This is Peter Hitchens’ Mail on Sunday column
* Â Looks like Peter Hitchens has his heart in the right place, but when it comes to Islam he is quite ignorant…
Dhimmi, Lunatic or both?
When did we go soft? When did we develop our national tendency to cringe before we are even hit, to apologise for existing?
What’s most striking about the past 50 years of our history is how we have given in without a fight to those who want to revolutionise our society.
It is all very well going on about Winston Churchill, but Archbishop Rowan Williams is a figure much more representative of modern Britain.
This prelate whimpered last week that Christianity was ‘offensive’ to Muslims.
Offensive? I know we have been urged to stop being horrid to this inept, terrifyingly well meaning man – and it really is nothing personal – but he does rather ask for it.
* A very good description for this disgraceful clown in robes…
A few months ago he mused on the possibilities of allowing a little light Sharia Law in this country.This is, I suppose, a point of view. I just can’t work out why the leader of a Christian church should hold it.
The same goes for the Lord Chief Injustice, Lord Phillips, whose entire career and substantial salary are based on centuries of Christian-based law.
If it is anyone’s job to suggest Muslim law should get a toehold in Britain, it isn’t his.
In my experience, Muslims aren’t in the least bit ‘offended’ by Christianity.
I’ve argued with them about it, in places as different as Peshawar, on the North-West Frontier, and Whitechapel, in the East End of London. And I had the impression they were relieved to find someone from the West who didn’t fawn all over them.
What really offends them is what also offends many of us – crudity, drunkenness, pornography and licence. (Goodness, are you doing a Dinesh d’Souza here, Peter?)
In any case, given that Christianity was founded centuries before Islam, Muslims can’t really claim to be upset by it, any more than I can be ‘offended’ by the existence of Stonehenge or a Hindu temple.
What should worry Dr Williams much more is the printing of millions of doctored versions of the Koran in Saudi Arabia, deliberately edited to encourage angry militancy. (Hitchens is definitely wrong on this one, the Wahabis are merely printing the real thing as it always was…)
I am grateful to Channel 4 and Antony Thomas for revealing this astonishing fact in their programme on the Koran last week.
“All steeds of war…”
What, you might ask, are tanks and missiles doing in a book 13 centuries old?
Well, in the Saudi edition, English translation, Surah 8, verse 60, a passage on unbelievers reads: ‘Make ready against them all you can of power, including steeds of war (tanks, planes, missiles, artillery) to threaten the enemy of Allah.’ (“steeds of war” is the correct translation in every Koran I have seen. It means ‘every kind ofÂ weaponryÂ you can muster’-Peter, what makes you think Â it doesn’t mean tanks, planes, missilesÂ artillery? But of curse it does, because Muslims adopt to modern technology, did you think they are obliged to fight us with bow and arrow and scimitars?)
* Update: Â is is indeed correct that the Wahabite Koran issued by the King Fahd Academy uses the above wording “tanks, planes, missilesÂ artillery?” But why should that be incorrect?
And in a verse that speaks of those who have earned God’s anger and gone astray, someone has inserted – in brackets – ‘such as the Jews’ and ‘such as the Christians’. (That’s correct: Muhammad fought Jews and Christians and drove them out of Arabia. Nothing wrong here, theÂ Zoroastrians, the Hindus, that came much later)
The programme also pointed out that in Surah 5, verse 69, the Koran assures righteous Jews and Christians that ‘no fear should come upon them’.Â
A footnote in the Saudi version insists that this was cancelled by a later verse which claims that those of any religion other than Islam will never be accepted. (Better believe it, Peter: that’s what’s calledÂ the concept of abrogation, but absolutely correct when it comes to Islamic Dualism)
This might be something to get offended about, if you wanted to, Dr Williams.