Spinning the Koran to Make it Palatable to Infidels

Woodmonkey · 10-23-2005, 01:55

Quote:

Twisting History

Quote:

The President is distorting history, both recent and ancient, by denying links between jihad war and Islamic teachings, derived in large part from the Koran

Big week for Uncle Sam. First, there was the referendum on the new Iraqi constitution, which, by the way, contains all provisions necessary for a sharia-ruled state. Then, at the president's by-now-annual Ramadan dinner, President Bush announced, "For the first time in our nation's history, we have added a Koran to the White House Library."

Anything wrong with this undoubtedly historic picture? Freedom marches on in Iraq, and tolerance expands its reach at home, or so they say. But I would put it this way: Democracy marches on in Iraq, and the Koran expands its reach at home.

Same thing? Not at all. But no one is supposed to consider the difference. So what if Article 2 in the Iraqi constitution states, "no law that contradicts the established provisions of Islam may be established." If people participate in an election for anything — including sharia, including Hamas — it's the Spirit of '76 all over again, or so our leaders say. Never mind that worried Iraqi Christians, concerned for religious freedom, say they're likely to ask Pope Benedict XVI to intervene. Meanwhile, according to the Bush Happy Face Doctrine, if any religious book goes onto the White House shelf, including one that's uniquely venomous toward "infidel" non-believers, it's a Hallelujah moment.

Is it just me, or does the president's gesture of inclusion sock the rest of us in the head? Fun-loving, peacenik Muslims aside, the Koran is indisputably the favorite book of Osama bin Laden, Abu Musab Zarqawi, the killers of Daniel Pearl, Hamas bus bombers, London Underground bombers and anyone who has ever hidden an IED on an Iraqi road to kill or maim an American soldier — none of which is the best recommendation for White House honors.

But maybe the president meant he would now be reading the Koran. He could start with Chapter 5, Verse 32, which he's taken to quoting as, well, chapter-and-verse evidence of Islam's aversion to bloodshed — always skipping the fatal exception. Mr. Bush will say: Killing an innocent human is like killing all of humanity, and then leave it at that. My translation of the Koran says: "... whosoever kills a human being, except [as punishment] for murder or for spreading corruption in the land, it shall be like killing all humanity." Easy guess that among Mr. Bush's Ramadan guests were a few who consider Americans guilty of murder, Israelis innocent of nothing, and both, as non-Muslims, complicit in "spreading corruption in the land" — and thus deserving death, dismemberment and banishment as outlined in Chapter 5, Verse 33.

But back to Mr. Bush's jarring gesture of inclusion, one unlikely to be reciprocated in Islamic countries such as Saudi Arabia where Bibles are verboten. What does it mean? No religious book besides the Koran inspires a religious vision of world political domination — which, of course, includes America.

JWR columnist Daniel Pipes, writing in Commentary magazine in 2001, reported on specific Muslim efforts to turn America into a sharia-ruled caliphate. More recently, the Middle East Media Research Institute tells us, Ahmad Dewidar, the prominent imam of the Islamic Center in New York and a lecturer at Manhattan University, referred in an interview to mosque-talk of how the White House — "through the domination of Islam and its ideas" — would become the "Muslim House." Mr. Bush has begun to acknowledge such designs, as when in a recent speech he mentioned jihadists' goal of "totalitarian empire." But the president is still distorting history, both recent and ancient, by denying links between jihad war and Islamic teachings, derived in large part from the Koran.

After September 11, Mr. Bush declared "Islam is peace." Now, he insists that "extremists" "distort the idea of jihad" into a rationale for terrorism. Maybe Mr. Bush will read his new Koran and discover that the idea of jihad is itself extreme. Better still, maybe Mr. Bush will go so far as to add another book to the White House collection: "The Legacy of Jihad" by Andrew G. Bostom. This extraordinary compendium of primary and secondary source material, much of it translated into English for the first time, elucidates the theory and practice of jihad over 1,400 years. With its chronological span across the centuries, "The Legacy of Jihad" goes a long way toward bridging the void in Western understanding of the institutional role of jihad within Islam.

The White House may have its own Koran now, but the president's reckoning with the legacy of jihad is still overdue.

Click here
for the source of this article

DocDiggs · 10-23-2005, 18:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woodmonkey

Click here
for the source of this article

Huh! Not what I expected to get, but....

I disagree that Bush "twists" history. He does ignore history and he certainly does not understand history. He also apparently has some very inadequate religious (theological) advisors. His continued friendship and support of Wahabist Saudis gives testimony to that. ...and while he may have bought a new Koran for the WH, I suspect that he will not actually read it for himself. He gets, like all other presidents, synopses of the news every morning; I suspect that he has gotten a (faulty) synopsis of the Koran as well. Actually there is nothing inherently bad about having a Koran in the WH, but like every other book, it should be read for meaning, not simply content.

There are a few very good rules that anyone, and certainly a president, should know and operate by:

1) Trust no one unless they prove themselves worthy of trust.

2) Do not repeat the mistakes of history, learn from them and avoid them.

3) Above all else, be flexible and open-minded.

Snowden · 10-24-2005, 11:56

Quote:

Self-denial at the White House

By Diana West
Oct 24, 2005
Syndicated columnist

Big week for Uncle Sam. First, there was the referendum on the new Iraqi constitution, which, by the way, contains all provisions necessary for a Sharia-ruled state. Then, at the president's by-now annual Ramadan dinner, Bush announced, "For the first time in our nation's history, we have added a Koran to the White House Library."
Anything wrong with this undoubtedly historic picture? Freedom marches on in Iraq, and tolerance expands its reach at home, or so they say. But I would put it this way: Democracy marches on in Iraq, and the Koran expands its reach at home.
Same thing? Not at all. But no one is supposed to consider the difference. So what if Article 2 in the Iraqi constitution states, "no law that contradicts the established provisions of Islam may be established"? If people participate in an election for anything -- including Sharia, including Hamas -- it's the Spirit of '76 all over again, or so our leaders say. Never mind that worried Iraqi Christians, concerned for religious freedom, say they're likely to ask Pope Benedict XVI to intervene. Meanwhile, according to the "Bush Happy Face Doctrine," if any religious book goes onto the White House shelf, including one that's uniquely venomous toward "infidel" non-believers, it's a Hallelujah moment.
Is it just me, or does the president's gesture of inclusion sock the rest of us in the head? Peaceful Muslims aside, the Koran is indisputably the favorite book to twist for the extremist agendas for Osama bin Laden, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the killers of Daniel Pearl, Hamas bus bombers, London Underground bombers, and anyone who has ever hidden an Improvised Explosive Device (IED) on an Iraqi road to kill or maim an American soldier -- none of which is the best recommendation for White House honors.
But maybe the president meant he would now be reading the Koran. He could start with Chapter 5, Verse 32, which he's taken to quoting as, well, chapter-and-verse evidence of Islam's aversion to bloodshed -- always skipping the fatal exception. Bush will say: Killing an innocent human is like killing all of humanity, and then leave it at that. My translation of the Koran says: "... whosoever kills a human being, except (as punishment) for murder or for spreading corruption in the land, it shall be like killing all humanity." Easy guess that among Bush's Ramadan guests were a few who consider Americans guilty of murder, Israelis innocent of nothing, and both, as non-Muslims, complicit in "spreading corruption in the land" -- and thus deserving death, dismemberment and banishment as outlined in Chapter 5, Verse 33.
But back to Bush's jarring gesture of inclusion, one unlikely to be reciprocated in Islamic countries such as Saudi Arabia where Bibles are verboten. What does it mean? No known religious book besides the Koran seemingly inspires a religious vision of world political domination -- which, of course, includes America. Daniel Pipes, writing in Commentary magazine in 2001, reported on specific Muslim efforts to turn America into a Sharia-ruled caliphate. More recently, the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) tells us, Ahmad Dewidar, the prominent imam of the Islamic Center in New York and a lecturer at Manhattan University, referred in an interview to mosque-talk of how the White House -- "through the domination of Islam and its ideas" -- would become the "Muslim House." Bush has begun to acknowledge such designs, as when in a recent speech he mentioned jihadists' goal of "totalitarian empire." But the president is still distorting history, both recent and ancient, by denying links between jihad war and Islamic teachings, derived in large part from the Koran.
After 9/11, Bush declared "Islam is peace." Now, he insists that "extremists" "distort the idea of jihad" into a rationale for terrorism. Maybe Bush will read his new Koran and discover that the idea of jihad is itself extreme. Better still, maybe Bush will go so far as to add another book to the White House collection: "The Legacy of Jihad" (Prometheus Books, 2005) by Andrew G. Bostom, MD. This extraordinary compendium of primary and secondary source material, much of it translated into English for the first time, elucidates the theory and practice of jihad over 1,400 years. With its chronological span across the centuries, "The Legacy of Jihad" goes a long way toward bridging the void in Western understanding of the institutional role of jihad within Islam.
The White House may have its own Koran now, but the president's reckoning with the legacy of jihad is still overdue.
[/size]

Find this story at:

http://www.townhall.com/opinion/colu...24/172507.html

RetPara · 10-24-2005, 20:48

Not so much twisting or ignorance... but a refusal to admit the teachings of much of Islam radicals can't be condemned by moderates, because they reflect accurately a good deal of the accurate teachings.

Woodmonkey · 10-24-2005, 20:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by RetPara

Not so much twisting or ignorance... but a refusal to admit the teachings of much of Islam radicals can't be condemned by moderates, because they reflect accurately a good deal of the accurate teachings.

That was well put Ret.

Woodmonkey · 10-26-2005, 18:01

It was suggested that I rename this thread, so....here goes!