Re: Islamic Political Corruption

Submitted by Bader S (Saudi Arabia), Feb 18, 2006 at 04:16

Annette Hong wrote, "Contrast this with countries which settlement is dominated by Norther Europeans. While there is absolutely corruption to be found, it is not institutionalized and systemic as it is in the Islamic (arabicized) world, or in the Hispanic conquests.

This is not a function of race, but rather a function of culture. The cultures of the British Isles, Scandinavia, Germany and many others never developed a culture of corruption. "

However, the following article http://college.hmco.com/history/readerscomp/rcah/html/rc_020900_corruption.htm
proves the absurdity of the above statements and demonstrate
that even European and American cultures were and are just as corrupt as any other culture.

Allow me to quote few passages from the above link:

"Prior to the American Revolution, the most spectacular examples of corruption center on the colonial governors—a dreary succession of royal and corporate placemen whose chief concern was grabbing as much as they could before returning home." ------ Were those colonial governors Muslims by any chance?

"Still another source of political corruption in the colonies was the profitability of land speculation. Angling for a share of the apparently endless supply of American land, investors and politicians on both sides of the Atlantic left a trail of chicanery, inside dealing, favoritism, and outright theft that even now staggers the imagination. The "Walking Purchase" of 1737, by which Pennsylvania authorities tricked native peoples out of most of their lands west of the Delaware River, is only one of many scandalous examples. For suitable considerations, George Cornbury, sometime governor of New York, handed out grants the size of entire English counties; his Hardenburgh Patent ran to an amazing 2 million acres, larger than Connecticut." --------- Hmmm, there must be an imprint of Islam somewhere here....

"Corruption nourished by these changes permeated the executive and legislative branches of the federal government throughout the nineteenth century, peaking in the scandals that rocked the Grant administration in the mid-1870s. What most aroused concern, though, was corruption identified with municipal and state governments—focal points of business pressure for concessions and privileges, and nurseries of the great nineteenth-century political machines." -------------Can this be labeled under "institutionalized and systemic"?

And finally some Arabs are mentioned in the article (ooops my mistake those are FBI agents pretending to be as Arabs)

"In the "Abscam" scandal of 1978-1980, fbi agents posing as Arab sheiks found numerous public officials willing to accept money for help with immigration authorities; six representatives and one senator were convicted of bribery. In the "Wedtech" scandal of 1986-1989, payoffs by a military contractor led to the conviction of two representatives and dozens of other figures on charges of racketeering, tax evasion, bribery, fraud, grand larceny, and perjury. All told, no fewer than twenty members of the One Hundredth Congress have been accused of misconduct, ranging from sexual harassment to misuse of campaign contributions, bribery, and tax evasion. Corruption also made new inroads into the White House during Reagan's presidency. Between 1981 and 1989, dozens of high-ranking Reagan appointees were charged with wrongdoing. They included, besides Attorney General Meese, Labor Secretary Raymond J. Donovan, the first member of a president's cabinet to be indicted while in office, and Franklyn ("Lyn") Nofziger, one of Reagan's key advisers. Donovan was subsequently acquitted; Nofziger was convicted of illegally lobbying the executive branch on behalf of private clients, among them the Wedtech Corporation, but his conviction was reversed on appeal." -----Oh my the Attorney General himself, I wonder if he is of Islamic ethnicity?

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".