Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
About this Blog   |   On Twitter   |   Follow us on Facebook   |   RSS Feeds RSS Feed

Robertson on Islam: "It's not a's a violent political system"

Rosalind Helderman

It was pretty much only a matter of time before Pat Robertson said something controversial, complicating life for Gov.-elect Bob McDonnell. And that time turns out to have been exactly one week since Robertson showed up at McDonnell's victory party, telling a reporter who saw him in the hotel lobby that he was headed upstairs to see McDonnell in his hotel suite while returns rolled in.

In a broadcast of the 700 Club Monday night, the Virginia Beach pastor had some choice words about Islam in reaction to the shootings at Fort Hood. Robertson said that Army Maj. Nidal Hasan's troubles were overlooked because of a politically-correct refusal to see Islam for what it is.

"Islam is a violent--I was going to say religion--but it's not a religion. It's a political system. It's a violent political system bent on the overthrow of governments of the world and world domination."

"They talk about infidels and all this. But the truth is, that's what the game is. You're dealing with not a religion. You're dealing with a political system. And I think you should treat it as such and treat it's adherents as such. As we would members of the Communist party and members of some Fascist group."

The comments are very similar to things Robertson has said in the past about Islam. And it's not exactly a secret that McDonnell has ties to the Virginia Beach televangelist. (In a Regent University press release, the Robertson-led school from which McDonnell received his master's and law degrees, about election results last week, Robertson said "Our motto at Regent is 'Christian Leadership to Change the World,' and this is the way we do it.")

Tucker Martin, a spokesman for McDonnell, declined to comment on Robertson's remarks.

By Rosalind Helderman  |  November 10, 2009; 5:23 PM ET
Categories:  Robert F. McDonnell , Rosalind Helderman  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: In the category of 'not interested'
Next: UPDATED: Senate special elections shape up


Pat Robertson is indeed right. This is PC (political correctness) - the same social virus that let FBI look the other way when this Major Nidal Hasan was communicating with the US born Yemeni Muslim cleric. Islam is a theocracy. It derives its so-called spirituality by asking the adherents and faithfuls to submit unconditionally before the Quran. Thus, as the atheist intellectual, Sam Harris points out, the verses calling for genocide in the Quran are also to be treated as a part of spiritual teachings of the Quran. Finally, Karen Armstrong, the former nun turned Islamic apologist states that Islam is basically a practice of code of ethics. In that sense collective actions of Muslims and the society they create indeed has strong political overtones which leads to the call for Sharia (Islamic laws). To conclude I would quote from the Quran a typical verse that commands the faithful to engage in the physical warfare (lesser Jihad as Major Hasan defined it) for the cause of Islam. The definition of the "right" cause for fighting on behalf of Islam is subjective. You may need to ask Allah to know clearly. Anyway the verse (from Abdullah Yusuf Ali's English translation) reads as follows:

"Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,- " ** [Quran(004:095)]

This verse has been used by clerics and Islamic scholars, who are formally accepted as custodians of Islam, to motivate suicide bombers/attackers. It may have also motivated Major Hasan to shoot at the Army personnel. Other home-grown Muslim radicals inspired by such a verse may be preparing something big - while we read such PC stuff on the Washington Post and pontificate.

Posted by: DebChatterjee | November 11, 2009 12:37 AM | Report abuse

As a Christian I could fill hundreds of posts with bloody verses from the Bible, not to mention incidents like a daughter being offered up as a gang rape victim so intruders don't break down a door. But maybe I'll just quote an irreverent little tune sung by the nice town women: "Saul has slain his thousands. And David his tens of thousands."

Posted by: marksabbatini | November 11, 2009 1:25 AM | Report abuse

And how about this story about Blackwater paying bribe money to Iraq after murdering civilians, and how one of the company's founder “views himself as a Christian crusader tasked with eliminating Muslims and the Islamic faith from the globe” and that his company “encouraged and rewarded the destruction of Iraqi life."

As for McDonnell, he proved during the campaign he's not an idiot. He'll distance himself from the remarks, but it's not a great thing he's close to someone who makes these kind of comments regularly. I'm guessing we'll be seeing Rev. Wright's name about a hundred times in this forum by people who somehow think that makes this incident irrelevant.

Posted by: marksabbatini | November 11, 2009 2:08 AM | Report abuse mistake. Here's the bribery article.

Posted by: marksabbatini | November 11, 2009 2:10 AM | Report abuse

It is certainly true that both the Bible and the Quran contain messages that can be (and have been) interpreted as calls to violence. But where Christians have overwhelmingly moderated these messages in Modern times, far too many Muslims in the world seem to still think that worshiping God is best done by slaughtering non-believers.

Of course the terrible irony of it all is the people they are slaughtering actually do believe in "The One God".

Posted by: rvogel1 | November 11, 2009 3:45 AM | Report abuse

rvogel1: My understanding is a tiny minority of extremists from both religions believing in "slaughtering" enemies (i.e. Ireland and abortion clinics, to name some Christian examples besides the Blackwater one above).

Furthermore, it seems their actions are denounced by the mainstream faithful. Since somebody will probably yell "yeah, but Muslims aren't objecting enough," what exactly do you want them to do beyond the organizational and individual pronouncements that have been made?

You and I do agree on the larger point of worshipping "The One God." Unfortunately history and the future will be full of bloodshed over a long-ago feud by a couple of brothers who ultimately reconciled to bury their father together.

Posted by: marksabbatini | November 11, 2009 5:57 AM | Report abuse

Helderman is the worst Post blogger. All of her post are attention seekers. Why no real news, like the fact that 60% of Virginians voted for Bob anyways and dont give a crap about this kind of stuff.

Posted by: joshstlouis | November 11, 2009 9:56 AM | Report abuse

If rational people would just stop quoting and listening to wackos like Pat Robertson then maybe we could indeed live together in peace. The radical imams got nothing on him when it comes to violent religious views.

How about it? Any rational people left out there?

Posted by: ViejitaDelOeste | November 11, 2009 3:07 PM | Report abuse

Although every religion has its nutjob's, the fact is MOST Christains are
secular and do not take the bible literally. Most Muslims take the Koran literally which may explain the sorry state of the sewers that make up most of the Muslim world. Now some logic. The PC's state that those concerned about our imported/self made jihadi's believe every Muslim is a terrorist. Of course, most Muslims are not terrorists. However, most terrorists are Muslim. Those are facts. Pakistan has terrorist attacks every day, but most Pak's are not terrorists. The number of terrost attacks by Muslims are much greater than those carried out by non Muslims. Only a complete PC moron with no concept of analogy, facts and data could think the number of terrorist attacks commited by Muslims is comparable to terrorist attacks by non Muslims. If this PC excuse for a country continues importing the Muslim world, we have a Pakistan like future to look forward to. Also many non violent Muslims believe the secular countries that take them in should adopt Sharia law. Talk about gratitude. Not to mention 'honor' killings, the death threats and murders carried out by Muslims in secular Europe against those who make films or statements that criticize Islam. (Remember Van Gogh) I agree with Robertson on very few things, but he is just stating the facts this time.
Only the PC crowd exceeds the Republicans/bible bangers in supreme stupidity and lack of brain.

Posted by: jm125 | November 14, 2009 10:20 PM | Report abuse

"Those are facts. Pakistan has terrorist attacks every day, but most Pak's are not terrorists. The number of terrost attacks by Muslims are much greater than those carried out by non Muslims. Only a complete PC moron with no concept of analogy, facts and data could think the number of terrorist attacks commited by Muslims is comparable to terrorist attacks by non Muslims."

Would that be because more than 97% of "Pak's" are muslim?

I'm sorry. I don't follow where you're going with this.

Posted by: holmesinco | November 15, 2009 12:08 AM | Report abuse

It appears that Rosalind Helderman is so convinced that Pat Robertson's statements are wrong, and so certain that everyone else obviously also sees his statements as not only wrong, but outrageous, that no discussion, analysis, or refutation is needed.

Serious people understand that sometimes one must ask "what if what he says is true?" and follow up with independent research to support or refute the assertion. Ms. Helderman makes no such effort, and intellectual integrity is diminished another iota for her lapse.

Ms. Helderman, have you read the Koran? Do you understand Shariah Law? Are you familiar with the documents introduced as evidence in the Holy Land Foundation trial? Have you heard of the Umdat al_Salik? Have you read Major Stephen Collins Coughlin's thesis, “TO OUR GREAT DETRIMENT”: IGNORING WHAT EXTREMISTS SAY ABOUT JIHAD? Does the Amman Message inform your thinking at all? Do 14,000+ terrorist attacks worldwide since 9/11 mean nothing to you?

Research these sources, and see if you can still so easily dismiss Mr. Robertson's assertions.

Posted by: AmmanMessenger | November 15, 2009 2:34 AM | Report abuse

Islam is “not a religion,” declared the irrepressible Pat Robertson, but “a violent political system bent on the overthrow of the governments of the world.”
Well Mr. Robertson, where have you been these past few years. Excuse me but Islam is a religion. Haven’t you read Christianity today ? It just so happens that there are terrorists and fanatics who “claim” Islam as their religion. You see, it is the same thing as rapists, wife beaters, preachers who murder their wife’s lover, snipers with a vendetta who kill for ‘no know reason’ who claim Christianity as their religion. So, with your reasoning, Christianity is a group of people who rape, kill for no known reason, and beat their wives on a regular basis. It was a Christian who did the Oklahoma bombing, a Christian who put bodies under his house or in his back yard, who picked up hitch hikers and murdered them for fun and left them beside the highway. I could go on Mr. Robertson but you should get the idea. I hope the rational people of this country get the idea. We are after PEOPLE… NOT a religion.

Posted by: stjohn2001 | November 16, 2009 1:21 AM | Report abuse

Mainstream media like Washington Post should be more careful not to spread the words of such crazy right wing extremist lunatics as Pat Robertson. It is not hard to see him taking on the job to disseminate hatred against the Muslim minority in the country. If the media are able to silence people like him, they will not be able to make as much money as they do now by promoting hatred and fear.

"Many Americans are unaware of the fact that of all the religious groups, Muslim Americans have the lowest crime rate, and that prior to the first WTC attack, there was no violence directed against the western culture by its members. A survey of 175 recorded incidents of terrorism in the US from January 1982 to January 1996 showed that of these: 77 were committed by Christian Puerto Rican nationalists, 31 were the work of Christian animal rights and Christian environmental groups, 23 were blamed on Christian left wing organizations, 18 were committed by what the FBI called “Jewish extremists” and 12 were by Christian anti-Castro Cubans. The total number committed by Arabs or Muslims over a period of 14 years was 3 (three).

Wikipedia may not be the most highly regarded encyclopedia, but it is a good indicator of public opinion. Under the heading Religious Terrorism such Jewish groups as the Jewish Defense League and Kahane Chai are listed. They also have entries on the Qibya Massacre by Israeli troops; the Kafr Qasim Massacre by the Israeli border police; the Sabra and Shatila massacres which refer to the perpetrators as Maronite Christian Militias and to possible Israeli culpability; and the Lavon Affair including the Operation Susannah bombings in Egypt by the Israeli’s. Why Israeli and not Jewish? Why no mention of their religion? Why militias and not terrorists? Israel identifies itself as a Jewish state.

In the case of Jewish terrorists Wikipedia includes the disclaimer:: Some of these Jewish groups believe that God gave Jews the land of Israel and so they advocate ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from Israel, West Bank and Gaza). Most, if not all, however, support the transfer of Palestinians to other regions within the Middle East and, while this entry on Religious Terrorism includes many entries for Islamic terrorism, doesn’t even mention many groups affiliated with Christianity or Judaism who have resorted to terrorism."

Posted by: freewill1776 | November 16, 2009 3:15 PM | Report abuse

Any one knowledgeable about Jewish law please explain how this verse has been interpreted by the Jews who sympathize with Israel:

Deuteronomy 20: 12, When the Lord they God hath delivered it (meaning a besieged city) unto they hands, thou shall smite every male therein with the edge of the sword: but the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shall thou take unto thy self.

This could be used to justify killing everyone in Palestine by Israel. I could be wrong because:

1) The verse is not interpreted literally, or

2) The Israelis are not religious and so what the Bible says holds no weight for them.

My question is, does this verse have any weight in today's war against the Palestinians?

Posted by: freewill1776 | November 16, 2009 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Has Washington Post let its readers know about this extremist fanatic like BBC did?

BBC: Rabbi calls for annihilation of Arabs

Has Robertson seen this lunatic extremist fascist?

What about this US soldier who, unfortunately, shots and kills five of his fellow soldiers:

Has anyone called him a Christian extremist? (Because he was not. He was just a mentally ill soldier just like Maj. Nidal was.)

This hatred campaign by right wing extremist (people like Sen. Lieberman and Robertson) may as well backfire and the very perpetrators of it might find themselves in a position where they have to defend themselves.

It is not hard to see that these people like Robertson is on a mission to spread hatred toward Muslims in America and they are committed to keep on their mission whatever happens.

Posted by: freewill1776 | November 16, 2009 3:47 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company