-
What Those Who Boycott Israel Really Want
May 14, 2013 | 143 comments
-
Mitt on Marriage
May 8, 2013 | 38 comments
-
The One Constant
May 1, 2013 | 118 comments
-
Trudeaus and Terrorism
April 22, 2013 | 15 comments
-
I Was Almost There
April 16, 2013 | 171 comments
The Obama Watch
Jihad by Stoning
Will Obama leave no stone unturned in Indonesia?
Perhaps the most telling moment so far of President Obama’s overseas trip to Southeastern Asia occurred while he was addressing students at St. Xavier’s College in Mumbai, India. During a question and answer period which followed the President’s remarks, a female student asked Obama’s views about jihad. Here is a portion of the President Obama’s reply to that question:
Well, the phrase jihad has a lot of meanings within Islam and is subject to a lot of different interpretations. But I will say that, first, Islam is one of the world’s great religions. And more than a billion people who practice Islam, the overwhelming majority view their obligations to their religion as ones that reaffirm peace and justice and fairness and tolerance. I think all of us recognize that this great religion in the hands of a few extremists has been distorted to justify violence towards innocent people that is never justified.
And so I think one of the challenges that we face is how do we isolate those who have these distorted notions of religious war and reaffirm those who see faiths of all sorts — whether you are a Hindu or a Muslim or a Christian or a Jew or any other religion, or your don’t practice a religion — that we can all treat each other with respect and mutual dignity, and that some of the universal principles that Gandhi referred to — that those are what we’re living up to, as we live in a nation or nations that have very diverse religious beliefs.
If one is to accept President Obama’s argument that jihad “has a lot of meanings within Islam and is subject to different interpretations,” then one must wonder what Obama thinks about its meaning and interpretation in certain parts of Indonesia. After all, Obama did spend four years of his childhood in the Indonesian capital of Jakarta. As a presidential candidate, Obama made the argument that his time in Indonesia rendered him more qualified on questions of foreign policy than either Hillary Rodham Clinton or John McCain. Based on those formative experiences, it would not be unreasonable then to conclude that the President maintains a keen interest in Indonesia’s state of affairs and is aware of ongoing developments there.
So as President Obama proceeds to the country he once called home for the next leg of his South Asian tour, one wonders if anyone will ask him what he thinks of that meaning and interpretation of jihad which sanctions death by stoning against those who commit adultery. To be precise, will anyone ask him his views of the stoning law that was unanimously passed in the Indonesian province of Aceh in September 2009? Some of the other sanctions covered under the law in Aceh are public caning for activities such as non-marital sex, drinking, and gambling. Anyone caught engaging in homosexual behavior is also subject not only to caning but a minimum of eight years in prison.
Aceh’s harsh sanctions against homosexuality are noteworthy when one considers what President Obama had to say about Uganda’s proposed anti-homosexual laws. Last February, while addressing the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington D.C., the President called the East African nation’s plans against homosexuals (which does include a death penalty provision) “odious.” As of this writing, however, the Ugandan legislation has not been enacted although it is believed the law will eventually pass.
However, the sanctions against homosexuality are the law of the land in Aceh. So too is the death penalty for adultery. Yet at present President Obama has volunteered no public comment and in the absence of any public comment it is only fair to ask President Obama if he also find the laws of Aceh to be “odious.” Or does the President hold Muslim countries and Christian countries to different standards? Does President Obama believe the legislators in Aceh engaged in extremism? Or does the President believe they are just fulfilling their obligation to their religion? Does President Obama think the Gandhian universal principles of respect and mutual dignity apply in Aceh? Or is Aceh one of those places where the President says it is not for him to meddle?
Or put another way, will President Obama leave Indonesia no stone unturned?
About the Author
Aaron Goldstein writes from Boston, Massachusetts.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (43) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Aaron Goldstein
More Articles From The Obama Watch
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/11/09/jihad-by-stoning
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Booger | 11.9.10 @ 6:20AM
From the bench of Vicki Miles-LaGrange, Chief U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Oklahoma:
Re: Oklahoma ballot initiative banning Sharia
I am issuing an injunction against the hateful, malicious, racist and most of all Islamaphobic ballot initiative recently passed and signed into law by the ignorant, red-neck Tea-baggers who oppose Allah (peace be upon His name), His holy prophet Muhammad (peace be upon his name as well) and our Great Leader, President for Life B. Hussein Obama (yet more peace be upon his name). After a complete and thorough review of the case, appropriate laws, and existing precedents, I have decided that there can be no grounds in the will of Mighty Allah (peace times two upon His name) for you infidel pigs, dogs and monkeys to oppose the use of Sharia, the only true and just way, to govern yourselves in the puny state of oklahoma.
I have seen the arguments that you unnatural sons of immoral women put forward against the use of Sharia, the only true right way, in your state courts. Although it is beneath my intellect to explain myself to the likes of you simpering chimpanzees, I will do my best to make it clear to you why this is a just and necessary decision.
First of all, please cease your petulant whining about the separation of church and state enshrined withing the first amendment of the u.s. constitution. I am well aware of this separation, and of the unbreakable wall it builds between church and state. I am fully aware that this law prevents you from praying to your false messiah in public schools, that it prevents you from posting the commandments of the lesser prophet moses on public property. I am completely versed in the proper role of the government in prohibiting the pernicious cancers of judaism and christianity from being spread through our culture.
While we understand that church and state are separated by the constitution, I can find no mention whatsoever in the constitution for a separation of MOSQUE and state. Hence, while banning the bible, and any teachings derived from it, from the public sphere is both necessary and desirable, banning the Holy Koran (peace and peace and peace be upon it) is neither necessary nor desirable. Furthermore, you must make yourselves understand that Muslims, as followers of the True Path, are a persecuted minority within this bigoted nation, and as such have a constitutional right to extra protections under the law. This is especially true for the religious practices of the followers of the Holy Prophet Mohammad (peace times two plus infinity upon his name) as they strive to bring enlightenment to this benighted continent.
In short, not only am I making my injunction against this ballot initiative permanent, I am also issuing a judicial order requiring the teachings of Sharia be a mandatory course for all public school students within the state of oklahoma. It is my fervent prayer that in so doing that I can at least remove the bigotry and racism from your illegitimate children, even if I cannot reach your rebellious ears. In time they will come to realize their need for acceptance of the Holy Prophet Mohammad (peace, peace and more pieces of peace upon his name) or to humbly submit to their proper roles as dhimmi to the true believers. This order is to be implemented immediately, and failure to do so will result in a bench warrant for contempt of court be issued against any and all opponents.
It pains me, a Federal Judge for Life, to have to explain myself to such infidel pigs, dogs and monkeys as you pathetic, racist, Islamophobic rednecks of oklahoma. Suffice it to say that my intellect is beyond your grasp, my enlightenment beyond your understanding, and my power as a Federal Judge beyond your ability to resist. You must learn to submit now, for resistance is futile.
Sincerely,
Vicki Miles-LaGrange, Chief U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Oklahoma
http://beautifulletters-bls.blogspot.com/
Intelligent Design| 11.9.10 @ 7:38AM
Islam seeks to merge church and state, whereas our Constitution prohibits religious discrimination either in the form of theocracy or in the form of denying an individual the right to choose his own religion. Islam does not recognize the rule of secular law -- such as our Constitution -- or the separation of "church" and state. To the extent some Muslim dominated countries have secular laws, they are not being faithful to Islam. (Good for them.) But look at Saudi Arabia, which most of us probably think of as friendly relative to Iran or Syria. Saudi Arabia does not tolerate any religion other than Islam, the Koran is their constitution, and Shari'a is their law. All of this is hostile to our Constitution, and efforts to establish anything like it here in the U.S. is subversive. The Oklahoma law in a sense is unnecessary, since it is, or should be, plain to all that the foundation of our society is the Constitution, not religious "laws" or international law. Despite this fact, some Supreme Court decisions have erroneously cited international law. Oklahomans are correct to say that none of their state courts should use shari'a or international law in making decisions. Common sense.
Curtain Politics| 11.9.10 @ 9:02AM
Saudi Arabia is anything but practicing sharia law or koran. What they practice is a manipulated understanding of the law which they use for their own benefits.
You should understand that certain legal practices in countries are based on cultural traditions rather than true islamic principles.
Stonning to death is not in Islam, it was abbrogated by prophet mohamed after being used once against a woman who testified against herself four times.
Which to remind you, adultery is punishible by lashes if you provide 4 witnesses, and after cross-examination of their testimonies they do not contradict. Any grain of doubt will result in the accues to be found innocent.
In islamic state you will not be forced to choose islam, clear proof of this is over 2m coptics in Egypt and christian minorities that live in lebanon, jordan, syria, and even synogogues in tunisia.
Booger| 11.9.10 @ 10:07AM
Dear Curtain Politics,
I am somewhat curious as to whether you are a Muslim yourself. If you are, would you mind terribly letting me know to which school of thought you adhere (e.g. Sunni, Shia, Suffi, etc.). I would also be curious to know as to whether you believe that Sharia should be incorporated into U.S. law, and if so, under what auspices. For example, would you hold adulterers should be subjected to the lash, as described above, under U.S. law? I look forward to hearing your response.
I suppose since I am making that request, I will make two others. Firstly, what penalty do you contend should be imposed upon an apostate from Islam (please state your Koranic justification) and should the U.S. Federal or state governments impose this penalty? Secondly, what penalty should be imposed for blasphemy (please reference the Koranic verse which addresses this matter) and should the U.S. Federal or stat government impose this penalty?
I look forward to your reply.
Cordially,
Booger
Sheila| 11.9.10 @ 11:40AM
Booger, I commend your respectful tone but Curtain Politics does not warrant this. His/her its comment contains blatant falsehoods and inaccuracies (all those Coptic Christians in Egypt under siege to convert would hardly agree with his assertions), but that's taqiyya for you.
Radegunda| 11.10.10 @ 2:35AM
I love how they say "It's not Islamic, it's cultural" -- even when the practices are explicitly described by their practitioners as being in accordance with Islam; even when we're told that Islam provides rules for every aspect of life; even when it's in places where Islam has been the dominant force for many centuries; even
even when it's in the country that holds itself to be the chief guardian of Islam; even when the authorities of that country say that their whole legal structure is based only on sharia.
Islamic culture = Islam. Pure and simple.
Intelligent Design| 11.9.10 @ 1:10PM
From the book published in 2009 by Wharton School Publishing, "Islam - The Religion and the People" by world-class expert Bernard Lewis, Professor Emeritus at Princeton, pages 212-213: "According to the Saudi basic law proclaimed in 1992, the Koran is the constitution of the country, Shari'a the law of the land. In the Hijaz, except for the seaport of Jedda, no non-Muslim is permitted to set foot. In the rest of the Kingdom, non-Muslims are permitted and are indeed accepted in increasing numbers to provide essential services. But religious worship of any kind other than Islamic is forbidden, even in private homes. So too is the wearing or display of any non-Islamic religious emblems."
For those who don't know, the Hijaz is the region of Arabia in which the holy cities of Mecca and Medina are situated.
Since 99% of all terrorist attacks worldwide are committed by Muslims, perhaps we should close all American airports to Muslim access? This would greatly enhance the safety and security of American citizens and others. Perhaps we should outlaw mosques?
haditwithsharia| 11.9.10 @ 3:29PM
Yea, you're right. Only a woman witness only counts as half a person and far more women are brought up on charges of adultery in the first place. Sharia law in Egypt says that an Islamic man may marry a Christian woman, but a Christian man may not marry an Islamic woman. That is considered adultery for which the punishment is death. Additionally, Egyptian Sharia law states that any Islamic man who marries a Jewish woman will be stripped of their citizenship. No one is forced to convert to Islam - they are welcome to pay a large "dhimmi" tax for their refusal, and are subject to having their property and wife confiscated. Islam seems for the most part to be a totalitarian cult - what other "religion" states that anyone who leaves it should be murdered by their families?
Intelligent Design| 11.9.10 @ 4:00PM
Any true religion opposes evil. Islam embodies evil. Muslims should join the 21st century by rejecting Islam and becoming ex-Muslims. But they must risk being murdered by other Muslims for making this decision.
Negro X| 11.9.10 @ 8:20PM
Curtain troll,
Waiting for a response. I thought so.
There are one 1500 Jews in Tunisia.
http://www.realcourage.org/201.....ch-attack/
http://www.realcourage.org/201.....ch-attack/
Hit the road dork!
car mas | 11.9.10 @ 4:38PM
there was intellect there?
as far as enlightenment Turn on the light seems it is pretty dark where you are
as far as your power what comes around goes around
can't get rid of private schools dear
Louis Jenkins| 11.9.10 @ 4:45PM
Follow the link if you dare. From the Gates of Vienna. The statistics are damning.
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.......html#more
Gigi| 11.10.10 @ 7:11PM
Is this a joke? Because if not, you have just demonstrated exactly why we are against the implementation of sharia law in the U.S. and why so many Christian Americans do not believe that Muslims can truly become functioning Americans in American society. You show that your true intentions are domination and control of all others. Beware. We won't submit. There is no God but the Lord Jesus Christ. And we won't allow the United States to become a slave nation.
Ken (Old Texican)| 11.9.10 @ 7:29AM
Booger,
Oklahoma said NO! as well.
Have you read www.texassaidno.com yet?
Sheila| 11.9.10 @ 11:38AM
Ken (Old Texican) - yes, Oklahoma said no to sharia law, but as Booger noted, federal judge Vicki Miles LaGrange invalidated the state's results by immediately putting a stay on the voters' will following a lawsuit by CAIR.
Gigi| 11.10.10 @ 7:15PM
Since when can one judge invalidate the will of the people? Yes, I know there's precedent because it's been done and is being done. But constitutionally, it's not correct. And we must stand against this practice. This "judge" needs to be investigated.
wukong| 11.9.10 @ 8:53AM
Uganda's death sanction is a bit odious, but caning, now that can get a rise!!!
davelnaf| 11.9.10 @ 8:58AM
Because he cannot seem to find it within himself to denounce Jihadist violence Obama’s use of words like “enemies” to attack his fellow Americans makes him look beyond asinine. His confused equivocations, like the one uttered in India the other day, strongly suggest more of the same to come.
A teleprompterless Obama is becoming a dangerous liability to the Democratic Party. For Democrats, at least, 2012 might well turn out to be the year of the foretold apocalypse.
Bill | 11.9.10 @ 9:25AM
...Is it a matter of political correctness that we dance around Obama's belief in Islam? Whether it be the very visible benign strains or it's murky lethal strains. If it walks like a terrorist, talks like a terrorist.... bobama is a terrorist sypathizer who's gonna get some payback for his jihadist homeys. The longer this creep is allowed to represent the US the greater the risk of all hell breaking loose...literally. Wake up people.. He's not confused, he knows exactly what he's doing.
ncatty| 11.9.10 @ 10:02AM
Why did he have to answer the question at all? Would he attempt a similar explanation of any other religious tenet? He should have said it was above his pay grade and let it go at that, but his inner professor could not be stopped.
Texian Gal| 11.9.10 @ 11:56AM
I have heard no comments about the tactlessness of Obama's remarks about jihad in India, which suffered the most brutal form of jihad (the Hindus not being "people of the Book" per the prophet). Oh yes, India is very familiar with the "Religion of Peace".
Ken (Old Texican)| 11.9.10 @ 12:27PM
Texian Gal,
welcome neighbor! Good thought.
India is well acquainted with Muslims. That is why they developed nukes.
I have no use for Hindus. They have too much "class by birth" built into their "religion".
.....and so do Muslims when you take the cover off.
Hindus haven't killed Americans lately, so I will step back and let them join the 21st century.
check out the website www.texassaidno.com
Buy some .22 cartridges ...(and a .22 rifle if you don't have one), for barter.
Buy some wheat berries and beans from the Mormon program off the internet.
Senor Mick| 11.9.10 @ 12:57PM
For barter? I'm keeping mine in a huge pretzel jar by my bed for those just-in-case scenarios. And I'm preparing to get my first real .22 this year (apart form a clunky old Polish Army museum piece I have, for artistic purposes). Take that, NYPD!
Actually, I think the caste system--awful, true--is more cultural than religious. Not entirely sure. If ambivalent amid the Muslims on the one and the Hindus on the other, you might want to try the Sikhs--no jihad, no caste system, and from the admittedly little I know, rather nice people.
Al Adab| 11.9.10 @ 1:50PM
Congratulations to Texas for taking the page from AZs book with the new immigration bill in Austin. May it prosper.
Occam's Tool| 11.9.10 @ 6:22PM
Does Barack HAVE an internal dialogue? Or is he compromised by his years of cocaine and marijuana abuse?
Senor Mick| 11.9.10 @ 12:50PM
I must admit, The One's pointless, exasperating masterpiece of sheer dithery in response to the student's question was comforting. Wouldn't have been wonderful if his response was, oh, I don't know, a Ralph Kramdenesque something akin to :
"Well, my views of jihad?
"Yes, Mr. President. Your views of Jihad."
"My views?"
"Yes. The views that you hold."
"On jihad?"
"Indeed, sir. "
"What I think about jihad?"
"Yes."
"The thoughts about jihad that I have, you mean."
"Yes."
And then the kicker:
"You mean, like, blowing up mosques?"
Imagine the response to that.
Maybe he really is just a hack , after all!
Metrotainment | 11.9.10 @ 1:37PM
Obama, Welcome To Indonesia :)
Al Adab| 11.9.10 @ 1:52PM
Dancing in Mumbai.
What has become of gravitas and dignitas? Apparently the concepts are too old fashioned (conservative?) for President Al Naqis.
hunter| 11.9.10 @ 2:41PM
Can't have th 10 commandments displayed but have to put up with sharia? As far as good muslims go I haven't heard of one yet. When something happens, such as the burning of a Catholic (probably the only one) in Iraq recently we didn't hear a peep out of a 'good muslim'. They were too busy celebrating most likely, but when pressed they will quietly utter some weak watered down unmeaning statement. Islam should be banned from our land, it has no business here, it being a goverment hiding behind a supposed religion.
CalMark| 11.9.10 @ 4:12PM
The people overwhelmingly oppose Obamacare, which is unconstitutional. A judge allows parts of the lawsuit to go to trial.
The people overwhelmingly approve a measure barring imposition of what State Sponsored Religion--i.e., Islam, an alien, anti-American religion--from being integrated into U.S. law. A judge blocks its implementation.
Apalling is an understatement.
Azarja| 11.9.10 @ 5:10PM
The information in the article is not correct.
The sharia bylaw on the death sentence is not passed in Aceh, since the governor Irwandi Yusuf refused to sign it. Only canings are possible, but it happens not very often and the convict usually gets only two or three lashes. A far cry from stoning.
bluecollarbytes| 11.9.10 @ 5:43PM
If -jihad "has a lot of meanings within Islam and is subject to different interpretations", then it should be easy to accept that some of those interpretations are exactly what they seem to be- a war to the death on all infidels, rooted in pious adherence to Islam, NOT a 'perversion of a religion-o-peace' by minor rogue elements' (forced to no doubt by sub-standard quality of life).
Emma| 11.9.10 @ 9:41PM
He's probably not too concerned about or bothered by Jihad in any configuration. He's still waiting to find out why "they hate us." Probably on the Blackberry with Jerry Wright about the issue even as we speak. Why should he care? It's been adequately demonstrated that he definitely doesn't care about America. Jihad is a footnote to him, necessary and sometimes bothersome, but no big f...n deal, like "health"care.
WeMustResist| 11.9.10 @ 11:28PM
I saw the video where Anna from St David's asked him about jihad and jihadis. This is the most important question of our times. It will dominate the lives of the young people in the audience. and our own children. Obama was unprepared - he had not thought much about the issue. In particular his rehtorical question "how do we isolate those who have these distorted notions of religious war..." shows his lack of thought. The answer is easy and simple. Anyone who wants to commit a crime for religious reasons should be isolated (ie sent to prison). In the fight against Hitler, or against the Communists, anyone who wanted to commit a crime out of loyalty to the foreigners was isolated (sent to prison or executed). Today we can and should do the same. You either believe that democracy makes the rules or you believe that Mohammed makes the rules. If it is the latter, then you can subject yourself only to those rules - nobody else. FGM, honour killing, forcing women to wear the burqa, calling for the killing of other people... etc etc... all these disgusting things should be listed in a new law with extra penalties for anyone who commits the crimes for a religious motive. Courts would not be allowed to find excuses and water down the penalty. It is not hard to understand or to do. If we value civilisation we should do it now.
Marc Jeric| 11.10.10 @ 1:04AM
Abu Hussein al-Mombassa (or wherever in Kenya that marxist Muslim was born) cannot surprise me. I can now predict his speeches and his deeds with absolute accuracy; you see - I lived in a communist hell till the age of 24 and therefore am well versed in marxism and communism. Now I am waiting for the next executive order giving citizenship to 15 million illegal aliens, the right to vote, Social Security, food stamps, subsidized housing, free health care - and the same for the following wave of 30 million of their brothers, sisters, parents, uncles and aunts...He will also arm his system of local soviets (that is community organizations in Russian) - he calls it domestic federal army. Then in 2016 - under conditions of extreme depression he will proclaim himself dictator for life.
RCV| 11.10.10 @ 2:33PM
So you grew up in Yugoslavia. Big deal. It obviously hasn't made you any smarter and we're sick of hearing about it.
tony bonn| 11.10.10 @ 1:06AM
barry soetoro was born in kenya and is still an indonesian citizen. so how in god's name does living in jakarta make him more qualified for foreign affairs than his quack opponents? i guess living in peoria would make me qualified to be foreign minister of france? i'm all for jihad against obushma...
Yosemeti Sam| 11.10.10 @ 7:54AM
India reportedly went to great pains to protect BHO:
Removing coconuts from scenic palm trees.
Did not want to have it on their heads if BHO were to otherwise have been stoned by a coconut - or two.
Um, do Indonesia have any nuts there as well?
LOL.
Louis Jenkins| 11.10.10 @ 12:48PM
Another damning article on Islam. Follow the link:
http://www.americanthinker.com.....meric.html
lowbudget| 11.11.10 @ 7:51PM
BHO: "Ich bin ein Muslimer."
Joe Six-Pack | 11.13.10 @ 9:30AM
"For most of the fourteen hundred years of Islamic history, Jihad has been most commonly interpreted as armed struggle for the advancement or defense of Muslim power."
(Bernard Lewis)
With President Obama's background, I just do not see how he does not know this. He is choosing to argue that multiple interpretations exist. You get to choose the one that you like.
Yea, like Islam allows for lots of choices like this.
Wars are fought over issues like stoning. I guess President Obama does not want to get into that discussion. I can see why.
Sukamo| 11.14.10 @ 3:57PM
IS OBAMA (COCO)NUTS ?
It's good that safety experts thought about falling coconuts during Obama's recent Asian trip and removed them from trees alongside his planned route. If a coconut had fallen, it might have been smashed to pieces when colliding with Obama's hard head!
//saw above item while webbing! Sukamo//