Misunderstanding Sumaya

Discussion in 'Politics' started by GeoffP, Feb 7, 2007.

  1. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    You know, I would be so, so much more supportive of islamic schools in the west if this kind of thing didn't crop up, you know...all the time. I mean, once: ok. Twice: maybe.

    But all the time?

    Another islamic school, under Ofsted direction (!) is found out preparing children for their assimilation into British society by teaching them that Christians and Jews are "pigs" and "monkeys". Ironically, atheists such as myself - which islam purports to hate the most - appear to come off scot-free aside from some nonsense about impending flames in some mythical afterlife. How come there's so much hate directed at the other good, kind, noble "People of the Book", that common book that no one has in common? And yet so little at my group of "alternately disbelieving kufr", to coin a PC phrase.

    Of course, the director, Sumaya Alyusuf (pronounced "elusive"?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    who picked this dolt to go before the camera?) tells us that interpretation is everything, saying first that, the verse is inappropriate translated. Then, when the darned kufr sees through that trick (may Allah damn his eyes) it's the interpretation and the weight the teacher gives the verses. Still no? Obstinate disbeliever! Then, it must be the context. Ahhh, context. She probably should have just gone there first, but it's always helpful to have multiple layers of distraction. What a troublesome interviewer, driving again and again to the heart of the issue, which is open hate in religious school textbooks. What is he, some kind of islamophobe?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Frankly, the context of the work is that Christians and Jews are described as "monkeys" and "pigs", period. The context of the sura, which I well know, is that of distaste and revulsion directed at non-muslims. Either come out and say that you do not believe this nonsense or admit that you wish you could do so, and have done. Madame Alyusuf (still makes me laugh; is it statistically possible to have this level of irony in an exposé?) won't of course damn the Sura, merely it's "interpretation". Of course, the simplest, most direct interpretation is the obviously offensive one. Ah! but islam is complex. It is deep. It is unfathomable. And you must all subscribe to it, post-haste - this unfathomable, unquantifiable, misunderstandable thing.

    Frankly I would have thought that instead of promulgating such an easily misunderstandable thing, one might put the brakes on the old da'wa until such time as it was understandable, if you understand me. You know, to avoid mistranslations. Or misappropriations. Or misunderstandings. Or dhimmitude, sharia, jizya. Those things.

    The good point of course is that the interviewer utterly obliterates her. And she admits that she, of course, will not remove the offensive books from the school. I wonder what would happen to books written by Christians or Jews that "offended" islam and which were found not merely in Saudi Arabia, but in any country in the ummah, which our dear friend Hypewaders apparently does not seem to feel exists.

    "Worthless religions", indeed.

    Watch it all; there's a few other good clips there that deserve viewing.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FY-vXw7XKzg&eurl=
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Oh, and I might add: she first says the books aren't used - they're merely "at the school", as if they were just hanging about, waiting for a bus back to Riyadh - then says that the books have "very good lessons" to teach, meaning that they are used. Which can it be? Can it be both? How shall and can one contort oneself, to avoid the issue?

    She also uses the old rub about how one has to read Arabic in order to understand them, as if the translators at the BBC couldn't read Arabic, or string a few ideas together to derive a logical synthesis. Maybe, in addition to no one being able to understand the Quran, no one can read Arabic either?

    But the Beeb: anti-dhimmitude? Where is the England I knew?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Best,

    Geoff
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Ghost_007 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,170
    King Fahd academy
    receives £4 million from the Saudi (Wahabi) royal family every year.

    Says it all.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    We are monkeys. It's not an insult, but a statement of fact.
     
  8. Roman Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,560
    Damn, you got a tail?
    Why didn't I get a tail?

    Oh, wait, you must be a Jew.
    Why don't us atheists get tails?
     
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2007
  9. nicholas1M7 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,417
    You may THINK it is a tail, but in ACTUALITY... its something else. Tails don't hang in the front.
     
  10. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Do you think he was stating his support for evolutionary theory?

    A novelty for the House of Saud.
     
  11. Roman Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,560
    What does a Jew with an erection get when he runs into a wall?
     
  12. nicholas1M7 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,417
    I'm thinking his own private holocaust on the testicles.
     
  13. Roman Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,560
    You think? This is a scientific forum! There is no room for opinion here! Only fact! The Jew breaks his nose!
     
  14. nicholas1M7 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,417
    Damn, I should have guessed that. I learn something new everyday here. But science and fact aren't always the same.
     

Share This Page