If he didn’t say that Islam is as retrograde as it gets; that its adherents are duty-bound by the terms of their holy (cough) books to bring the world to heel on the terms of their vicious and cruel Allah, including when necessary through murder; and that Muslims have brought nothing but misery for 1400 years, and that their continued actions are bringing war on themselves and the rest of the world by reason of their hideous religion,
then,
his speech was a failure.
Davidsays
There’s a difference between how we speak and how politicians speak. You can’t expect Trump to go there and tell them, “OK guys, either you help us bomb the sh*t out of terrorists, or we’ll blow the sh*t out of you!”
Baucentsays
Exactly. You expect a certain politeness of speech when visiting anyone. However what he does rather than what he says before muslim leaders, is the important point. Time will tell.
gravenimagesays
Trump is just a tall man; he wasn’t bowing as Obama had done.
Alarmed Pig Farmersays
His speech was certain to be a failure by predicate. A more kind definition of success is required here. His speech was a limited success in that he was in Riyadh talking about a severe problem that everybody there acknowledged. That there is no solution to it is another matter, but at least the Wahabbis were to we’re gonna try to stop it. Of course, stopping it can’t be done short of shutting down the Islam belief system globally, but that’s another matter.
Please, Diane, Allow me (sarcastically here…) to play the devil’s advocate here, make the argument for buying into the possibility of this fairytale becoming a reality.
‘ start with the following:
“Bismi’llah i’r Rahman i’r Raheem Allahumma Salli wa Sallim wa Baarik ‘alla Rasul” as cited by the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, “[In the name of Allah the most Compassionate, the most Merciful, Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessing be upon His Messenger”]
Why can we not, once and for all, accept what Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, stated, in his prelude to President Trump’s speech?
In that intro, King Salman stated, once more–clearly for the benefit of the “foolish,” “ignorant,” and hard-headed concerning Islam–“Islam,” he said, “was and always will be the religion of mercy, tolerance, and co-existence.”
As has been confirmed, asserts the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, “by brilliant presidents.” Indeed, no doubt about it, Bush, Obama, and Trump among those.
The noble Custodian stated, “in Islam’s prosperous time, it provided the best examples of coexistence and harmony among followers of religions and cultures.”
In other words, if you study history, you will clearly see, when Islam was allowed to rule, everybody honoring it, basically, got along. Knew, in other words, just what the “Holy Prophet” promised, repeated times, those who regarded an honored Islam would know: “the protection of God and His Messenger.”
Just as the honorable Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques stated, today, we see people determined, hard-press to present to the world “a distorted picture of religion, ”a picture that seeks to conflate this great religion with violence.”
Yes, indeed, thus those who make such “wrongful” claims must be silenced.
Why can we not, as stated, just, once and for all, put the books away, go with what GW told us of Islam, go with what Obama told us of Islam, go with what King Salman told us today about Islam—which is, as Trump has stated of late, one of the world’s great religions?
Why can we not just go with that? Put an end to hearing and regarding folks like Spencer, Geller, and all those who want to “soil” the reputation and doctrine of this great faith?
Bottom line, all: it will highly improbable if not categorically impossible to see this dream presented today by Trump ever come to fruition, unless the voices such as Spencer’s are silenced and the info on Islam, as that provided by the honorable noble Custodian of the Two Holy Mosque provided us with today, is regarded. Accepted as both the long and short on Islam.
As Trump stated, these are our partners. Thus, hand in hand with them, it is understood, we walk together. How can two walk together unless they agree?
They cannot.
Thus, it is inconceivable to consider remotely possible, Trump is not in agreement with this that our partner stated and presented to us here today.
Thus, if we are to give any chance at all to see Trump’s tabled goals here succeed, we must not only embrace our Saudi partners, but also embrace what they, and Trump, tell us of Islam. Embrace it for the “great religion” they tell us it is.
billybobsays
Put an end to hearing and regarding folks like Spencer, Geller, and all those who want to “soil” the reputation and doctrine of this great faith?
Folks like Spencer and Geller do not “soil” the faith of Islam, but rather, point out where Islam has soiled itself. if we are to give any chance at all to see Trump’s tabled goals here succeed, we must not only embrace the realists like Spencer, Geller, but also embrace the implications of what they tell us of Islam so that we be firmly resolved to speak softly but carry a big stick if needed. Platitudes alone will not do it.
I agree with everything you u say about Islam, but your conclusion that the speech was a failure is wrong as is obvious if you ask what good would it have done to call Islam what it is – an evil ideology.
Trump challenged Islam to reform. Islam can’t reform without disbanding. No one can say Trump didn’t give Islam the benefit of the doubt. He will be free to question Islam’s willingness to reform when it is clear that they can’t.
I am a frequent critic of Trump but this speech, with all of its false praise for Islam ((none of which Trump believes) was pure genius. It was chess
Leon Degneysays
Couldn’t agree more. Check and mate!
C Tsays
It can reform, but it has to dump the ahadith, which should never have been treated as legit. According to the Quran itself, sects would arise after Muhammed which would all be false. Hello, Sunni and Shia, that’s both of you.
ahemsays
This may go down as one of the most brilliant politcal speeches of all time.
C Tsays
Agreed. It was a terrific talk. I especially liked “If we do not stand in uniform condemnation of this killing—then not only will we be judged by our people, not only will we be judged by history, but we will be judged by God.”
Come on, Salafism pushers, go ahead and ask God how much he likes your killing people for not agreeing with your loyalty to the hearsay contained in the ahadith.
Steve Kleinsays
I feel certain the best-selling author who owns this site would agree, what President Trump calls ” the terrorists and the extremists” are devout Muslims; the sheikhs, the imams, the Islamic scholars, the jihadists and their supporters throughout Saudi Arabia and the Middle East, those who are following the example of the prophet Muhammad.
Roderick MacUalraigsays
Indeed, Sir.
gravenimagesays
All true.
dsincsays
Yes, “radical Islamic extremists” President Trump knows Muslims are ALL radical Islamic extremists.
Kilfinceltsays
I listened to the whole thing on Fox. What the King of Saudi Arabia said made me sick to my stomach because he was lying. As readers of this website know, an Islamic terrorist to us is jihadi warrior fighting the good fight to many of them. The only reason this conference was held by Saudi Arabia was because those in charge feel threatened by Iran and ISIS. Ideologically, they are not all that far apart.
I thought Trump’s speech was pretty good under the circumstances; however, for the most part, the speakers were all talking past each other because the Islamic culture and belief system is totally incompatible with that of the West.
Steve Kleinsays
Pamela wrote: Before we get to Trump’s speech, I would like to comment on King Salman’s remarks prior to President Trump’s speech to the Muslim world. Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud is King of Saudi Arabia, Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, and head of the House of Saud.
Behind the flag of the sword and shahada (much like the ISIS flag), King Salman declared, “Islam is the religion mercy and tolerance and co-existence as confirmed by brilliant precedence. In its prosperous times Islam provided the best examples of co-existence and harmony among followers of religions and cultures.” Good for Muslims, horrible for non-believers, who were forced to live under dhimmitude, paying the jizya and living in a state of subjugation. No mention of the hundreds of millions slaughtered in jihadi wars, land appropriations, cultural annihilations and enslavements.
He talks about the forces of “extremism” – Saudi Arabia under sharia rule defines the force of extremism.
He speaks with the forked tongue of Obama administration, using “countering violent extremism,” the West’s euphemism for Islamic holy war. It’s jihad, and the King knows it.
The King cites as proof of peaceful Islam, a qur’anic verse stolen and twisted from the Talmud, “Islam is the religion of peace and tolerance. It considers an innocent tantamount to killing all of humanity.”
This is the wholesale theft from the Talmud (an authoritative record of rabbinic discussions on Jewish law, Jewish ethics, customs, etc.): “Whoever destroys a soul, it is considered as if he destroyed an entire world. And whoever saves a life, it is considered as if he saved an entire world.” Mishnah Sanhedrin 4:5; Yerushalmi Talmud 4:9, Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 37a.
It’s difficult to know where to begin with what’s is wrong in this speech. Briefly, it is a triumph of naivete, if he believes it. He is speaking in a country where they behead people for what would be innocent acts in most other countries. How can he talk of the oppression of women in that place!
Deansays
This is painful – what a horrible betrayal – he will pay in the next elections.
No deal, photo op or strategy/Machiavellian motive is worth this soul destroying trip.
His bad karma will catch up with him in the Novembers to come.
very stylish setting: Like an oversized 1980s brothel.
salimsays
Does it matter what he says in open? He said many things before.
What matters is what he does … and says behind closed doors.
Trump was my last hope and turned out to be a false one.
lebelsays
“Behind the flag of the sword and shahada (much like the ISIS flag), King Salman declared, “Islam is the religion mercy and tolerance and co-existence as confirmed by brilliant precedence. In its prosperous times Islam provided the best examples of co-existence and harmony among followers of religions and cultures.” Good for Muslims, horrible for non-believers, who were forced to live under dhimmitude, paying the jizya and living in a state of subjugation. No mention of the hundreds of millions slaughtered in jihadi wars, land appropriations, cultural annihilations and enslavements.”
Why mention that? how would you feel if a politician came to America and mentioned the millions of dead indians and black slavery and then REDUCED the entire country to that. This is the jihadwatch way (or extreme leftist way) but its not the way of rational people.
Steve Kleinsays
There is a difference. Do you know what it is?
lebelsays
Yes, Islam is evil, evil all the time and Taqqiya means that any good is way to fool the infidels.
Let me know if I missed anything
gravenimagesays
lebel wrote:
“Behind the flag of the sword and shahada (much like the ISIS flag), King Salman declared, “Islam is the religion mercy and tolerance and co-existence as confirmed by brilliant precedence. In its prosperous times Islam provided the best examples of co-existence and harmony among followers of religions and cultures.” Good for Muslims, horrible for non-believers, who were forced to live under dhimmitude, paying the jizya and living in a state of subjugation. No mention of the hundreds of millions slaughtered in jihadi wars, land appropriations, cultural annihilations and enslavements.”
Why mention that? how would you feel if a politician came to America and mentioned the millions of dead indians and black slavery and then REDUCED the entire country to that. This is the jihadwatch way (or extreme leftist way) but its not the way of rational people.
………………………
If these horrors were a thing of the past in Saudi Arabia, this would be correct.
But Saudi Arabia is *still* oppressing women and Infidels, practicing brutal Shari’ah law, teaching Jihad and Shari’ah in Madrasses all over the world, and funding violent Jihad. Of course, lebel understands this distinction.
lebelsays
Is Saudi responsible for all Islamic history? and is it the job of visiting politician to criticize each country for its shortcomings? is the Saudi Prince supposed to lecture police brutality publically on his next trip to the US.
That does not mean that these things cant be criticized but Im responding to the poster who suggested we mention the billions upon billions of Islam’s victims.
gravenimagesays
lebel wrote:
Is Saudi responsible for all Islamic history?
………………………..
No, they are not–but they are responsible for continuing that baleful history, including chopping people’s heads off, teaching genocide of the Jews and violent Jihad, stoning women to death, and involvement in 9/11.
Of course, no surprise that lebel has no apparent problem with this savagery.
More:
and (sic) is it the job of visiting politician to criticize each country for its shortcomings?
………………………..
Pretending that these barbarians are our allies or share our values is absurd–these are not small differences of opinions we might have with other civilized nations such as England, Switzerland, or Canada.
No American president is pretending, say, that North Korea is a civilized nation.
More:
is (sic) the Saudi Prince supposed to lecture police brutality publically (sic) on his next trip to the US.
………………………..
Ah–just the sort of witless tu quoque we have come to expect from lebel.
Pretending that Saudi Arabia has civilized law enforcement and the United States does not is, of course, ludicrous.
Police brutality is *illegal* here, and is prosecuted. One might argue that this should be more vigorously enforced, but acting as though Shari’ah sh*tholes have the same sort of checks and balances is ridiculous.
More:
That does not mean that these things cant (sic) be criticized but Im (sic) responding to the poster who suggested we mention the billions upon billions of Islam’s victims.
………………………..
No, of course, all of these billions of victims–even those who are suffering and dying today–should be studiously ignored, lest Muslims be “offended”. Can’t have that…
lebelsays
By the way, pretty good speech. You are lucky that Trump is not Trump jihadwatch hoped for.
gravenimagesays
I think Muslim apologist lebel means that this is lucky *for him*.
lebelsays
Do you really honestly think that?
I get that you hate me because Islam is evil for ALL time and Muslims as well (the nice ones are practicing taqqiya)
But do you really honestly think that I meant that?
gravenimagesays
Apart from once vaguely claiming that he was against Jihad–while at the same time whitewashing Islam–lebel has never done anything here but cast aspersions on those who actually oppose Jihad.
If Islam were really to reform into something that was not oppressive and bloody, I would not hate it. But no–I actually *do* hate pedophilia, FGM, slavery, rape, amputations, stoning, and violent Jihad waged against non-Muslims. I make no apologies for hating such savagery.
I don’t hate Muslims who do not practice the horrors of their faith–but I also know that very few of them actually oppose such horrors. If Muslims really did begin to oppose such barbarism, I would applaud them.
I don’t hate lebel, either–but I recognize him as someone who has whitewashed Islam for many years here, and I will continue to counter his propaganda. He is no ally of those who bravely stand against Jihad.
David Asays
Do you disagree that “Saudi Arabia is *still* oppressing women and Infidels, practicing brutal Shari’ah law, teaching Jihad and Shari’ah in Madrasses all over the world, and funding violent Jihad”???
lebelsays
I agree that Saudi arabia is still doing much of this although this has lessened in recent years. There has been a change in the curriculum for example.
Also, I believe that most funding at this point comes from private donors rather than the government.
Obviously the laws are oppressive but I believe they will change.
gravenimagesays
lebel wrote:
I agree that Saudi arabia is still doing much of this although this has lessened in recent years. There has been a change in the curriculum for example.
…………………………..
Moreover, Saudi Arabia is spreading this orthodox Islamic education all over the world through sponsoring Madrasses and staffing them with Saudi clerics.
More:
Also, I believe that most funding at this point comes from private donors rather than the government.
Uh huh:
“‘Tsunami of money’ from Saudi Arabia funding 24,000 madrassas in Pakistan”
Obviously the laws are oppressive but I believe they will change.
…………………………..
What possible reason could lebel have for believing they will change? Instead, the Saudis are trying to spread this oh-so-Islamic savagery.
salimsays
What people should be asking:
Why America, with all its might and wealth, pander to the most backward country on earth?
Is it difficult for Trump to understand that Saudi Arabia is behind radical Islam? … and behind Islamic terrorism?
Would America fall, or its economy collapse, if it doesn’t make that arms deal?
I am afraid its a very dirty game that has been going on since that infamous meeting between Roosevelt and Abdul Aziz in 1945.
Americans should care more about their country and nation than about political parties. When a president fails … he simply fails, even if voted for him.
Walter Sieruksays
One of the reasons that the officials of Saudi Arabia did give President Thump more respect than they gave to President Obama is because of the Muslim mindset which views being timid as having weakness. Obama was so timid that he was afraid to use the term “Islamic terrorism.” In contrast, President is not afraid to use that term likewise this current American President calls things as they actually are. The Muslim officials of Saudi Arabia respect President Trump for that. Furthermore, the government of Saudi Arabia has threats against it by ISIS and also the stooge jihad terror groups of Iran. So Saudi officials understand that those terror entities are, actually, Islamic terrorist organizations.
John A. Marresays
It was good, within the confines of what he dared say while surrounded by beards and white dresses. Still too much “Religion of Peace” for me, and not enough “Cult of Death.”
Leesays
Trump is a great man.
Palsays
President Trump speaks NOT to the Muslim Brotherhood but to governments.
Unlike Barrack Obama, 2009, Al-Azhar, Egypt.
sogsays
@Pal… YES! …and that’s only one of the paradigm shifts Trump will trigger. Saudi Arabia and the gulf states *really are* Threatened by Iran. Trump evoked Hezbollah and Iran. The Sunni lead Gulf states need the west, and it really tickles my funny bone that “the west” includes Israel. They want this bulwark to stand against Iran. If Trump and his administration can get Governments to remove support form radical Islam then the world will be better off. This is despite the fact that the very nature of Islam is “radical Islam”.
If Trump is successful in producing the paradigm shifts he is trying to produce, then for the most part, the new face of Islam truly will become “a religion of peace”.
Transmastersays
At last we have a President that aims to return the Middle East to the balance of power the region had before Jimmy Carter and President’s thereafter destroyed. The best people to bring the radicals under control are the Muslims themselves. I like President’s Trump’s statement that it is not up to the United States to dictate how people live. The concept of “Nation Building” has not worked since the bogus idea was coined in Vietnam in the late 1960’s. It is apparent to anyone with any knowledge of the world that you cannot force a western goverment system on a country that does not have any such traditions. The Shi’a, Sunni genocide can only be controlled by inside forces as it was under the Ottoman Empire.
gravenimagesays
Transmaster wrote:
At last we have a President that aims to return the Middle East to the balance of power the region had before Jimmy Carter and President’s thereafter destroyed. The best people to bring the radicals under control are the Muslims themselves.
…………………….
Dear Transmaster, “radicals” are just pious Muslims–why would Muslims want to control them?
Palsays
“Iran” was one of the main points in king Salman (Solomon?) ‘s speech.
“Down with Iran, down with Iran!”
In case all participants were Shias, it would have sounded:
“Down with Saudi Arabia, down with Saudi Arabia!”.
The Parody Of islam.
Barrysays
…..from the king’s mouth…“In Islam’s prosperous time, it provided the best examples of coexistence and harmony among followers of religions and cultures……” Really!!!! The only time Mo was prosperous (other than from his first wife) was when he sent murdering thugs to rob, rape and murder caravans…Jefferson and Adams had to deal with the Barbary pirates robbing and enslaving American merchant ships, even extorting money from the U.S. government in return for ransomed captured American ‘slaves’ from those ships….
Islam has brought ZERO innovation, invention, art or kind of prosperity on it’s own….the only reason it survives to this days is because it advocates theft and extortion from non-muslims – and of course middle-east oil (which western oil companies discovered and processed for them). We have a place for murders, rapists and thieves….it’s called prison….Islam is an organized crime syndicate and death cult that has survived by murder, rape, extortion and outright theft. Its god can only be the prince of darkness.
duh swamisays
Does anyone really believe that the Muslim audience believed one word said by a Christian, shirker and kuffar? Somehow I don’t think they are ‘that’s stupid…
billybobsays
I saw the speech as diplomatic, deep, and very subtle. Everyone in the room knew what he was talking about, though for the most part he employed euphemism. For me, he was telling them – your barbaric religion is not only holding back progress in the Middle East, but is also destroying the world. Yes indeed, that is what I heard – couched in diplomatic terms and euphemisms. Furthermore, he was talking over the heads of the mullahs who would spit in his face to the leaders who know full well what he was saying. These same may indeed not be so pious in their hearts. These same undoubtedly are in an eternal struggle with the mullahs for power and control. He was saying to them, the leaders – rise up and overthrow your mullahs and give your people freedom and prosperity.
I don’t care that his speech was diplomatic. What are you going to do? You cannot ignore diplomacy even with your worst enemy, especially when you are right there in his camp.
I think this speech was brilliant, and I was very impressed with both the substance and the delivery. Trump has scored a homerun with this one, in my opinion, especially when I was well prepared for the worst by Hugh Fitzgerald’s piece Shut Up and Deal, or Brittle Man, You’ve Had a Dizzy May. They should take back the Nobel Peace prize they gave Obama for his fake speech and give it to Trump. Notice Trump never said any nonsense like “The future must not belong to those who would disparage the Prophet of Islam”. rather, he was saying enough of this religion and let’s make a prosperous and peaceful future for our people. Furthermore, they can take that as a warning. They are either with us or against us in this, and if they choose to be against us our military is prepared with new strategies.
rarasays
> if they choose to be against us our military is prepared with new strategies.
Joke.
Saudis are just going to get the weapons worth 100 billion dollars from the US.
Jack Diamondsays
Enough of this religion, let’s talk like pragmatic men of the world who aren’t really motivated by such nonsense, is that his mindset?
So, when Trump says we need to defeat terrorism (sic) and send its wicked ideology into oblivion, he is fully aware that he is speaking about Islam itself as the source of this wickedness? Not exonerating it?
When he compares terrorists to nihilists in love with death and barbaric criminals who only seek to annihilate life, he is fully aware that Islamic jihadists are seeking to impose Islamic law over the earth, that this was Bin Laden’s goal, not just annihilating life, just as it is the goal of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation? The same Islamic law supposed to rule in Saudi Arabia?
He knows he is being disingenuous? He is fully aware that the Saudis were behind al Qaeda and the Taliban and ISIS when he says such things?
billybobsays
That’s the way I read it, Mr. Diamond
Jack Diamondsays
I do hope time proves you right about that for everyone’s sake.
C Tsays
I read it that way, too. I wonder how many of the youth of Saudi Arabia heard it that way, too, and realized they don’t have to bow down to mullahs who will kill them over a line in a collection of hearsay, i.e., the ahadith.
gravenimagesays
Unfortunately, a lot of young Muslims are just as fanatical as their elders.
Barrysays
Does anyone anymore remember that 17 of the 19 9/11 cowards were Saudis. Furthermore, investigations prove beyond doubt that high Saudi officials were deeply involved with that cowardly terror attack targeted at innocent civilians that experienced horrific terror and pain to the point that some lept to their deaths due to the intense heat – in many cases that melted flesh from bones. For the life of me, I can’t understand why we didn’t declare war on that terrorist country that had in fact declared war on us.
gravenimagesays
I sure as hell have not forgotten, Barry. These thugs are not our allies.
dsincsays
The answer is OIL.
Gsays
Barry, “…that had in fact declared war on us.” Change “had” for “has” and you will have the accurate picture.
Mr. President, you stated of the “Islamist,” “we must stop what they’re doing to inspire because they do nothing to inspire but kill.” (at 22:38)
Wrong, Sir. Wrong.
To inspire, they teach from the pages of the “sacred texts” of that which you call a great religion. They teach and use as an example and inspiration for the believers, the words and deeds of their “Holy Prophet” and the same of his “Noble Companions,” Sir.
You say, Mr. President, “Muslim nations must be willing to take on the burden, if we are going to defeat terrorism and send its wicked ideology into oblivion.”
It’s “wicked ideology,” Sir, is that written, as stated above, on the pages of the orthodox works of what you call a great religion.
Davegreybeardsays
You are so full of crap Debi, its coming out your ears!
There is NO EVIDENCE that Trump thinks of Islam in the way that you have characterized.
When Trump loudly and repeatedly calls, in his BIG voice, for Muslims to “CAST THEM OUT!!”
Who do you think the “Them” is? Who do you think the Muslims in attendance think the “Them” is.
But lest idiots misunderstand Trump spells it out, the “Them” are ISLAMIC TERRORISTS!
To say such a thing, in the heart of the birthplace of Islam, to the leaders of Islam, who know EXACTLY what you are referring to, is simply brilliant.
But you Debi, are so blinded by your Trump hatred that you completely fail to understand what is going on.
“There is NO EVIDENCE that Trump thinks of Islam in the way that you have characterized.”
Characterized it, Dave? I cited his words, my Friend, precisely what he stated.
“When Trump loudly and repeatedly calls, in his BIG voice, for Muslims to “CAST THEM OUT!!”
Who do you think the “Them” is?”
I think it is who he stated it was, as I posted above, those he defined as Islamist. Whom, anyone who studies Islam knows are simply devout Muslims, following the teachings of the Qur’an and sunnah.
” Who do you think the Muslims in attendance think the “Them” is.”
They [ the Muslims in attendance] know who the ” ‘Them’ is” : as I provided above, the “Them” that Trump is telling Muslims to cast out are the keepers of the faith the Saudis and all good Muslims sanction.
Davegreybeardsays
@Debi Brand
“Trump and the art of doublespeak.”
‘Yup. In a word.’
It’s your unthinking, knee jerk adversarial attitude really.
It seems it is difficult for you to stop for a minute and consider what is really going on, before pronouncing judgment on it, with invariable condemnation of Trump.
As your above comment indicates, nothing Trump says is to be taken seriously.
We obviously view the world quite differently.
Time has passed since Trump demanded of the Saudi’s “THROW THEM OUT!”
Clearly in reference to the most devout amongst them as you yourself noted.
It is a demand that could very well echo though the ages.
Do you think the Saudis think that Trump “is practicing the art of double speak?”
Do you think the Saudis take Trump seriously and if so, do you think that this is a good thing?
no_onesays
If anyone wanted to retaliate for 9/11 US had to bomb Meca and Medina, not Iraq. It is all about money and no one cares about human life. Trump is no different than the two presidents before him. I am not sure Hillary would be worse. Total disappointment.
Gsays
9/11 Commission found: “After the airspace reopened, nine chartered flights with 160 people, mostly Saudi nationals, departed from the United States between September 14 and 24. In addition, one Saudi government flight, containing the Saudi deputy defense minister and other members of an official Saudi delegation, departed Newark Airport on September 14. Every airport involved in these Saudi flights was open when the flight departed, and no inappropriate actions were taken to allow those flights to depart.”
Why?
Stan Leesays
What we, who speak English, heard of Trump’s speech, seemed as diplomatic as his message could be under the circumstances. He was obliged to be more of an American man than Obama was. Trump did not appease, it was far better that way. Trump did understand the Saudi concerns of Iran upstaging the Sunni Islam center of its nations. Obama did not, nor did he really give a da-n. He was there to impress the Saudi King of his (Obama’s) Muslim pedigree. It fell flat, even the “bush league” bowing. Arabs won’t respect groveling, but they will respect far sooner when they see a masculine American leader.
Trump’s words were not empty as they came across in English. It was fairly tactful and obviously Trump was being diplomatic. That, I welcomed, Arabs are particularly sensitive, their words can be sweet, while their deeds can be very sour. I would have been more satisfied to hear the literal Arabic translation of Trump’s words, because it has always been very clear what happens to a speech given in English (for example) once the English becomes processed through the Arabic wringer. Their future deeds will reflect how they really digested Trump’s words.
Trump may be a “rookie” politician, but his element is business including negotiations. He is no “rookie” in that regard. He also was well prepared concerning Saudi Arabia’s needs. I think McMaster has something to do with that.Trump didn’t go there to get “a deal” on Saudi oil, we are now well-off in our own regard concerning energy. No, the Saudis need to arm-up, and for that they covet American military technology. American military hardware sets a world standard in most cases, apart from occasional developments such as the British Hawker Harrier VTO fighter of years ago, still in service because it’s that good. I think the U.S.M.C. aviation still uses it to support ground troops, though attack heliocopters have come a long way.
Russia still produces a standard AK development which competes with any infantry weapon issued to ours or NATO troops. But, they still are exceeded by U.S. aircraft and armor. Even after 8 years of Obama, it is the USA overall quality that sets the standard. Russian armor is good, but recent marks of our M-1 heavy battle tank remains the one for any other country to surpass. The Saudis want our export version of that tank.
Trump will return to the USA after negotiating about $350 billions of sales which include $110 billions of military hardware, the rest of it Saudi investments in U.S. businesses. Parts for whatever units the Saudis bought increase the value of Trump’s sale to them for the future. He’s not finished with his Mideast-Euro tour, other nations will entertain replenishing, because Trump’s message has been that they need to validate their places in NATO by being prepared. That is not essentially a “sales pitch,” it is a fact if NATO is to be respected.
SAMsays
Guys and Gals we have Trump now vs Hillary. No perfection here as we are all mortals. So I want to know how we are going to fight Islam with what we have. I don’t want to talk about Islam. I want to fight it. Any suggestions other than contributing to this and other anti Jihad sights?
Davegreybeardsays
You have to talk about it to fight it Sam.
At this point talking IS fighting. So talk to every Infidel you can, whenever you can about the true Islam. It is what you can do.
Deus Vult!
gravenimagesays
Agreed, Dave. That is what Robert Spencer is doing with Jihad Watch.
Markosays
Truth is the greatest weapon against Islam (Islam is an idea). The Islamic world needs to be bombarded with historical truths like the Quran is man-made, it has been altered etc., Islam was invented by Abdul Malik, decades after Mohamed is said to have existed, no Arabs wrote about Mohamed during his life, the Quran was complied 20 years after Mohamed died, the Hadith 200 years after (and 99% of Hadiths were thrown away), 100% of mosques didn’t point to Mecca during Mohamed’s life and it took about 200 years before all Mosques pointed to Mecca (this wasn’t a knowhow problem). And more. Start by reading, “In the Shadow of the Sword” by Tom Holland.
Note: Abdul Malik is essentially Islam’s version of Emperor Constantine (who standardized Christianity for similar reasons as Abul Malik).
I am thinking when President Trump today told barbaric criminals,This is a battle against barbaric criminals, he was speaking to barbaric criminals. What do you think?
Trump to cast battle against ‘Islamist extremism’ as fight with ‘barbaric criminals’
I think it was an encoded warning speech to them. If that’s true a very good speech!
Lee Hickssays
A good barometer regarding any President is how they view and act both Israel and the Islamic world. When you see them gloss over the corruption of Islam, and begin hints at work on a “peace process” regarding Israel, neither are positive signs.
Islam is without a doubt the biggest threat to safety and security that we face today, and to see otherwise conservatives pretending that his speech in Saudi Arabia is groundbreaking and positive is simply astonishing.
To refuse to recognize that every Islamic nation oppresses women, allows child “marriages”, promote their own versions of Sharia, allow little or no Jewish and Christian representation, and refuse to demand that Jihad be separated from worship, it signals that the officials in question are either abysmally ignorant of Islam, or are in bed with such regimes for personal goals.
The “peace process” always signals benevolence towards the Muslim and Islamic world, and demands that Israel continue to capitulate and compromise for a fictional peace.
Regardless as to the Trump followers who continue to excuse or ignore his red flag excesses, this trip abroad is not looking good in the least.
I believe he’ll go down the same corrupt road regarding Islam that we’ve seen in the past, pretending that our only enemy is “extreme”, and that he’ll do the same hatchet job on Israel that we’ve historically seen from various presidents, even if he pretends good will towards it.
What I’m seeing is some good choices and directions, and many bad ones as well. His petulance is still prominent, and he has started down the road of backpedaling from many of the campaign promises that I never believed he was honest about.
What we’re seeing from Trump is predictable and unfortunate, and he tries to stick to “the art of the deal”, instead of genuinely doing the right and ethical things within his power and ability.
More Ham Edsays
Very few ham sandwiches at this event, but abundant amounts of wahabi ranch dressing.
Gsays
“Drive them out”, “Drive them out”, in relation to Islamic terrorists. Ad nauseum repeated over and over by Trump when lecturing most of the Middle East. I lived in the Middle East during the 80’s and the English text newspapers extolled the virtues of spreading the Saudi form of islam, Wahhabism, throughout Africa. As readers of these articles will know, Wahhabism is the, probably, most extreme form of islam and it forms the basis of ISIS’ followers ideology. Fast forward: Question – where did the likes of Boko Haram and the rest of the savages in Africa get their creed from? Answer: the Middle East and Saudi in particular.
“Drive them out”, “Drive them out”. Must have been music to the ears of Middle East leaders. Not only has Trump been deceived by the Leaders who would anxiously describe islam as a ‘religion of peace’, but they have, indirectly, been ‘driving them out’ for decades. Drive the people out of Africa into the West. Then offer to finance the, for example, 500 mosques in Germany? Saudi money can be traced to many educational establishments in the West. Extreme islam? Yes, it comes from the Middle East and a lecture from an ignorant Trump on the subject will not change anything. Just goes to demonstrate the quality and knowledge of Trumps advisors. He will be a massive disappointment to the US, mark my words.
Jessica Greenmansays
Hmmm. I can see what he’s driving at here, but there’s a terrible problem with assuming that Saudi Arabia, and Islam is interested in peace. This is the hole in the argument: Islam preaches terrorism; there’s no difference between Isis and Saudi Arabia. they do precisely the same thing, and it’s in the Koran, so Trump is facing a big problem talking about ‘shared values’ – persecution of Jews and christians and oppression of women – when the whole point of Islam is to subjugate women and kill infidels. That is not equality and not peace. So… there are no shared ‘values’ here. I think maybe he is being disingenuous: he is pretending he’s not read ‘slay them wherever you find them’ and ‘strike terror into the hearts of unbelievers’ and that the Saudis have and are just bored now, because the God Trump is invoking isn’t Allah, so they can fall asleep now. However, he is definitely saying ‘terrorism must stop’ (while conveniently forgetting that Islam IS terrorism and you can’t invoke Peace when you are in the House of War) but you never know, this might work: it’s just frankly, with hand on heart, how can the Saudis NOT fund Isis when they agree with it? Does Trump think that the Saudis all of a sudden agree that women shouldn’t be oppressed and jews and christians shouldn’t be killed? When the Koran TELLS them to do both? Maybe he has a very tight legal document getting them to sign on the dotted line to values they at home utterly condemn. Maybe.
C Tsays
The Koran by itself has room for flexibility and interpretation. Discard the ahadith, with their repeated injunctions to kill people for apostasy (which is too widely defined), and Islam can be peaceful. Probably not a religion any leftist would join, but peaceful.
Jack Diamondsays
The Qur’an has repeated injunctions to kill people for being disbelievers. The Qur’an has repeated injunctions to hate people for being disbelievers. The Qur’an has repeated injunctions to subjugate people who are disbelievers.
Further, the Qur’an is clear enough that you are not a Muslim, one who submits, unless you do submit and obey Allah AND Muhammad without questions: “It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger he has indeed strayed into plain error.” Q 33:36 “They can have NO FAITH unless they make you (O Muhammad) judge in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance against your decisions, and accept them with full submission.” Q 4:65
Really, flexibility and interpretation that can render Islam peaceful? Take 9:29 as an example and explain that kill, slaughter, massacre (qital) means something different than what it says, or that the verse is now to be interpreted as merely an historic relic in such a way that Muslims will accept your explanation. And put aside their Qur’an mandated hate and enmity (al baraa) as well.
Then explain how much sense Islam makes without the sunnah, without the words and deeds and example of Muhammad, to the majority of Muslims, and how they can or will also ignore the clear consensus of Islamic scholarship and jurisprudence for centuries in order to create this peaceful Quran-only Islam? Or were you only considering the problem being Muslims killed for apostatizing?
If the hadith are merely “hearsay” what does that make the Qur’an, according to you?
gravenimagesays
C T, I’m afraid Jack is correct. Even without the Hadith–which no orthodox Sunni plans on jettisoning–the Qur’an itself is hideously violent.
Jan Aage Jeppesensays
“This is not a battle between different faiths, different sects, or different civilizations.
This is a battle between barbaric criminals who seek to obliterate human life, and decent people of all religions who seek to protect it.
This is a battle between Good and Evil.”
(Donald Trump in his Saudi Speech).
So it is now goodbye to the best scientific hypothesis pointing out where the fundamental source of conflict lies in world politics – Samuel P. Huntington’s “Clash of Civilizations”.
The motivating religion and ideology behind Islamist terror and violence is – surprise – Islam. Any Muslim who takes the dictates from Allah and Muhammad seriously and literally cannot be distinguished from an Islamist terrorist. Luckily most Muslims are not terrorists but the potential to become one is latent in their religion.
By traditional Islamic standards Islamic State is not a criminal or non-Islamic organization. So says the highest Sunni authorities at the Al Azhar University in Cairo when they refused to issue a fatwa condemning The Islamic State and calling the group apostates or non-Islamic. Fighting in the cause of Allah can never be un-Islamic according to traditional Islamic theology.
The Islamist fighters and terrorist use violence in order to cleanse the world of impurities believing that they are creating a more perfect world. From their perspective they are purifying the world of injustice, cruelty, and all that is anti-human. They believe they are doing something holy.
Trump did not have to denounce the Clash-hypothesis in order to please the barbaric kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the group of Arabic leaders. All representing countries with the worst record of Human Rights abuses, discrimination, misogyny, racism and barbaric warfare and punishment.
So why did he or his speech writer do it?
Probably because words are cheap, as a Danish secretary of State said in 1940 during the Nazi occupation when he was criticized for expressing admiration for the great German victories on the battlefield. The false words were intended to create a better climate for negotiations with the Nazis. Tell them what they want to hear is considered a good diplomatic strategy.
I have not found a better explanation than the Clash-thesis of the patterns of conflict in the present phase of world politics which we entered at the end of The Cold War in 1991.
Just two years later the political scientist Samuel P. Huntington wrote an article in Foreign Affairs saying what did not become obvious to most thinkers before the terror attack on America in 2001:
“It is my hypothesis that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. Nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics. The fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future.”
Huntington also wrote that Islam has bloody borders. You must be blind not to see it.
Politics and diplomacy is not about truths but finding the best ways to achieve political goals – regardsles of what the truth is.
gravenimagesays
Not all cultures want to destroy others. It is canonical to teach that Islam will violently dominate the whole world.
And the idea that Islam has nothing to do with ideology is, I’m afraid, mistaken.
davejsays
Let’s give Trump some credit here. I think he knows “they hate us” but it was his job to give a reasonably polite speech right in the heart of the evil. So he did – but also managed to deliver a stern warning: “This is a battle between Good and Evil – you need to drive these radical jihadists out (with the unspoken “or we will”).
He made the US the totem of peace and prosperity, contrasting it with the nihilism and barbarity of the whole Muslim world without directly insulting them in their own house. I give him an A+
Davegreybeardsays
Yup.
And I hope “CAST THEM OUT!” becomes a battle cry.
Discover more from
Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.
Diane Harvey says
If he didn’t say that Islam is as retrograde as it gets; that its adherents are duty-bound by the terms of their holy (cough) books to bring the world to heel on the terms of their vicious and cruel Allah, including when necessary through murder; and that Muslims have brought nothing but misery for 1400 years, and that their continued actions are bringing war on themselves and the rest of the world by reason of their hideous religion,
then,
his speech was a failure.
David says
There’s a difference between how we speak and how politicians speak. You can’t expect Trump to go there and tell them, “OK guys, either you help us bomb the sh*t out of terrorists, or we’ll blow the sh*t out of you!”
Baucent says
Exactly. You expect a certain politeness of speech when visiting anyone. However what he does rather than what he says before muslim leaders, is the important point. Time will tell.
gravenimage says
Trump is just a tall man; he wasn’t bowing as Obama had done.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
His speech was certain to be a failure by predicate. A more kind definition of success is required here. His speech was a limited success in that he was in Riyadh talking about a severe problem that everybody there acknowledged. That there is no solution to it is another matter, but at least the Wahabbis were to we’re gonna try to stop it. Of course, stopping it can’t be done short of shutting down the Islam belief system globally, but that’s another matter.
Debi Brand says
Please, Diane, Allow me (sarcastically here…) to play the devil’s advocate here, make the argument for buying into the possibility of this fairytale becoming a reality.
‘ start with the following:
“Bismi’llah i’r Rahman i’r Raheem Allahumma Salli wa Sallim wa Baarik ‘alla Rasul” as cited by the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, “[In the name of Allah the most Compassionate, the most Merciful, Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessing be upon His Messenger”]
(http://www.iqra.net/Salaams/salaams2.html)
Why can we not, once and for all, accept what Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, stated, in his prelude to President Trump’s speech?
In that intro, King Salman stated, once more–clearly for the benefit of the “foolish,” “ignorant,” and hard-headed concerning Islam–“Islam,” he said, “was and always will be the religion of mercy, tolerance, and co-existence.”
As has been confirmed, asserts the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, “by brilliant presidents.” Indeed, no doubt about it, Bush, Obama, and Trump among those.
The noble Custodian stated, “in Islam’s prosperous time, it provided the best examples of coexistence and harmony among followers of religions and cultures.”
In other words, if you study history, you will clearly see, when Islam was allowed to rule, everybody honoring it, basically, got along. Knew, in other words, just what the “Holy Prophet” promised, repeated times, those who regarded an honored Islam would know: “the protection of God and His Messenger.”
Just as the honorable Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques stated, today, we see people determined, hard-press to present to the world “a distorted picture of religion, ”a picture that seeks to conflate this great religion with violence.”
Yes, indeed, thus those who make such “wrongful” claims must be silenced.
Why can we not, as stated, just, once and for all, put the books away, go with what GW told us of Islam, go with what Obama told us of Islam, go with what King Salman told us today about Islam—which is, as Trump has stated of late, one of the world’s great religions?
Why can we not just go with that? Put an end to hearing and regarding folks like Spencer, Geller, and all those who want to “soil” the reputation and doctrine of this great faith?
Bottom line, all: it will highly improbable if not categorically impossible to see this dream presented today by Trump ever come to fruition, unless the voices such as Spencer’s are silenced and the info on Islam, as that provided by the honorable noble Custodian of the Two Holy Mosque provided us with today, is regarded. Accepted as both the long and short on Islam.
As Trump stated, these are our partners. Thus, hand in hand with them, it is understood, we walk together. How can two walk together unless they agree?
They cannot.
Thus, it is inconceivable to consider remotely possible, Trump is not in agreement with this that our partner stated and presented to us here today.
Thus, if we are to give any chance at all to see Trump’s tabled goals here succeed, we must not only embrace our Saudi partners, but also embrace what they, and Trump, tell us of Islam. Embrace it for the “great religion” they tell us it is.
billybob says
Put an end to hearing and regarding folks like Spencer, Geller, and all those who want to “soil” the reputation and doctrine of this great faith?
Folks like Spencer and Geller do not “soil” the faith of Islam, but rather, point out where Islam has soiled itself. if we are to give any chance at all to see Trump’s tabled goals here succeed, we must not only embrace the realists like Spencer, Geller, but also embrace the implications of what they tell us of Islam so that we be firmly resolved to speak softly but carry a big stick if needed. Platitudes alone will not do it.
Debi Brand says
Of course, BB. As I stated above, the arguments I made were made sarcastically.
billybob says
Oh wow I totally missed that.
Leon Degney says
Me too!
Jihadi John says
Trump and the art of doublespeak.
Debi Brand says
“Trump and the art of doublespeak.”
Yup. In a word.
Terry Gain says
Diane Harvey
I agree with everything you u say about Islam, but your conclusion that the speech was a failure is wrong as is obvious if you ask what good would it have done to call Islam what it is – an evil ideology.
Trump challenged Islam to reform. Islam can’t reform without disbanding. No one can say Trump didn’t give Islam the benefit of the doubt. He will be free to question Islam’s willingness to reform when it is clear that they can’t.
I am a frequent critic of Trump but this speech, with all of its false praise for Islam ((none of which Trump believes) was pure genius. It was chess
Leon Degney says
Couldn’t agree more. Check and mate!
C T says
It can reform, but it has to dump the ahadith, which should never have been treated as legit. According to the Quran itself, sects would arise after Muhammed which would all be false. Hello, Sunni and Shia, that’s both of you.
ahem says
This may go down as one of the most brilliant politcal speeches of all time.
C T says
Agreed. It was a terrific talk. I especially liked “If we do not stand in uniform condemnation of this killing—then not only will we be judged by our people, not only will we be judged by history, but we will be judged by God.”
Come on, Salafism pushers, go ahead and ask God how much he likes your killing people for not agreeing with your loyalty to the hearsay contained in the ahadith.
Steve Klein says
I feel certain the best-selling author who owns this site would agree, what President Trump calls ” the terrorists and the extremists” are devout Muslims; the sheikhs, the imams, the Islamic scholars, the jihadists and their supporters throughout Saudi Arabia and the Middle East, those who are following the example of the prophet Muhammad.
Roderick MacUalraig says
Indeed, Sir.
gravenimage says
All true.
dsinc says
Yes, “radical Islamic extremists” President Trump knows Muslims are ALL radical Islamic extremists.
Kilfincelt says
I listened to the whole thing on Fox. What the King of Saudi Arabia said made me sick to my stomach because he was lying. As readers of this website know, an Islamic terrorist to us is jihadi warrior fighting the good fight to many of them. The only reason this conference was held by Saudi Arabia was because those in charge feel threatened by Iran and ISIS. Ideologically, they are not all that far apart.
I thought Trump’s speech was pretty good under the circumstances; however, for the most part, the speakers were all talking past each other because the Islamic culture and belief system is totally incompatible with that of the West.
Steve Klein says
Pamela wrote: Before we get to Trump’s speech, I would like to comment on King Salman’s remarks prior to President Trump’s speech to the Muslim world. Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud is King of Saudi Arabia, Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, and head of the House of Saud.
Behind the flag of the sword and shahada (much like the ISIS flag), King Salman declared, “Islam is the religion mercy and tolerance and co-existence as confirmed by brilliant precedence. In its prosperous times Islam provided the best examples of co-existence and harmony among followers of religions and cultures.” Good for Muslims, horrible for non-believers, who were forced to live under dhimmitude, paying the jizya and living in a state of subjugation. No mention of the hundreds of millions slaughtered in jihadi wars, land appropriations, cultural annihilations and enslavements.
He talks about the forces of “extremism” – Saudi Arabia under sharia rule defines the force of extremism.
He speaks with the forked tongue of Obama administration, using “countering violent extremism,” the West’s euphemism for Islamic holy war. It’s jihad, and the King knows it.
The King cites as proof of peaceful Islam, a qur’anic verse stolen and twisted from the Talmud, “Islam is the religion of peace and tolerance. It considers an innocent tantamount to killing all of humanity.”
This is the wholesale theft from the Talmud (an authoritative record of rabbinic discussions on Jewish law, Jewish ethics, customs, etc.): “Whoever destroys a soul, it is considered as if he destroyed an entire world. And whoever saves a life, it is considered as if he saved an entire world.” Mishnah Sanhedrin 4:5; Yerushalmi Talmud 4:9, Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 37a.
Here is what the Qur’an really says….
http://pamelageller.com/2017/05/king-salamans-lies.html/
Kilfincelt says
I agree with what Pamela Geller wrote.
gravenimage says
Yes–spot on.
Debi Brand says
Indeed, Pamela.
Case of garbage in garbage out.
Frederick Middleton says
It’s difficult to know where to begin with what’s is wrong in this speech. Briefly, it is a triumph of naivete, if he believes it. He is speaking in a country where they behead people for what would be innocent acts in most other countries. How can he talk of the oppression of women in that place!
Dean says
This is painful – what a horrible betrayal – he will pay in the next elections.
No deal, photo op or strategy/Machiavellian motive is worth this soul destroying trip.
His bad karma will catch up with him in the Novembers to come.
Debi Brand says
Betrayal indeed.
RichardL says
very stylish setting: Like an oversized 1980s brothel.
salim says
Does it matter what he says in open? He said many things before.
What matters is what he does … and says behind closed doors.
Trump was my last hope and turned out to be a false one.
lebel says
“Behind the flag of the sword and shahada (much like the ISIS flag), King Salman declared, “Islam is the religion mercy and tolerance and co-existence as confirmed by brilliant precedence. In its prosperous times Islam provided the best examples of co-existence and harmony among followers of religions and cultures.” Good for Muslims, horrible for non-believers, who were forced to live under dhimmitude, paying the jizya and living in a state of subjugation. No mention of the hundreds of millions slaughtered in jihadi wars, land appropriations, cultural annihilations and enslavements.”
Why mention that? how would you feel if a politician came to America and mentioned the millions of dead indians and black slavery and then REDUCED the entire country to that. This is the jihadwatch way (or extreme leftist way) but its not the way of rational people.
Steve Klein says
There is a difference. Do you know what it is?
lebel says
Yes, Islam is evil, evil all the time and Taqqiya means that any good is way to fool the infidels.
Let me know if I missed anything
gravenimage says
lebel wrote:
“Behind the flag of the sword and shahada (much like the ISIS flag), King Salman declared, “Islam is the religion mercy and tolerance and co-existence as confirmed by brilliant precedence. In its prosperous times Islam provided the best examples of co-existence and harmony among followers of religions and cultures.” Good for Muslims, horrible for non-believers, who were forced to live under dhimmitude, paying the jizya and living in a state of subjugation. No mention of the hundreds of millions slaughtered in jihadi wars, land appropriations, cultural annihilations and enslavements.”
Why mention that? how would you feel if a politician came to America and mentioned the millions of dead indians and black slavery and then REDUCED the entire country to that. This is the jihadwatch way (or extreme leftist way) but its not the way of rational people.
………………………
If these horrors were a thing of the past in Saudi Arabia, this would be correct.
But Saudi Arabia is *still* oppressing women and Infidels, practicing brutal Shari’ah law, teaching Jihad and Shari’ah in Madrasses all over the world, and funding violent Jihad. Of course, lebel understands this distinction.
lebel says
Is Saudi responsible for all Islamic history? and is it the job of visiting politician to criticize each country for its shortcomings? is the Saudi Prince supposed to lecture police brutality publically on his next trip to the US.
That does not mean that these things cant be criticized but Im responding to the poster who suggested we mention the billions upon billions of Islam’s victims.
gravenimage says
lebel wrote:
Is Saudi responsible for all Islamic history?
………………………..
No, they are not–but they are responsible for continuing that baleful history, including chopping people’s heads off, teaching genocide of the Jews and violent Jihad, stoning women to death, and involvement in 9/11.
Of course, no surprise that lebel has no apparent problem with this savagery.
More:
and (sic) is it the job of visiting politician to criticize each country for its shortcomings?
………………………..
Pretending that these barbarians are our allies or share our values is absurd–these are not small differences of opinions we might have with other civilized nations such as England, Switzerland, or Canada.
No American president is pretending, say, that North Korea is a civilized nation.
More:
is (sic) the Saudi Prince supposed to lecture police brutality publically (sic) on his next trip to the US.
………………………..
Ah–just the sort of witless tu quoque we have come to expect from lebel.
Pretending that Saudi Arabia has civilized law enforcement and the United States does not is, of course, ludicrous.
Police brutality is *illegal* here, and is prosecuted. One might argue that this should be more vigorously enforced, but acting as though Shari’ah sh*tholes have the same sort of checks and balances is ridiculous.
More:
That does not mean that these things cant (sic) be criticized but Im (sic) responding to the poster who suggested we mention the billions upon billions of Islam’s victims.
………………………..
No, of course, all of these billions of victims–even those who are suffering and dying today–should be studiously ignored, lest Muslims be “offended”. Can’t have that…
lebel says
By the way, pretty good speech. You are lucky that Trump is not Trump jihadwatch hoped for.
gravenimage says
I think Muslim apologist lebel means that this is lucky *for him*.
lebel says
Do you really honestly think that?
I get that you hate me because Islam is evil for ALL time and Muslims as well (the nice ones are practicing taqqiya)
But do you really honestly think that I meant that?
gravenimage says
Apart from once vaguely claiming that he was against Jihad–while at the same time whitewashing Islam–lebel has never done anything here but cast aspersions on those who actually oppose Jihad.
If Islam were really to reform into something that was not oppressive and bloody, I would not hate it. But no–I actually *do* hate pedophilia, FGM, slavery, rape, amputations, stoning, and violent Jihad waged against non-Muslims. I make no apologies for hating such savagery.
I don’t hate Muslims who do not practice the horrors of their faith–but I also know that very few of them actually oppose such horrors. If Muslims really did begin to oppose such barbarism, I would applaud them.
I don’t hate lebel, either–but I recognize him as someone who has whitewashed Islam for many years here, and I will continue to counter his propaganda. He is no ally of those who bravely stand against Jihad.
David A says
Do you disagree that “Saudi Arabia is *still* oppressing women and Infidels, practicing brutal Shari’ah law, teaching Jihad and Shari’ah in Madrasses all over the world, and funding violent Jihad”???
lebel says
I agree that Saudi arabia is still doing much of this although this has lessened in recent years. There has been a change in the curriculum for example.
Also, I believe that most funding at this point comes from private donors rather than the government.
Obviously the laws are oppressive but I believe they will change.
gravenimage says
lebel wrote:
I agree that Saudi arabia is still doing much of this although this has lessened in recent years. There has been a change in the curriculum for example.
…………………………..
Yeah, right:
“Saudi curriculum blamed for breeding hatred”
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2005/12/saudi-curriculum-blamed-for-breeding-hatred
Moreover, Saudi Arabia is spreading this orthodox Islamic education all over the world through sponsoring Madrasses and staffing them with Saudi clerics.
More:
Also, I believe that most funding at this point comes from private donors rather than the government.
Uh huh:
“‘Tsunami of money’ from Saudi Arabia funding 24,000 madrassas in Pakistan”
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/01/tsunami-of-money-from-saudi-arabia-funding-24000-madrassas-in-pakistan
And this is not just in Dar-al-Islam:
“Saudi government funded jihad teaching in US mosques”
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/07/saudi-government-funded-jihad-teaching-in-us-mosques
More:
Obviously the laws are oppressive but I believe they will change.
…………………………..
What possible reason could lebel have for believing they will change? Instead, the Saudis are trying to spread this oh-so-Islamic savagery.
salim says
What people should be asking:
Why America, with all its might and wealth, pander to the most backward country on earth?
Is it difficult for Trump to understand that Saudi Arabia is behind radical Islam? … and behind Islamic terrorism?
Would America fall, or its economy collapse, if it doesn’t make that arms deal?
I am afraid its a very dirty game that has been going on since that infamous meeting between Roosevelt and Abdul Aziz in 1945.
Americans should care more about their country and nation than about political parties. When a president fails … he simply fails, even if voted for him.
Walter Sieruk says
One of the reasons that the officials of Saudi Arabia did give President Thump more respect than they gave to President Obama is because of the Muslim mindset which views being timid as having weakness. Obama was so timid that he was afraid to use the term “Islamic terrorism.” In contrast, President is not afraid to use that term likewise this current American President calls things as they actually are. The Muslim officials of Saudi Arabia respect President Trump for that. Furthermore, the government of Saudi Arabia has threats against it by ISIS and also the stooge jihad terror groups of Iran. So Saudi officials understand that those terror entities are, actually, Islamic terrorist organizations.
John A. Marre says
It was good, within the confines of what he dared say while surrounded by beards and white dresses. Still too much “Religion of Peace” for me, and not enough “Cult of Death.”
Lee says
Trump is a great man.
Pal says
President Trump speaks NOT to the Muslim Brotherhood but to governments.
Unlike Barrack Obama, 2009, Al-Azhar, Egypt.
sog says
@Pal… YES! …and that’s only one of the paradigm shifts Trump will trigger. Saudi Arabia and the gulf states *really are* Threatened by Iran. Trump evoked Hezbollah and Iran. The Sunni lead Gulf states need the west, and it really tickles my funny bone that “the west” includes Israel. They want this bulwark to stand against Iran. If Trump and his administration can get Governments to remove support form radical Islam then the world will be better off. This is despite the fact that the very nature of Islam is “radical Islam”.
If Trump is successful in producing the paradigm shifts he is trying to produce, then for the most part, the new face of Islam truly will become “a religion of peace”.
Transmaster says
At last we have a President that aims to return the Middle East to the balance of power the region had before Jimmy Carter and President’s thereafter destroyed. The best people to bring the radicals under control are the Muslims themselves. I like President’s Trump’s statement that it is not up to the United States to dictate how people live. The concept of “Nation Building” has not worked since the bogus idea was coined in Vietnam in the late 1960’s. It is apparent to anyone with any knowledge of the world that you cannot force a western goverment system on a country that does not have any such traditions. The Shi’a, Sunni genocide can only be controlled by inside forces as it was under the Ottoman Empire.
gravenimage says
Transmaster wrote:
At last we have a President that aims to return the Middle East to the balance of power the region had before Jimmy Carter and President’s thereafter destroyed. The best people to bring the radicals under control are the Muslims themselves.
…………………….
Dear Transmaster, “radicals” are just pious Muslims–why would Muslims want to control them?
Pal says
“Iran” was one of the main points in king Salman (Solomon?) ‘s speech.
“Down with Iran, down with Iran!”
In case all participants were Shias, it would have sounded:
“Down with Saudi Arabia, down with Saudi Arabia!”.
The Parody Of islam.
Barry says
…..from the king’s mouth…“In Islam’s prosperous time, it provided the best examples of coexistence and harmony among followers of religions and cultures……” Really!!!! The only time Mo was prosperous (other than from his first wife) was when he sent murdering thugs to rob, rape and murder caravans…Jefferson and Adams had to deal with the Barbary pirates robbing and enslaving American merchant ships, even extorting money from the U.S. government in return for ransomed captured American ‘slaves’ from those ships….
Islam has brought ZERO innovation, invention, art or kind of prosperity on it’s own….the only reason it survives to this days is because it advocates theft and extortion from non-muslims – and of course middle-east oil (which western oil companies discovered and processed for them). We have a place for murders, rapists and thieves….it’s called prison….Islam is an organized crime syndicate and death cult that has survived by murder, rape, extortion and outright theft. Its god can only be the prince of darkness.
duh swami says
Does anyone really believe that the Muslim audience believed one word said by a Christian, shirker and kuffar? Somehow I don’t think they are ‘that’s stupid…
billybob says
I saw the speech as diplomatic, deep, and very subtle. Everyone in the room knew what he was talking about, though for the most part he employed euphemism. For me, he was telling them – your barbaric religion is not only holding back progress in the Middle East, but is also destroying the world. Yes indeed, that is what I heard – couched in diplomatic terms and euphemisms. Furthermore, he was talking over the heads of the mullahs who would spit in his face to the leaders who know full well what he was saying. These same may indeed not be so pious in their hearts. These same undoubtedly are in an eternal struggle with the mullahs for power and control. He was saying to them, the leaders – rise up and overthrow your mullahs and give your people freedom and prosperity.
I don’t care that his speech was diplomatic. What are you going to do? You cannot ignore diplomacy even with your worst enemy, especially when you are right there in his camp.
I think this speech was brilliant, and I was very impressed with both the substance and the delivery. Trump has scored a homerun with this one, in my opinion, especially when I was well prepared for the worst by Hugh Fitzgerald’s piece Shut Up and Deal, or Brittle Man, You’ve Had a Dizzy May. They should take back the Nobel Peace prize they gave Obama for his fake speech and give it to Trump. Notice Trump never said any nonsense like “The future must not belong to those who would disparage the Prophet of Islam”. rather, he was saying enough of this religion and let’s make a prosperous and peaceful future for our people. Furthermore, they can take that as a warning. They are either with us or against us in this, and if they choose to be against us our military is prepared with new strategies.
rara says
> if they choose to be against us our military is prepared with new strategies.
Joke.
Saudis are just going to get the weapons worth 100 billion dollars from the US.
Jack Diamond says
Enough of this religion, let’s talk like pragmatic men of the world who aren’t really motivated by such nonsense, is that his mindset?
So, when Trump says we need to defeat terrorism (sic) and send its wicked ideology into oblivion, he is fully aware that he is speaking about Islam itself as the source of this wickedness? Not exonerating it?
When he compares terrorists to nihilists in love with death and barbaric criminals who only seek to annihilate life, he is fully aware that Islamic jihadists are seeking to impose Islamic law over the earth, that this was Bin Laden’s goal, not just annihilating life, just as it is the goal of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation? The same Islamic law supposed to rule in Saudi Arabia?
He knows he is being disingenuous? He is fully aware that the Saudis were behind al Qaeda and the Taliban and ISIS when he says such things?
billybob says
That’s the way I read it, Mr. Diamond
Jack Diamond says
I do hope time proves you right about that for everyone’s sake.
C T says
I read it that way, too. I wonder how many of the youth of Saudi Arabia heard it that way, too, and realized they don’t have to bow down to mullahs who will kill them over a line in a collection of hearsay, i.e., the ahadith.
gravenimage says
Unfortunately, a lot of young Muslims are just as fanatical as their elders.
Barry says
Does anyone anymore remember that 17 of the 19 9/11 cowards were Saudis. Furthermore, investigations prove beyond doubt that high Saudi officials were deeply involved with that cowardly terror attack targeted at innocent civilians that experienced horrific terror and pain to the point that some lept to their deaths due to the intense heat – in many cases that melted flesh from bones. For the life of me, I can’t understand why we didn’t declare war on that terrorist country that had in fact declared war on us.
gravenimage says
I sure as hell have not forgotten, Barry. These thugs are not our allies.
dsinc says
The answer is OIL.
G says
Barry, “…that had in fact declared war on us.” Change “had” for “has” and you will have the accurate picture.
Debi Brand says
Mr. President, you stated of the “Islamist,” “we must stop what they’re doing to inspire because they do nothing to inspire but kill.” (at 22:38)
Wrong, Sir. Wrong.
To inspire, they teach from the pages of the “sacred texts” of that which you call a great religion. They teach and use as an example and inspiration for the believers, the words and deeds of their “Holy Prophet” and the same of his “Noble Companions,” Sir.
You say, Mr. President, “Muslim nations must be willing to take on the burden, if we are going to defeat terrorism and send its wicked ideology into oblivion.”
It’s “wicked ideology,” Sir, is that written, as stated above, on the pages of the orthodox works of what you call a great religion.
Davegreybeard says
You are so full of crap Debi, its coming out your ears!
There is NO EVIDENCE that Trump thinks of Islam in the way that you have characterized.
When Trump loudly and repeatedly calls, in his BIG voice, for Muslims to “CAST THEM OUT!!”
Who do you think the “Them” is? Who do you think the Muslims in attendance think the “Them” is.
But lest idiots misunderstand Trump spells it out, the “Them” are ISLAMIC TERRORISTS!
To say such a thing, in the heart of the birthplace of Islam, to the leaders of Islam, who know EXACTLY what you are referring to, is simply brilliant.
But you Debi, are so blinded by your Trump hatred that you completely fail to understand what is going on.
Debi Brand says
“Greybeard,” you stated as follows:
“There is NO EVIDENCE that Trump thinks of Islam in the way that you have characterized.”
Characterized it, Dave? I cited his words, my Friend, precisely what he stated.
“When Trump loudly and repeatedly calls, in his BIG voice, for Muslims to “CAST THEM OUT!!”
Who do you think the “Them” is?”
I think it is who he stated it was, as I posted above, those he defined as Islamist. Whom, anyone who studies Islam knows are simply devout Muslims, following the teachings of the Qur’an and sunnah.
” Who do you think the Muslims in attendance think the “Them” is.”
They [ the Muslims in attendance] know who the ” ‘Them’ is” : as I provided above, the “Them” that Trump is telling Muslims to cast out are the keepers of the faith the Saudis and all good Muslims sanction.
Davegreybeard says
@Debi Brand
“Trump and the art of doublespeak.”
‘Yup. In a word.’
It’s your unthinking, knee jerk adversarial attitude really.
It seems it is difficult for you to stop for a minute and consider what is really going on, before pronouncing judgment on it, with invariable condemnation of Trump.
As your above comment indicates, nothing Trump says is to be taken seriously.
We obviously view the world quite differently.
Time has passed since Trump demanded of the Saudi’s “THROW THEM OUT!”
Clearly in reference to the most devout amongst them as you yourself noted.
It is a demand that could very well echo though the ages.
Do you think the Saudis think that Trump “is practicing the art of double speak?”
Do you think the Saudis take Trump seriously and if so, do you think that this is a good thing?
no_one says
If anyone wanted to retaliate for 9/11 US had to bomb Meca and Medina, not Iraq. It is all about money and no one cares about human life. Trump is no different than the two presidents before him. I am not sure Hillary would be worse. Total disappointment.
G says
9/11 Commission found: “After the airspace reopened, nine chartered flights with 160 people, mostly Saudi nationals, departed from the United States between September 14 and 24. In addition, one Saudi government flight, containing the Saudi deputy defense minister and other members of an official Saudi delegation, departed Newark Airport on September 14. Every airport involved in these Saudi flights was open when the flight departed, and no inappropriate actions were taken to allow those flights to depart.”
Why?
Stan Lee says
What we, who speak English, heard of Trump’s speech, seemed as diplomatic as his message could be under the circumstances. He was obliged to be more of an American man than Obama was. Trump did not appease, it was far better that way. Trump did understand the Saudi concerns of Iran upstaging the Sunni Islam center of its nations. Obama did not, nor did he really give a da-n. He was there to impress the Saudi King of his (Obama’s) Muslim pedigree. It fell flat, even the “bush league” bowing. Arabs won’t respect groveling, but they will respect far sooner when they see a masculine American leader.
Trump’s words were not empty as they came across in English. It was fairly tactful and obviously Trump was being diplomatic. That, I welcomed, Arabs are particularly sensitive, their words can be sweet, while their deeds can be very sour. I would have been more satisfied to hear the literal Arabic translation of Trump’s words, because it has always been very clear what happens to a speech given in English (for example) once the English becomes processed through the Arabic wringer. Their future deeds will reflect how they really digested Trump’s words.
Trump may be a “rookie” politician, but his element is business including negotiations. He is no “rookie” in that regard. He also was well prepared concerning Saudi Arabia’s needs. I think McMaster has something to do with that.Trump didn’t go there to get “a deal” on Saudi oil, we are now well-off in our own regard concerning energy. No, the Saudis need to arm-up, and for that they covet American military technology. American military hardware sets a world standard in most cases, apart from occasional developments such as the British Hawker Harrier VTO fighter of years ago, still in service because it’s that good. I think the U.S.M.C. aviation still uses it to support ground troops, though attack heliocopters have come a long way.
Russia still produces a standard AK development which competes with any infantry weapon issued to ours or NATO troops. But, they still are exceeded by U.S. aircraft and armor. Even after 8 years of Obama, it is the USA overall quality that sets the standard. Russian armor is good, but recent marks of our M-1 heavy battle tank remains the one for any other country to surpass. The Saudis want our export version of that tank.
Trump will return to the USA after negotiating about $350 billions of sales which include $110 billions of military hardware, the rest of it Saudi investments in U.S. businesses. Parts for whatever units the Saudis bought increase the value of Trump’s sale to them for the future. He’s not finished with his Mideast-Euro tour, other nations will entertain replenishing, because Trump’s message has been that they need to validate their places in NATO by being prepared. That is not essentially a “sales pitch,” it is a fact if NATO is to be respected.
SAM says
Guys and Gals we have Trump now vs Hillary. No perfection here as we are all mortals. So I want to know how we are going to fight Islam with what we have. I don’t want to talk about Islam. I want to fight it. Any suggestions other than contributing to this and other anti Jihad sights?
Davegreybeard says
You have to talk about it to fight it Sam.
At this point talking IS fighting. So talk to every Infidel you can, whenever you can about the true Islam. It is what you can do.
Deus Vult!
gravenimage says
Agreed, Dave. That is what Robert Spencer is doing with Jihad Watch.
Marko says
Truth is the greatest weapon against Islam (Islam is an idea). The Islamic world needs to be bombarded with historical truths like the Quran is man-made, it has been altered etc., Islam was invented by Abdul Malik, decades after Mohamed is said to have existed, no Arabs wrote about Mohamed during his life, the Quran was complied 20 years after Mohamed died, the Hadith 200 years after (and 99% of Hadiths were thrown away), 100% of mosques didn’t point to Mecca during Mohamed’s life and it took about 200 years before all Mosques pointed to Mecca (this wasn’t a knowhow problem). And more. Start by reading, “In the Shadow of the Sword” by Tom Holland.
Note: Abdul Malik is essentially Islam’s version of Emperor Constantine (who standardized Christianity for similar reasons as Abul Malik).
Humanity needs to grow up.
Robert Spencer says
Marko:
You may (or may not) be interested to know that I also have written a book about this very thing, Did Muhammad Exist? An Inquiry Into Islam’s Obscure Origins: https://www.amazon.com/Did-Muhammad-Exist-Inquiry-Obscure/dp/1610171330/ref=sr_1_1_twi_pap_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1495464149&sr=8-1&keywords=Did+Muhammad+Exist
gravenimage says
Yes; an important book.
Steve Klein says
I am thinking when President Trump today told barbaric criminals,This is a battle against barbaric criminals, he was speaking to barbaric criminals. What do you think?
Trump to cast battle against ‘Islamist extremism’ as fight with ‘barbaric criminals’
BY KYLE BALLUCK – 05/21/17 07:33 AM EDT
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/334431-trump-expected-to-cast-fight-against-islamist-extremism-as-battle-against
Joe says
I think it was an encoded warning speech to them. If that’s true a very good speech!
Lee Hicks says
A good barometer regarding any President is how they view and act both Israel and the Islamic world. When you see them gloss over the corruption of Islam, and begin hints at work on a “peace process” regarding Israel, neither are positive signs.
Islam is without a doubt the biggest threat to safety and security that we face today, and to see otherwise conservatives pretending that his speech in Saudi Arabia is groundbreaking and positive is simply astonishing.
To refuse to recognize that every Islamic nation oppresses women, allows child “marriages”, promote their own versions of Sharia, allow little or no Jewish and Christian representation, and refuse to demand that Jihad be separated from worship, it signals that the officials in question are either abysmally ignorant of Islam, or are in bed with such regimes for personal goals.
The “peace process” always signals benevolence towards the Muslim and Islamic world, and demands that Israel continue to capitulate and compromise for a fictional peace.
Regardless as to the Trump followers who continue to excuse or ignore his red flag excesses, this trip abroad is not looking good in the least.
I believe he’ll go down the same corrupt road regarding Islam that we’ve seen in the past, pretending that our only enemy is “extreme”, and that he’ll do the same hatchet job on Israel that we’ve historically seen from various presidents, even if he pretends good will towards it.
What I’m seeing is some good choices and directions, and many bad ones as well. His petulance is still prominent, and he has started down the road of backpedaling from many of the campaign promises that I never believed he was honest about.
What we’re seeing from Trump is predictable and unfortunate, and he tries to stick to “the art of the deal”, instead of genuinely doing the right and ethical things within his power and ability.
More Ham Ed says
Very few ham sandwiches at this event, but abundant amounts of wahabi ranch dressing.
G says
“Drive them out”, “Drive them out”, in relation to Islamic terrorists. Ad nauseum repeated over and over by Trump when lecturing most of the Middle East. I lived in the Middle East during the 80’s and the English text newspapers extolled the virtues of spreading the Saudi form of islam, Wahhabism, throughout Africa. As readers of these articles will know, Wahhabism is the, probably, most extreme form of islam and it forms the basis of ISIS’ followers ideology. Fast forward: Question – where did the likes of Boko Haram and the rest of the savages in Africa get their creed from? Answer: the Middle East and Saudi in particular.
“Drive them out”, “Drive them out”. Must have been music to the ears of Middle East leaders. Not only has Trump been deceived by the Leaders who would anxiously describe islam as a ‘religion of peace’, but they have, indirectly, been ‘driving them out’ for decades. Drive the people out of Africa into the West. Then offer to finance the, for example, 500 mosques in Germany? Saudi money can be traced to many educational establishments in the West. Extreme islam? Yes, it comes from the Middle East and a lecture from an ignorant Trump on the subject will not change anything. Just goes to demonstrate the quality and knowledge of Trumps advisors. He will be a massive disappointment to the US, mark my words.
Jessica Greenman says
Hmmm. I can see what he’s driving at here, but there’s a terrible problem with assuming that Saudi Arabia, and Islam is interested in peace. This is the hole in the argument: Islam preaches terrorism; there’s no difference between Isis and Saudi Arabia. they do precisely the same thing, and it’s in the Koran, so Trump is facing a big problem talking about ‘shared values’ – persecution of Jews and christians and oppression of women – when the whole point of Islam is to subjugate women and kill infidels. That is not equality and not peace. So… there are no shared ‘values’ here. I think maybe he is being disingenuous: he is pretending he’s not read ‘slay them wherever you find them’ and ‘strike terror into the hearts of unbelievers’ and that the Saudis have and are just bored now, because the God Trump is invoking isn’t Allah, so they can fall asleep now. However, he is definitely saying ‘terrorism must stop’ (while conveniently forgetting that Islam IS terrorism and you can’t invoke Peace when you are in the House of War) but you never know, this might work: it’s just frankly, with hand on heart, how can the Saudis NOT fund Isis when they agree with it? Does Trump think that the Saudis all of a sudden agree that women shouldn’t be oppressed and jews and christians shouldn’t be killed? When the Koran TELLS them to do both? Maybe he has a very tight legal document getting them to sign on the dotted line to values they at home utterly condemn. Maybe.
C T says
The Koran by itself has room for flexibility and interpretation. Discard the ahadith, with their repeated injunctions to kill people for apostasy (which is too widely defined), and Islam can be peaceful. Probably not a religion any leftist would join, but peaceful.
Jack Diamond says
The Qur’an has repeated injunctions to kill people for being disbelievers. The Qur’an has repeated injunctions to hate people for being disbelievers. The Qur’an has repeated injunctions to subjugate people who are disbelievers.
Further, the Qur’an is clear enough that you are not a Muslim, one who submits, unless you do submit and obey Allah AND Muhammad without questions: “It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger he has indeed strayed into plain error.” Q 33:36 “They can have NO FAITH unless they make you (O Muhammad) judge in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance against your decisions, and accept them with full submission.” Q 4:65
Really, flexibility and interpretation that can render Islam peaceful? Take 9:29 as an example and explain that kill, slaughter, massacre (qital) means something different than what it says, or that the verse is now to be interpreted as merely an historic relic in such a way that Muslims will accept your explanation. And put aside their Qur’an mandated hate and enmity (al baraa) as well.
Then explain how much sense Islam makes without the sunnah, without the words and deeds and example of Muhammad, to the majority of Muslims, and how they can or will also ignore the clear consensus of Islamic scholarship and jurisprudence for centuries in order to create this peaceful Quran-only Islam? Or were you only considering the problem being Muslims killed for apostatizing?
If the hadith are merely “hearsay” what does that make the Qur’an, according to you?
gravenimage says
C T, I’m afraid Jack is correct. Even without the Hadith–which no orthodox Sunni plans on jettisoning–the Qur’an itself is hideously violent.
Jan Aage Jeppesen says
“This is not a battle between different faiths, different sects, or different civilizations.
This is a battle between barbaric criminals who seek to obliterate human life, and decent people of all religions who seek to protect it.
This is a battle between Good and Evil.”
(Donald Trump in his Saudi Speech).
So it is now goodbye to the best scientific hypothesis pointing out where the fundamental source of conflict lies in world politics – Samuel P. Huntington’s “Clash of Civilizations”.
The motivating religion and ideology behind Islamist terror and violence is – surprise – Islam. Any Muslim who takes the dictates from Allah and Muhammad seriously and literally cannot be distinguished from an Islamist terrorist. Luckily most Muslims are not terrorists but the potential to become one is latent in their religion.
By traditional Islamic standards Islamic State is not a criminal or non-Islamic organization. So says the highest Sunni authorities at the Al Azhar University in Cairo when they refused to issue a fatwa condemning The Islamic State and calling the group apostates or non-Islamic. Fighting in the cause of Allah can never be un-Islamic according to traditional Islamic theology.
The Islamist fighters and terrorist use violence in order to cleanse the world of impurities believing that they are creating a more perfect world. From their perspective they are purifying the world of injustice, cruelty, and all that is anti-human. They believe they are doing something holy.
Trump did not have to denounce the Clash-hypothesis in order to please the barbaric kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the group of Arabic leaders. All representing countries with the worst record of Human Rights abuses, discrimination, misogyny, racism and barbaric warfare and punishment.
So why did he or his speech writer do it?
Probably because words are cheap, as a Danish secretary of State said in 1940 during the Nazi occupation when he was criticized for expressing admiration for the great German victories on the battlefield. The false words were intended to create a better climate for negotiations with the Nazis. Tell them what they want to hear is considered a good diplomatic strategy.
I have not found a better explanation than the Clash-thesis of the patterns of conflict in the present phase of world politics which we entered at the end of The Cold War in 1991.
Just two years later the political scientist Samuel P. Huntington wrote an article in Foreign Affairs saying what did not become obvious to most thinkers before the terror attack on America in 2001:
“It is my hypothesis that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. Nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics. The fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future.”
Huntington also wrote that Islam has bloody borders. You must be blind not to see it.
Politics and diplomacy is not about truths but finding the best ways to achieve political goals – regardsles of what the truth is.
gravenimage says
Not all cultures want to destroy others. It is canonical to teach that Islam will violently dominate the whole world.
And the idea that Islam has nothing to do with ideology is, I’m afraid, mistaken.
davej says
Let’s give Trump some credit here. I think he knows “they hate us” but it was his job to give a reasonably polite speech right in the heart of the evil. So he did – but also managed to deliver a stern warning: “This is a battle between Good and Evil – you need to drive these radical jihadists out (with the unspoken “or we will”).
He made the US the totem of peace and prosperity, contrasting it with the nihilism and barbarity of the whole Muslim world without directly insulting them in their own house. I give him an A+
Davegreybeard says
Yup.
And I hope “CAST THEM OUT!” becomes a battle cry.