Yes he does, by being an Unclean Infidel Dog and the Leader of the Great Satan. But other than that, they like him just fine.
From AFP, with thanks to all who sent this in:
BERLIN (AFP) - US President George W. Bush said in an interview with a German newspaper that he unwittingly caused fears in the Muslim world."We must understand words mean things to different people," Bush said in Bild, according to an English transcript released by the White House.
"Sometimes my own messages send signals that I don't mean to send, but stirs up anxieties in the Muslim world.
He is no doubt referring to his early post-9/11 use of the word "crusade," which is in fact a perfectly good word.
"There needs to be more understanding between the Muslim world and the Western world. There needs to be a better understanding of the true beliefs of their respective religions."
Amen, George.
Bush said however that he was convinced that most people in the world shared common, peaceful values."I take great comfort in knowing that the true Muslim -- Islam, itself, is a peaceful religion, and those who adhere to Islam are people that respect the rights of others.
"And there's common values in the great religions. And what we cannot allow to happen is for these totalitarians, these Islamic extremists to distort a great religion and define the nature of that religion."
We cannot allow it? It's already happening, Mr. President. Whether or not it's actually a distortion of Islam, it's undoubtedly a very widespread view of the religion. It's too late to refuse to allow this to happen.
It would be refreshing if someone somewhere would come up with some evidence for the oft-repeated assertions that Bush here repeats yet again. I have asked here many times, to no avail. But I'll try again: one more time I am asking for anyone of good will to show me. Send me examples of Islamic religious scholars rejecting, on Islamic grounds, jihad violence against non-Muslims; rejecting the idea that Sharia law should be instituted in the Muslim and non-Muslim world; and teaching the idea that non-Muslims and Muslims should live together indefinitely as equals. Send me rejections of the ideas that women should not enjoy full equality of rights with men. Send me information that shows that those who write such rejections are not lone voices crying in the wilderness, with the wolves of Islamic orthodoxy ready to pounce upon them, but that they represent broad traditions within Islam and have large followings.
I'll be right here, at director@jihadwatch.org.
George, start by puckering your lips and then say Mooooooooooooo very slowly and respectfully.
You may wish to face Mecca a poke your fanny skyward while your down on all fours; it shows your sincerity on the matter.
show me proof that islam even thinks jews and christians are people,and not dogs and monkeys.just once i would like a muslim to speak to us like we are people.
So do cartoons.
So it's safe to say, that any infidel can stir anxiety in mohammedons just by ........being infidel!!!!!!
Bush: "Islam, itself, is a peaceful religion."
By now he must know this is not true. He is not stupid. He thinks it politically expedient to pronounce this falsehood. If you repeat something false often enough can you get people to believe it? Bush is making himself ridiculous and bringing himself into contempt with any rational and honest observer. He is like a somewhat more genial version of O'Brien without the shock machine.
"How can I help seeing what is in front of my eyes?"
"Islam, itself, is a peaceful religion, and those who adhere to Islam are people that respect the rights of others... we cannot allow... these totalitarians, these Islamic extremists to distort a great religion and define the nature of that religion." -- Bush
The Clintons, Al Gore, Senator Kerry, Howard Dean, Jimmy Carter, Ted Kennedy, Senator Obama, would all completely agree with Bush. Hell, even Ward Churchill would completely agree with Bush on this point. On perhaps the most important point in politics today, there is complete bipartisan agreement to support the most irrational and dangerous opinion about Islam.
just before ww2 many thought hitler was a nice guy and the nazi party was the hope of germany...now we have islam....maybe we are just sheep led to slaughter....makes you wonder about the world.
I wonder at what point it will become resoundly clear to most Infidels in the Western world what the lie of 'peaceful Islam' has cost us. Billions (or perhaps by now trillions) of dollars, thousands of lives, and wasted time. And surely this belief influences the utter lack of any urgency in the Bush adminstration to take drastic action to lessen dependence on foreign oil. After all, Islam itself is peaceful, all one needs is diplomacy and the spread of democracy and Muslim nations will work with us to ensure a steady, secure supply of oil to world markets. No security risk to worry about. Oil weapons? Saudi Arabia is our ally. And so, five years after 9/11 there exists no real movement in developing alternative energy. Only the recent price surges in oil, in part caused by an 'Islamic terrorist price premium', have had a significant impact on alternative energy development. The government remains lethargic at best.
The lie is so horribly harmful, and so obviously a lie: the only genuine peace of Islam is Islam itself, that is, surrender. Hence, the burden of keeping the peace falls to non-believers who are confronted with Islam's existential choice: believe or face the consequences. Since peace means surrender, and Islam by definition is surrender, 'Islam is peaceful' is necessarily true, a tautology of a sort. Those who do not surrender are by definition, not at peace. The problem for Bush, and for all Infidels who encounter the peace of Islam, is that the wrong choice, namely, lack of surrender to Islam, necessarily implies the contrary of peace, agitation, aggression, or a state of war, depending on one's reaction and the closer of da'wa and other forms of Islamic growth and dominance, as options.
There is nothing Bush or any of us Infidels can do, but surrender, if we mean to have a real, lasting peace with Islam, that is, by definition 'peaceful'.
Prove to me that there is not a certain verse that allows husbands to beat their wives, President Bush.
Islam is a peacful religion if you're:
a) Muslim
b) Male
c) Theologically lobotomised to agree with everything your Imam tells you.
I'm sure there's a D) somewhere.
D: In a coma.
How frigg'n nauseating.
Can he really be such an idiot? Does he believe what he is saying about the "religion of peace?" Or is he being careful not to offend his friends the Saudi arabs?
We will probably never know. But he does present the portrait of a perfect idiot leading a war against an abstraction: Terror.
A Don Quijote? Hardly. Either mentally handicapped or pretending to be so.
To disarm the enemy? We should be so lucky!
To divert attention from the identity of the enemy: the practicioners of the ideology that has jihad and world domination as its goal?
Why?
Never forget the image of the President of the United States holding hands with a "royal" Saudi.
Not as much of an idiot as he wants us to believe he is.
Certainly Bush should be reading -- or have read to him -- the Qur'an and Hadith (al-Bukhari and Muslim will do), again and again. Abrogation should be explained to him. 5.32 should be read "in context" -- that is, the context of 5.33. The Muslim understanding of "There is no compulsion in religion" needs to be conveyed to Infidels. especially in the light of two quite obvious kinds of "compulsion" in religion -- punishment of apostasy by death, and the condition of humiliation, degradation, and physical insecurity imposed on Infidels under Muslim rule.
l really dont think anyone that knows of evil, does not knoe islam is evil. l am hoping that when Bush says islam is a religion of peace,that he is crossing something while saying that.
I can think of a way to 'stir up anxiety' LOL
"Can he really be such an idiot? Does he believe what he is saying about the "religion of peace?" Or is he being careful not to offend his friends the Saudi arabs?
-- from a posting above
1. Yes.
2. Yes, or at least partly. Deeply respectful of anything that is called a "religion" or has a billion supposed followers, is George Bush.
3. Yes, and there is absolutely no need to do so. One does not have to curry favor with the local gas station owner. Or the one further afield. Saudi Arabia is totally, completely, hopelessly and helplessly dependent on the sale of oil. It has nothing else. It has not created, and will not create, a modern economy. Its princes and princelings and princelettes are coupon-clipping rentiers; they are greedy, they are spendthrifts. So are all of the Saudi courtiers around them. They want money. They want access to Western technology, Western education, Western medicine, Western everything. They are dependent on wage slaves to run their country and to take care of them. They are desperate to keep an oil market, and to ensure that customers will always buy that oil.
Stupidity is always intolerable. When that stupidity is at the top, it is intolerable -- and dangerous.
It's high time to move on beyond Bush to the presidential candidates - Allen, Romney, Bayh, Biden, et al. In the case of the GOP, appeal to their patriotism, and point to Arab supremacist goals, like Shariah, as well as things like Shariah loans. In the case of the Dems, point out what Islam says about Women's & Gay Rights, animal rights, honor killings, attitudes towards athiests... In other words, given the different demographic make-ups, use different messages to target the candidates on both sides, and win them over to the anti-Islamic cause. Let there be a pro-Muslim candidate on both sides - McCain in the GOP (who opposed torture and secret prisons), and Hilary (who first bunched Ramadan along with Chrismas and Hannukah in 1999.) that can attract the Moslim & Dhimmi portions of the electorate.
With less than 1000 days left, there is no reason to invest any more hope in him. Just hope that he doesn't carry the water for Islam after his presidency like Carter & Clinton.
Robert said
Unfortunately for the American people, you do not have day to day access to Bush to ask him directly. But the press corps do. It is their job to ask him hard questions, to press him on issues on which he is evasive or on which his position diverges from reality. I am extremely disappointed in our media. There are dozens of reporters with access to the White House, it would just take one of them to learn the basics about Islam, and to start asking questions. Maybe Bush would boycott reporters who do ask hard questions (just ask Helen Thomas), but that is all the more reason to do it. Someone needs to do it.
George W. Bush said
This completely pegs the irony-o-meter. This is becoming almost Kafka-esqe.