Dr. Mordechai Kedar on the “Good Koran” vs. the “Radical Koran” — on The Glazov Gang

hg[Subscribe to The Glazov Gang and LIKE it on Facebook.]

This week’s Glazov Gang was joined by Dr. Mordechai Kedar, the director of the Center for the Study of the Middle East and Islam (under formation) at Bar-Ilan University, Israel.

He joined the show to discuss The “Good Koran” vs. the “Radical Koran,” analyzing the phenomenon of Jihad-Denial and the reluctance to recognize the true threat we face.

Don’t miss Frontpage’s second episode this week with Chloé Simone Valdary, a Junior at the University of New Orleans and founder of the Allies of Israel Association. She is a conservative and an African-American Zionist.

[LIKE Allies of Israel on Facebook]

Our guest discussed her passionate defense of Israel, the Jews’ contributions to the world, the vicious racist attacks on her by the Left, and much, much more:

To watch previous Glazov Gang episodes, Click Here.

LIKE Jamie Glazov’s Fan Page on Facebook.

  • Christoper Logan

    Then why does Horowitz support Zuhdi Jasser? The sooner America realizes “moderates” are not going to save the day, the better. Muslim immigration needs to be ended, and Islam banned.

    • Sourav

      if Americans and especially Europeans wonder why Muslim immigration is so significant, it is because most of the failed states are overwhelmingly Islamic and they get a free pass to Western education, employment, social welfare etc. Keep expecting more.

      • Christoper Logan

        They are slowly turning the West Islamic.

        • Sourav

          its only gonna be worse

  • Joe The Gentile

    Mordechai Kedar doesn’t sound like he quite gets it. From 9:50 – 12:00, its almost Jamie Glazov confronting a Jihad-denier. He downplays the problems with Islam, saying things like ‘Christianity has had its problems too’. Later, at 13:00 he sounds like he does get it!

    Neither of them mentioned *abrogation*, which is surprising, and they both talked as if it did not exist. *All* the peaceful, tolerant passages of the Quran have been abrogated, and abrogation is prescribed in the Quran itself.

  • theoprinse

    I dont agree with Morderhai Kedar saying the problem is not the (ideology of) Islam but terrorist muslims. Kedar says although there is one Islam (meaning dangerous if you understand the tue interpretation or not dangerous when you are a dimmi) and saying that there are many ways of interpreting. Kedar makes a mistake because Kedar wants to save (the) faith in distinction from a religion. Islam is NOT a religion but Islam remains a faith.


    I LOVE IT when Dr. Mordechai Kedar speaks in Arabic on Al Jazzera and tells the Truth to the audience, in their own language.


  • Seek

    The false dichotomy of moderate (good) and radical (bad) Islam is the West’s main stumbling block to dealing effectively with Islam generally. President Bush, unfortunately, peddled the idea that a radical rump faction within Islam has “hijacked” an otherwise great religion. Conservative author Dinesh D’Souza also had promoted this delusion.

    The fact is that Islam contains no features allowing for openness or modernization. It is a faith that demands of its followers blind, unyielding and implacable fanaticism.

    • Eddie

      Right on the spot

  • popseal

    Willful ignorance about the nature of Islam, complicated by politicians who are DHIMMI, and abrogation from Mohammed’s Mecca teaching to his Medina teaching combine to confuse the unstudied population. That population is too uninterested until a building falls on it or a bomb blows innocent people to pieces. Then it goes back to sleep, with the idea that a few man hugs can fix the plague started 1400 years ago.

  • cacslewisfan

    Chloe is awesome!

  • NYgal

    Chloe, you are a wonderful, intelligent well-spoken young woman and a great advocate and highly moral person. I wish you a great success in all your endeavors.

    You are awesome.

  • Infovoyeur

    This guy TERRIFIES me. First he says people [can, do?] pick and choose from Koran due to their cultures. Second he says Koran give IMPERATIVE for in effect global caliphate conquest. OMITTED is what I have heard (accurate or not) that not “all” but the abrogated verses, with the Conquest message MUST be observed by all true Muslims. “Unreal City,” like is THIS guy, even, practicing subversive jihad?!!…

  • Gea

    Islam is a totalitarian supremacist ideology that also condones pedophilia, polygamy, misogyny, dhimmitude, looting, rape and murder. It is unsuitable for human consumption and should be treated as a Nazi party and Muslims who after reading Koran still want to stay Muslims, should be treated as members of the Nazi party.

    Obama must be impeached for subverting US Constitution and the Universal declaration of Human Rights in order to cover up for Islam, Koran and his Muslim Brotherhood, a terrorist organization.

  • Gea

    65% of Koran (Medina Koran) is a hate speech against humanity…all non-Muslims, Muslim women and children. The 35% of Mecca Koran is a watered down distorted stories of Hebrew and Christian Bibles. Mohamed was a pedophile, polygamist, rapist, misogynist, looter and murderer who in any decent society would be convicted for his crimes against humanity and not emulated by 1,640 millions of Muslims who consider him as a “most perfect human being who ever lived”. The criminal role model creates criminal followers, as the jails in Europe testify since they are disproportionately filled with Muslim men.

  • Gloria Stewart

    Dr. Kedar is always fascinating to watch, but I must take exception to one of his points. Of course there is only one Koran. But it can be thought of as two testaments, if you will, or as being divided into two parts. One part is that written in Mecca where Mohammed began his career. He had no power, and his preaching was tolerant and ecumenical (There were then 250 religions in Mecca). He said he was the last in a line of Jewish prophets. There were no Jews in Mecca at the time and no one to disabuse the Meccans of that claim.

    When he left Mecca for Medina and slowly rose to a position of power in the latter city, his visions and messages became more violence prone. A moderate Muslim may choose to follow the Meccan part of the Koran, but Islam is not like a Chinese menu. One does not get to select one from column A and one from column B. The principle of Abrogation in the Koran states clearly that if two verses seem to contradict each other, the latter in time (the Medinan one) is the stronger one and ought to be followed.

    Moderate Muslims may be moderate for many reasons. For example, they may conform their choice of Islamic teachings to fit their personalities as Dr. Kedar suggests. The freedom and prosperity in free countries like America and Israel must be a heady brew – not to mention that both countries and other free societies are a pleasant place in which to eat and sleep. Their Islam is no doubt derived while looking through a lens of Western liberalism. Unfortunately, there is no moderate Islam.

    Just one scary thought – how many “moderate” Muslims are one khutba away from becoming violent?

    • Eddie

      The analogy with new and old testament does not quite cut it. Some of the abrogated verses happened after Mohamed left Mecca. I agree there were change of strategy, but the bigger issue is the big deception the west undergoes because of some verses, that the Muslims themselves consider invalid. I never heard a muslim Imam, teacher or a preacher using these Verses when they talk to Muslims, specially in Arabic. I have been 12 years of forced islamic teaching growing up, plus a couple of decades of Muslim controlled media.

      The muslims use these abrogated verses only when they talk to naive westerns. Deception is an integral strategy when dealing with non-muslims.

      Why is the Koran is not looked at as a whole? And even if this is not the case, shouldn’t the “new testament” be taken more seriously.

      Why is the last 10 years of Mohamed’s life, teaching, behavior and action is not taken seriously? I can understand that someone has a bad past but behaved during the last few years of his life. The other way around is a joke, specially if he is the role model for all good muslims.

      I admit not all average muslims are aware of this abrogation stuff. When they get to know about it, they discount it , then they ask and research, then they undergo a shock. As a result, not all muslims will follow an Imam teaching and go explode themselves after loosing confidence in a God that changes his mind. But these are the inquisitive ones. Muslim taught to question religion or religion authority, so I think it is the free word responsibility to get Muslims to know their true religion, before they sacrifice themselves.

      Yet, to the point about good muslims living in the west: A large part of the muslim immigrants are behaving well because they do not have the upper-hand. Look at the countries that they managed to control….

      I have lots of good friends who happen. The main common denominator among them, is that they do not take the Koran and their Imams seriously, else they would not have befriended me in the first place.

      I’ve also seen several cases of non-radical Muslims who turned radical in the west, simply when they met other Muslims who got them to attend the mosque regularly. They got brainwashed in no time. You can guess the rest…

  • Eddie

    Unbelievable!!!!! This Islamic studies so called expert, refers to verses from the Koran that are no longer valid. Yes, some Quranic verses have been replaced by Allah. This is one of Islam fundamentals.

    This comes directly from the Quran. It has never been disputed by any muslim scholar or institution throughout the 1400 year history of Islam. There are plenty of books and references on the subject of ABROGATION. These references include a comprehensive list of the Quranic verses that have been abrogated. That includes explanations and justifications of Allah’s wisdom to replace some versus.

    The most famous obligated verses are “there’s no compulsion in religion” and “you have your religion and I have mine” among several other piece from versus.

    These type of verses were common when Mohamad was weak and did nit have a big army. After Mohamed migration to Medina, these “peaceful” verses have expired and were replaced.

    Did Dr. Kedar sleep through the class on abrogation?? I do not want to guess what is he up to.

    In my opinion he is more dangerous than the blind sheik preaching.

    Mr. Glazov, I urge you to make a session on the subject of abrogation & Taqquia (deception). Please invite a real subject matter expert. Raymond Ibrahim, Robert Spencer, Noni Darwish to name a few.

    • Joe The Gentile

      I wrote to Jamie Glazov, and he kindly responded quickly and said that he is well aware of abrogation but did not find the time to bring it up in that session. I do agree with you that a session on abrogation and Taqiyya would be a good thing. Arguably, abrogation is one of the greatest, most effective taqiyya operations of all. While those tolerant passages are still left in the book (but officially abrogated as the wiser know), this brilliantly confuses infidels into believing that they are safe, and that there is scriptural support for peaceful, empowered existence alongside a Muslim majority.

      • jamieglazov11

        Thanks Joe, abrogation and taqiyya will both be discussed on the show very soon with some great guests!

    • jamieglazov11

      Dear Eddie, thanks so much for watching the show and for writing in. You will be pleased to know that I have some episodes coming up with some experts on Islam where abrogation and taqiyya will both be discussed!

  • Gloria Stewart

    Dear Eddie,

    I did not intend to treat the two parts of the Koran as one treats the Old and New Testaments of the Bible. There is not really any comparison. I used the term ‘testament’ in a generic sense simply referring to two parts of one book.

    Muslims cannot say that any verses in the Koran are wrong since they were supposedly written by Allah. They can only say that the latter ones (written when Mohammed was in Medina) are stronger. I have sat through interfaith events where verses from the Koran written when Mohammed was in Mecca and virtually powerless were read and given as an example of the peaceful nature of Islam. Actually, I have heard verses recited that left out key parts so that they sounded peaceful when they were not.

    Some of the non Muslims who collaborate with Islam are so incredibly naive that one could read from a time table and they would swoon.

    You are right about the Koran being looked at as a whole. Islam is an ideology that seeks a world wide caliphate that will bring all peoples under its control. That is the bottom line. Judaism is a covenant between God and the Jewish people. Christianity is a doctrine of faith and individual salvation. The latter two may have been ill used but whatever wrongs were committed by the followers could find no justification in the scriptures. In the case of Islam, the scriptures justify the violence and aggression.

  • Infovoyeur

    Later–I just may have an ANSWER, to My Own perplexity in my
    just-recent post. The puzzlement was: the speaker seemed to say that Muslims pick-and-choose their Islam depending on local cultures—more warlike, more peaceful—BUT at the same time, that world conquest is a MANDATE in Islam. A pesky contradiction here?

    So, how can Islam be (in our terms) “Civilized” etc.—have Justice, Peace, Equality, etc.—if it is also of the Sword and mandates Muslims to conquer the world (“Global Caliphate”) and either convert, subdue, or kill kaffirs?

    Well, is this, the Answer? “The Civilized treatment of Others, applies ONLY to—OTHER MUSLIMS!” Not to infidels (who must be mal-treated by our standards…)

    So, a religion where its practitioners MUST practice it ALL—easy to do. Just apply those peaceful, civilized verses—to FELLOW Muslims WITHIN Islam. Then on the weekend, take the Sword and defend-and-conquer the Infidels.

    Also clearer is “What is a moderate Muslim?” So both the 9/11 jihadists, and a non-warlike Muslim, are imperfect practitioners, are not truest Muslims. The hijackers should have practiced the Pillars and Principles within Islam more (maybe they did). And the “peaceful” Muslims should have also been more warlike. (Via strict, revivalist Islam, that is—OR via ISLAM simply?!)

    So, perhaps my confusion is settled? Thus, Islam can be (and is?) air-tight,
    inflexible, mandated, doctrine which true Muslims MUST follow –ALL the Koran,
    Hadith, and Sharia mandates. Which includes both (1) conquering the
    worldly Outsides, and (2) living by Islam’s more-“Peaceful” values—BUT ONLY when relating to OTHER MUSLIMS? Must vigorously do both or not a true Muslim, etc.

    ….. do I have anything here except pesonal confusion? At least an attempt to solve the speaker’s disturbing contradictions etc.? Or is this totally off-target?