Posted on 10/16/2002 2:11:22 PM PDT by AdamSelene235
Bush 'rejects' WND's line of questioning
Spokesman bristles at reader's query about violence in Quran
Posted: October 16, 2002 5:00 p.m. Eastern
Editor's note: Each week, WorldNetDaily White House correspondent Les Kinsolving asks the tough questions no one else will ask. And each week, WorldNetDaily brings you the transcripts of those dialogues with the president and his spokesman. If you'd like to suggest a question for the White House, submit it to WorldNetDaily's exclusive interactive forum MR. PRESIDENT!
By Les Kinsolving © 2002 WorldNetDaily.com
At today's White House press briefing, both of WorldNetDaily's questions to presidential press secretary Ari Fleischer came directly from WND's interactive forum MR. PRESIDENT!
The first question addressed the nature of Islam:
WND: If it is true, as your administration claims, that Islam is a religion of peace, how can such a claim continue to be made in light of the Quran's promotion of violence and killing in Surat 4, 5 and 9? And in light of their historic subjecting of defeated unbelievers to paying tribute to Islam –
FLEISCHER: Lester, the president emphatically rejects your constant line of questioning. The president believes –
WND: He did?
FLEISCHER: The president believes and knows that Islam is a religion of peace. And I don't think anybody anywhere in the world should blame the innocents, should blame a religion for the acts of a depraved few. And that's why it's important that the United States is engaged to bring justice to those depraved few, while honoring and respecting our Muslim American neighbors and Muslims around the world.
WorldNetDaily then asked Fleischer about illegal immigration:
WND: Ari, on another subject, if thousands of illegal aliens walked across the Crawford ranch property every month, trashing the land, smuggling drugs, and threatening to rape and injure and kill the residents, would the president do something about it? This, of course, is happening on our borders, as you know.
FLEISCHER: Is there a question here, Les?
WND: Yes.
FLEISCHER: Of a serious nature?
WND: What is the president planning to do about millions of the illegals coming across the border? Is he going to do anything about this?
FLEISCHER: Well, of course, through the various agencies of the federal government, we have a series of protections in place in a country that is opening and welcome, and has a border that in some places is not as – that can be porous. And this is a longstanding issue for our country, about how to enforce and protect our borders.
And, interestingly, in the aftermath of Sept. 11, with the additional steps and protections that have been taking place on the border, we have gotten better controls of our border, but it remains an important and vexing issue about how to be an open society and enforce our law.
WND: But President Fox –
FLEISCHER: Mr. Sanger.
WND: – President Fox thinks that it should be an open border. The president doesn't agree with President Fox –
FLEISCHER: You only get two, Les. Mr. Sanger.
WND: All right, well, thank you for the two.
FLEISCHER: I treat you like I treat everybody else.
WND: Thank you very much.
Answer: Well, of course, through the various agencies of the federal government, we have a series of protections in place in a country that is opening and welcome, and has a border that in some places is not as – that can be porous. And this is a longstanding issue for our country, about how to enforce and protect our borders.
Translation: No
He's also dead wrong about the border policy. It's practically degenerating into open warfare down there.
WND is what journalism is all about.
Nah...I still don't believe it.
That doesn't mean you have to tell a bold faced lie and call it a "religion of peace™".
"Religion of Peace™" my ass.
1)The cowed muslims who practice peace can someday inherit the religion without it being further poisoned against us.
2) Coalition building is so much easier when we haven't declared religious war, even if one has been declared against us.
3) Setting up a rhetoric of "Religion of Peace" contrasts so heavily with the daily news that it rings more condemnation down on the evil doers.
4) It helps minimize the number of fence sitting muslims who would be pushed over into terrorist hands with direct religious confrontation.
I could probably think of more. I am a big believer in the TRUTH, which I don't think is escaping many people. Which is to say that Islam is at war with its neighbors virtually everywhere it is practiced. But maintaining the fiction of a "Religion of Peace" is not a useless lie.
Hokay..But you can be diplomatic without corrupting the language. As in "Patriot Act", "Social Security", "Religion of Peace". Don't care much for Orwellian double speak. That said, I'm not big on the Christian-Islam showdown mentality either.
So one should lie when it is in one's interests? The ends justify the means?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.