Even the Qur'an admits that the Land of Israel belongs to the Jews

It's true!

 I've checked in two different translations of that tendentious book.  The seventh Sura(h), also called 'Al Araf', in verse137 promises the land to the East and West of the River to Israel. The Surah is mostly a précis of Exodus with other bits. From the context, the river must be Jordan. This is also confirmed in Surah 5:21/23 depending on the translation. This much I have checked and verified for myself.

I understand that there are other Surahs on similar lines.

Israel Today has published an article on the subject.

The Koran promises the Land to the children of Israel because they suffered in Egypt, according to Nissim Dana, an Israeli expert on Islam who spoke with Israel Today reporter Olga Zenkova.

It is behind a subscription wall but I have read the article in the printed magazine. Some Muslims try to wriggle out of these verses but others are more open. Sadly, the article does not list all the verses.

Many Muslims are completely unaware of these verses as they do not read the Qur'an. They are told that translations are not accurate and that they need to learn Arabic. Even the Arab Muslims do not read the Qur'an.

All of which begs the question, "What are they fighting Israel for?" The answer is that they want to keep what they have conquered in the past and that they want the world for Islam.

Arab sheik receiving a Jewish visitor.

 

Built-in bias at the BBC.

Daphne Anson asked me if I could access a link on the BBC's School of Journalism. It isn't accessible in Australia. Whilst I was there, I looked at the style guide. (May not be accessible outside the UK). Some of it is useful. However, I discovered two examples of built-in bias. There may be more elsewhere or not. These are the two I found. It's how they manipulate the journalists let alone the rest of us.

Abortion
Avoid pro-abortion, and use pro-choice instead. Campaigners favour a woman's right to choose, rather than abortion itself. And use anti-abortion rather than pro-life, except where it is part of the title of a group's name.


Notice how the debate is automatically skewed in favour of the abortionists. The positive 'pro-choice' is encouraged. The one person who dies in this exercise has no choice. Notice also how the positive 'pro-life' is disallowed and anyone caring about the unborn child is portrayed as the negative 'anti-abortion'.

Under ' religion' is this:


Supporters of Shariah
(radical Islamic group) Our policy is to run stories about this group and others like it (e.g.: al Muhajiroun) only if we can make it clear that they are regarded by the majority of British Muslims as unrepresentative - ideally, through a quote to that effect from a leading mainstream Muslim group, such as the Muslim Council of Britain. Preachers associated with these groups should not be described simply as ‘Muslim clerics’, but should be labelled as radical, fringe, or something similar. Do not confuse the mainstream Muslim Council of Britain with the more radical Islamic Council of Britain - which should be labelled as self-styled.

I think if I was a devout Muslim, I could find this offensive but, perhaps, for slightly different reasons.

Islam is a religion of law. (I am taking what follows from Islamic publications about Islam. The Muslim Educational Trust published a text-book for Muslim children whose first language is English. It's called, " Islam, Beliefs and Teachings" and is by Ghulam Sarwar.) I have other Islamic publications as well.

Shari'ah law is based on the Qur'an and the example (sunnah) of their founder Muhammad. It is the very heart of Islam. Shari'ah is a complex system that has developed over the centuries, but any Muslim who observes the basic requirements of Islam is observing Shari'ah law. (This is not a quote but it is a fair summary).
 
The Muslim believes that Shari'ah is Allah's law and is superior in every way to human law. It would seem that all Muslims are to be depicted as extremists if they openly call for Shari'ah law. There is a pretence that there is some sort of divide between moderate, devout Muslims and anyone who believes that Shari'ah law should be obeyed.

Alternatively, we could conclude that, at its heart, Islam is extreme.

The BBC does not want us to notice this. As a consequence, intelligent scrutiny of Islam, reasoned refutation or reasoned advocacy are shut down. Scrutiny and refutation are shut down as dealing with extremists and so is unnecessary and misleading. Advocacy is shut down in public, at least, as being extremist. This prevents the rest of us from seeing a true picture of Islamic belief. 

See also my article on "Do we need an Islamic Reformation?" 

Language control is thought control and the BBC are engaged in it. So much for their educational remit.