Between the Koran’s teachings against befriending Christians and Jews … and its teachings that it is a “grave sin for a Muslim to shirk the battle against the unbelievers,” as the scholar and critic Ibn Warraq explains (“those who do will roast in hell”), it is also perfectly Islamic to wage jihad against any and all infidel “education, development projects,” not to mention against Muslims not actively fighting or supporting jihad.
If [President George] Bush … ever did crack the book, he read only the “good parts” — the 124 verses of tolerance — that are rendered meaningless according to the rule of “abrogation.”
The rule of abrogation is the key that Islamic scholars use to resolve contradictions within the Koran. By means of this doctrine, Koranic passages are “abrogated,” or canceled, by any subsequently “revealed” verses that convey a different meaning. In other words, when there is a contradiction (e.g., don’t kill the infidel vs. yes, kill the infidel), whatever was “revealed” to Islam’s prophet, Mohammed, more recently trumps whatever was “revealed” before it. This technique comes from Mohammed himself at the Koran’s sura 2:105: “Whatever verses we [i.e., Allah] cancel or cause you to forget, we bring a better or its like.” …
In his book What the Koran Really Says, Ibn Warraq explains that while abrogation resolves the abundant contradictions to be found in the Koran, it “does pose problems for apologists of Islam, since all the passages preaching tolerance are found in Meccan (i.e. early) suras, and all the passages recommending killing, decapitating and maiming, the so-called Sword Verses, are Medinan (i.e. later).”
His conclusion: “‘Tolerance’ has been abrogated by ‘intolerance.’” Just to be clear: Islamic tolerance in the Koran has been canceled by Islamic intolerance in the Koran. …
This fact contradicts the Big Lie at the root of the prevailing ideology: “Islam is a religion of peace.” Therefore, our leaders don’t want us to know it. They also don’t want to know it themselves. …
Such knowledge would collapse their deceitful balloon of “universal” values, which rises on the hot air of “Kum-bay-a”- interchangeable sameness. Such a collapse would, in turn, doom the relativism, moral and cultural, that currently drives these same utopian fantasists to undermine liberty in their quest to order or even rule our world and beyond. Suppression of the facts, then, becomes the only way to keep this enterprise of lies buoyant, something for which there is ample precedent in our past, as the pages ahead will show.
Under both the Bush and Obama administrations, then, any fact-driven discussion of Islamic religious, legal, and historical imperatives to make holy war until the world is governed by Islam threatened this same enterprise and had to be, in effect, outlawed and later officially forbidden.
“Cultural sensitivity” had to become the name of the game. Thus, as Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey wrote in April 2012, U.S. military programs must “exhibit the cultural sensitivity, respect for religion and intellectual balance that we should expect of our academic institutions.”
In plain English: Whitewash Islam or else.
The left’s narrative has a dozen big lies.
Islam is a gift to the world from 7th century Arabia, gradually conquering the world by force. It does not change or reform, because radicals keep dragging it back to its fundamentals. It is not a religion as we otherwise understand that term, but a totalitarian, supremacist ideology.
What other “religion” sentences you to death if you leave? “Cult,” more like.
Woke and Islam are united against western culture, but that marriage of convenience cannot last forever. Islam is far stronger than woke, but we shall see.