PAUL AUSTIN MURPHY ON POLITICS

PAUL AUSTIN MURPHY ON POLITICS


The subjects covered in this blog include Slavoj Žižek, IQ tests, Chomsky, Tony Blair, Baudrillard, global warming, sociobiology, Islam, Islamism, Marx, Foucault, National/International Socialism, economics, the Frankfurt School, philosophy, anti-racism, etc... I've had articles published in The Conservative Online, American Thinker, Intellectual Conservative, Human Events, Faith Freedom, Brenner Brief (Broadside News), New English Review, etc... (Paul Austin Murphy's Philosophy can be found here


This blog used to be called EDL Extra. I was a supporter (neither a member nor a leader) of the EDL until 2012. This blog has retained the old web address.

****************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************

Monday, 24 January 2011

There Can be No Negative Readings of the Koran... Muslims have said so

In the leftist magazine, Red Pepper, a Nawaz commented, negatively and critically, on non-Muslims having never read the Koran (9th August, 2009). (H formed the Muslim Defence League and is also a musician.)

Yes, I have read the Koran and it is one of the most despicable books I have ever read. Even more so than Hitler's Mein Kampf - which it is very similar too, and not just its rabid anti-Jew stuff. (He should know this. Hitler's book has been consistently popular with Muslims since the 1930s, as has been the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which is a best seller in Muslim countries and was also a big hit with Hitler and the Nazis.)

Nawaz may now say that I 'should read it in the original Arabic'. Is that because Allah is Arabic? Or is it impossible to read the Koran in a negative way? Can only a Muslim read it correctly? But I have always known Muslims believed that.

Geert Wilders has read the Koran and he came to negative conclusions about it.

Salman Rushdie likewise. Plus many, many non-Muslims. Hitler probably read it and liked it. Perhaps the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem gave him a copy on one of their many meetings.

So no one can give a negative reading of the Koran - by (Nawez's) definition? If they do, it is because they have not (really) read it. Either that or they are killed, etc. This is not because Muslims 'have a profound and deep love' for the Koran. It is because the Koran, and Islam itself, are eggshells. If something is so easily broken, then it is not surprising that Muslims kill and foam at the mouth went someone dares criticise the Koran, Islam or whatever.

No comments:

Post a Comment