Category Archives: Religion
“Picture an ad showing throngs of Muslims screaming in streets, shouting anti-US or anti-Christian slogans, burning embassies, preaching hate on televisions, beheading and stoning adulterers, converts, apostates, and blocking streets in European cities with praying men, butts in the air.
“The voice-over comes on:
“Imagine there is a religion which believes it is the duty of every one of its adherents to kill, enslave and degrade anyone not belonging to it.
“Imagine there is a religion whose adherents believe in removing the clitorises of young girls to secure their sexual constancy and obedience to their husbands.
“Imagine there is a religion which takes as its divinely-ordained human model a man who married his twelve year old niece, disavowed his adopted nephew to do so, slaughtered thousands of prisoners of war, and who made his lusts the criterion and authoritative guide of all male behaviour for all time?
“Imagine a religion which says its primary texts are not just divinely inspired, but are the dictations of God to man, literally and fully authoritative, even though one fifth of it cannot be logically or grammatically deciphered, even it its original language?”
“Imagine a religion that considers all inquiry, of whatever kind, to be formally forbidden”
“Imagine a religion that believes that if God says two plus two makes five, then there is no human basis for disputing that absurdity, and that to do so would merit death?
“Imagine a religion which says that the match does not light the gasoline, but that all physical events happen directly and without intermediation or operation of physical laws, but by the will of God alone?”
“Imagine if there were a religion which says that everything that happens in the universe: every molecule jiggling, every event that happen to a human, every bird falling from the sky, happens by the will of God alone?”
“Imagine the effects on scientific education and rational inquiry, when all possible subjects of inquiry: religious, philosophical or scientific, are forbidden.
“Would you not want to defend yourself against this religion? Would you not seek to have it disputed in public places by people in authority?
“If there were such a religion?”
I can see the hate-crime prosecutions now, but I can see the ad very clearly, and so do many of you, dear readers, without the benefit of televisions or computers. It is running every day, just the voice-over is missing. And now you have one.”
Found at AD: http://americandigest.org/
Bet You Didn’t Know it – Even God is Racist, Says an Ivy League Racist (They must let anybody into the “Ivy” League these days)
You have to pay the big bucks to attend an Ivy League university. But it’s worth it to acquire an education from the greatest minds of our time — like Anthea Butler, who insightfully observes that George Zimmerman not being found guilty of murder for defending himself against the young hoodlum who was bashing his head against the pavement proves that God is a “white racist.”
Anthea Butler, an associate professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Department of Religious Studies, made the unusual comments in a blog post released on Monday on ReligionDispatches.org, where she is a regular contributor.
“God ain’t good all of the time. In fact, sometimes, God is not for us,” she wrote in the post. “As a black woman in an [sic] nation that has taken too many pains to remind me that I am not a white man, and am not capable of taking care of my reproductive rights, or my voting rights, I know that this American god ain’t my god.
“As a matter of fact, I think he’s a white racist god with a problem. More importantly, he is carrying a gun and stalking young black men,” she added.
In her profundity, Anthea — who is an associate chair of the prestigious university’s religious studies department and a regular contributor for MSNBC and CNN — divines that Christianity is to blame for God’s wickedness.
“As a historian of American and African-American religion, I know that the Trayvon Martin moment is just one moment in a history of racism in America that, in large part, has its underpinnings in Christianity and its history,” she wrote.
Apparently Anthea is just barely bright enough to understand that the more she denounces Western Civilization and pretends to be oppressed, the more she will be showered with privileges. She spews her bizarre venom for the same reason a lab rat presses a lever that releases food pellets.
What are the odds that someone too dumb even to write proper English could achieve the status and income of an Ivy League professor without being “oppressed”? Take away her sacred victim status, and her brain power wouldn’t have gotten her through junior high. She would be swabbing toilets at the local Motel 6 if not for moonbattery, so don’t blame her for spewing it.
Blame the white liberals who set morons like this on pedestals in order to debase our culture with the ultimate cultural Marxist goal of destroying it.
MYANMAR: Burmese Buddhist Monk burned with acid, slashed with knives, had genitals cut off, all by Muslims
Burmese-Buddhist monk Shin Thawbita who was brutally assaulted and then burned alive by the Muslim mob in Meikhtilar on March 20 was a devout teacher-monk from Mogaung Monastery in Hanzar Village of Tharzi Twonship. (And people wonder why Buddhists are fighting back so hard against Muslim savages who are trying to take over the country, piece by piece, as they have done in every other Buddhist country)
HLAOO 1980 He’d been a monk at his friend U Pannisa’s monastery for over two years and on that fateful day of 20 March 2013 at about 4:30 in the afternoon he and a friend came to Meikhtilar to buy some books on Buddhism for his class of 200 students. Neither knew that a race-riot was brewing between Muslims and Buddhists in Meikhtilar that day.
When they reached Meikhtilar, they saw a large mob of angry Muslim Kalars armed with swords and iron rods gathering on both sides of the main road. “Doesn’t look too good, let’s turn back,” said fearful Tin Maung Win to U Thawbita. But U Thawbita wasn’t so concerned. “Maybe they’re fighting each other, don’t worry you’re with me, just drive on,” said U Thawbita who was very confident that even the rioting Muslims wouldn’t harm a Buddhist monk. Wrong!
The Muslim Kalar swinged and hit violently U Thawbita from behind. By then the motorbike was hardly moving forward as the Muslim crowd thirsting for the wounded Buddhist-monk’s blood was all over them.
“We’re from Tharzi, we’re from Hanzar, we come here to buy books, please, please, we don’t know what’s going on here, please,” pleaded and begged desperately for mercy both U Thawbita and Tin Maung Win but the Meikhtilar-Muslims were determined to kill the first Buddhist monk they ran into.
A steel ball from a Muslim-slingshot hit the left side of U Thawbita’s shaved head. The Muslims were also beating up U Thawbita’s back with sticks and iron rods. The “bone,bone,bone” noises from the back beating was unbearable for Tin Maung Win at the front. He then saw a sword swing just above the bare head of the monk behind. U Thawbita then fell limp to the ground. The monk’s head just above the ears was deeply hacked and blood was flowing like water from the deep wound.
When Tin Maung Win turned he saw the same Muslim man who first struck the monk with his huge farming-fork was running towards them with a big 5-gallon yellow-jerrican on his shoulder and shouting loud, “Burn him, burn him, burn the bloody monk.”
According to the eyewitnesses while Tin Maung Win was fleeing the Muslim mob, Muslim Kalar Myo Win (A shoe-shop owner) and his wife Ma Yu and another Muslim Kalar Annawar were cutting U Thawbita with knifes.
Soon Another Muslim kalar brought the petrol can and he pulled the blood-stained saffron-robe off the dying monk. The Muslims who wanted to inflict maximum possible pain on the Buddhist monk then turned him flat on his bare back and slowly poured petrol and some acid on his belly and lower body.
Instead of just throwing petrol and acid from the cans, the Muslim men, women, and even the children were using small cups to slowly pour acid and petrol all over his body as if they were committing a communal torture on the Buddhist monk.
When the Burmese-Buddhists reached the dying monk his almost naked and burning body was away from his robe lying in the pool of his blood on the hot-tarred road. Meanwhile the angry Buddhist crowd had followed some fleeing Muslims into the nearby mosque and burned the huge Saudi-built mosque down with the Muslims inside.
By about 9 in the night the Meikhtilar Hospital was in total chaos as ambulances were constantly bringing in so many wounded. Most were Buddhist-Burmese with severe knife-wounds and only few were not seriously wounded.
U Thawbita passed away on exactly 9:45 that night of 20 March 2013. Blood from his head wound was still flowing as his body was being moved onto a concrete slab in the hospital morgue. The dead monk was completely naked. The morgue staff was then sewing the gaping head wound back. When they looked close-up they sadly noticed the monk’s genitals had been completely chopped off by the Muslims.
Muslims brought this upon themselves as they do wherever they go. With Muslims, it’s either kill or be killed.
From Bare Naked islam: http://www.barenakedislam.com/
Recently Robert Spencer interviewed former Pentagon Sharia expert Stephen Coughlin, who spoke at our inaugural AFDI event at CPAC in 2010, on his ABN show. They discussed the pitfalls of “interfaith dialogue,” a trap that Jews and Christians frequently fall into. Spencer explains about Muslim/Christian dialogue:
I am all for dialogue between Muslims and Christians when it is honest and not based on false pretenses. There doesn’t seem to be any use to dialogue that ignores difficulties and points of disagreement rather than confronting them. They won’t go away if ignored. I discuss the genuine prospects for dialogue and its pitfalls at length in my book Not Peace But A Sword, which will be published next week by Catholic Answers.One thing that must be recognized is that for many Muslim spokesmen and leaders, dialogue with adherents of other religions is simply a proselytizing mechanism designed to convert the “dialogue” partner to Islam, as the Muslim Brotherhood theorist Sayyid Qutb explained: “The chasm between Islam and Jahiliyyah [the society of unbelievers] is great, and a bridge is not to be built across it so that the people on the two sides may mix with each other, but only so that the people of Jahiliyyah may come over to Islam.”
In line with this, 138 Muslim scholars wrote to Pope Benedict XVI, inviting him to dialogue. The title of the document they sent to him was A Common Word Between Us and You. Reading the entire Qur’anic verse from which the phrase “a common word between us and you” was taken makes the Common Word initiative’s agenda clear: “Say: ‘People of the Book! Come now to a word common between us and you, that we serve none but God, and that we associate not aught with Him, and do not some of us take others as Lords, apart from God.’ And if they turn their backs, say: ‘Bear witness that we are Muslims’” (3:64). Since Muslims consider the Christian confession of the divinity of Christ to be an unacceptable association of a partner with God, this verse is saying that the “common word” that Muslims and the People of the Book should agree on is that Christians should discard one of the central tenets of their faith and essentially become Muslims. Not a promising basis for an honest and mutually respectful dialogue of equals.
From Atlas Shrugs: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/
Found at Mad Medic:http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
Many people mistake Sikhs for Muslims due to their turbans, which often makes Sikhs targets of attacks meant for Muslims. Please study the differences in Sikh (right) and Muslim headgear below. You might be able to save a Sikh’s life one day.
If you see a man walking down the street wearing a turban, there is 99.9% chance that he is a Sikh, a follower of a monotheistic religion that started in the 15th century in India. Sikhs proudly wear the turban as part of their religious and cultural heritage. Sikhs are often mistaken for Muslims or Arabs. They are neither. Sikhism is an independent religion and is in no way related to Islam.
SIKH MEN commonly wear a peaked turban that serves partly to cover their long hair, which is never cut out of respect for God’s creation. Devout Sikhs also do not cut their beards, so many Sikh men comb out their facial hair and then twist and tuck it up into their turbans along with the hair from their heads. Sikhism originated in northern India and Pakistan in the 15th century and is one of the youngest of the world’s monotheistic religions. There are an estimated 18 million Sikhs in the world, with some 2 million spread throughout North America, Western Europe and the former British colonies.
MUSLIM RELIGIOUS ELDERS, like this man from Yemen, often wear a turban wrapped around a cap known in Arabic as a kalansuwa. These caps can be spherical or conical, colorful or solid white, and their styles vary widely from region to region. Likewise, the color of the turban wrapped around the kalansuwa varies. White is thought by some Muslims to be the holiest turban color, based on legends that the prophet Mohammed wore a white turban. Green, held to be the color of paradise, is also favored by some. Not all Muslims wear turbans. In fact, few wear them in the West, and in major cosmopolitan centers around the Muslim world, turbans are seen by some as passé.
AFGHAN MUSLIM MEN wear a variety of turbans, and even within the Taliban, the strict Islamic government that controls much of the country, there are differences in the way men cover their heads. This Taliban member, for example, is wearing a very long turban — perhaps two twined together — with one end hanging loose over his shoulder. The Taliban ambassador to Afghanistan, on the other hand, favors a solid black turban tied above his forehead. And some men in Afghanistan do not wear turbans at all, but rather a distinctive Afghan hat.
IRANIAN MULLAHS wear black or white turbans wrapped in the flat, circular style shown in this image of Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The word turban is thought to have originated among Persians living in the area now known as Iran, who called the headgear a dulband.
ARAB MUSLIM KAFFIYEH is not technically a turban. It is really a rectangular piece of cloth, folded diagonally and then draped over the head — not wound like a turban. Yasser Arafat, the Palestinian leader, has made the kaffiyeh famous in recent times. However, the kaffiyeh is not solely Palestinian. Men in Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the Arab Persian Gulf states wear kaffiyehs in colors and styles that are particular to their region. Jordanians, for example, wear a red and white kaffiyeh, while Palestinians wear a black and white one. And a man from Saudi Arabia would likely drape his kaffiyeh differently than a man from Jordan. The black cord that holds the kaffiyeh on one’s head is called an ekal.
DESERT PEOPLES & MUSLIM TERRORISTS have long used the turban to keep sand out of their faces, as this man from Africa is likely doing. Members of nomadic tribes have also used turbans to disguise themselves. And sometimes, the color of a person’s turban can be used to identify his tribal affiliation from a distance across the dunes. This man’s turban is a very light blue. In some parts of North Africa, blue is thought to be a good color to wear in the desert because of its association with cool water.
From bare Naked Islam: http://www.barenakedislam.com/
The Pitfalls of “Dialogue”
By Robert Spencer
Robert McManus, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Worcester, Massachusetts, recently dropped me from a scheduled appearance at a Catholic conference in Worcester on the grounds that “Mr. Spencer’s talk would impact negatively on the Church’s increasingly constructive dialogue with Muslims.”
In the name of interreligious dialogue, it’s not uncommon for Muslim spokesmen to visit churches with the stated goal of clearing up “misconceptions” about Islam. Such sessions often include the Muslim speaker’s downplaying the reality of jihad activity and Muslim persecution of Christians, and offering his Christian audience bland assurances that such things have nothing to do with authentic Islam.
On a larger scale, Muslims have engaged in several high-profile attempts at dialogue with Catholics in recent years, to which Catholics have generally responded with enthusiasm. Yet, there is less to these attempts at outreach than meets the eye. The two most visible and well-publicized attempts by Muslims to reach out to Catholics turn out, on close examination, to be thinly veiled exercises in proselytizing. All of these attempts at “dialogue” share several common characteristics, including most notably a downplaying and glossing-over of the differences between Christianity and Islam, an over-emphasis on the similarities between the two religions, and a call to Christians to abandon or modify certain of their core beliefs, while never budging an inch on Islamic doctrines.
One notorious example of this came a few years ago, when 138 Muslim leaders and scholars from all over the globe issued a more extensive appeal to Christians for mutual understanding, entitled A Common Word Between Us and You. The “Common Word” initiative is quite extensive, with ongoing conferences and other mutual endeavors between Muslims and Catholics, as well as between Muslims and other Christian groups. The Common Word website describes the project in enthusiastic terms: “Never before have Muslims delivered this kind of definitive consensus statement on Christianity. Rather than engage in polemic, the signatories have adopted the traditional and mainstream Islamic position of respecting the Christian scripture and calling Christians to be more, not less, faithful to it.”
Following a pattern that’s common in documents like these, data contradicting the assertions in A Common Word Between Us and You are not addressed and refuted but simply ignored. Nothing is said, for example, about the Islamic claim that the Christian Scripture has been corrupted. While claiming they want to respect Christian Scripture and build on common ground, the Muslim scholars (despite copious Qur’an quotes) never mention Qur’an 5:17, which says that those who believe in the divinity of Christ are unbelievers; or 4:171, which says that Jesus was not crucified; or 9:30, which says that those who believe that Jesus is the Son of God are accursed; or 9:29, which mandates warfare against and the subjugation of Jews and Christians. Why should they mention these unpleasant passages in the midst of trying to build bridges? Because they are precisely the obstacles to such bridges. For there to be any true and honest dialogue, verses like these must be addressed in some way, even if only to give them a benign interpretation.
When Pope John Paul II died, the Washington Post reminded its readers how “during his long reign, Pope John Paul II apologized to Muslims for the Crusades, to Jews for anti-Semitism, to Orthodox Christians for the sacking of Constantinople, to Italians for the Vatican’s associations with the Mafia and to scientists for the persecution of Galileo.” In reality, he never apologized for the Crusades; the closest he came was on March 12, 2000, the “Day of Pardon,” when he said, “[W]e cannot fail to recognize the infidelities to the Gospel committed by some of our brethren, especially during the second millennium. Let us ask pardon for the divisions which have occurred among Christians, for the violence some have used in the service of the truth and for the distrustful and hostile attitudes sometimes taken towards the followers of other religions.”
Though it’s hardly an “apology for the Crusades,” nonetheless one would be hard pressed to find a similar statement from any Muslim leader, still less one of the pope’s stature, acknowledging any wrongdoing on the part of Muslims individually or of any Islamic state. The idea of a Muslim asking pardon and forgiveness from a non-Muslim is anathema to Islamic theology. But some kind of reciprocity of this kind would seem necessary for genuine dialogue.
Reading the entire Qur’anic verse from which the phrase “a common word between us and you” was taken makes clear the Common Word initiative’s agenda: “Say: ‘People of the Book! Come now to a word common between us and you, that we serve none but God, and that we associate not aught with Him, and do not some of us take others as Lords, apart from God.’ And if they turn their backs, say: ‘Bear witness that we are Muslims’” (3:64). Since Muslims consider the Christian confession of the divinity of Christ to be an unacceptable association of a partner with God, this verse is saying that the “common word” that Muslims and the People of the Book should agree on is that Christians should discard one of the central tenets of their faith and essentially become Muslims.
Not a promising basis for an honest and mutually respectful dialogue of equals. The Common Word document’s explanation for this was disingenuous, not mentioning that according to the mainstream Islamic understanding of what it means to “ascribe a partner to God,” the Christians were guilty of this sin:
The words: we shall ascribe no partner unto Him relate to the Unity of God, and the words: worship none but God, relate to being totally devoted to God. Hence they all relate to the First and Greatest Commandment. According to one of the oldest and most authoritative commentaries on the Holy Qur’an the words: that none of us shall take others for lords beside God, mean “that none of us should obey the other in disobedience to what God has commanded.” This relates to the Second Commandment because justice and freedom of religion are a crucial part of love of the neighbour.
The Common Word document suggests its true intentions in its Qur’anic epigraph: “Call unto the way of thy Lord with wisdom and fair exhortation, and contend with them in the fairest way. Lo! thy Lord is Best Aware of him who strayeth from His way, and He is Best Aware of those who go aright.” This verse (16:125) is a curious choice to head up a document that is ostensibly devoted to finding common ground for dialogue and mutual cooperation—unless the intention is actually only to proselytize.
The use of this epigraph recalls the words of the Egyptian Islamic supremacist writer Sayyid Qutb (1906-1966), the great theorist of the Muslim Brotherhood: “The chasm between Islam and Jahiliyyah [the society of unbelievers] is great, and a bridge is not to be built across it so that the people on the two sides may mix with each other, but only so that the people of Jahiliyyah may come over to Islam.”
Muslims in the U.S. and Europe often term their outreach to non-Muslims “bridge-building,” but to Muslims this expression has a very different meaning. Bishop McManus, and those like him, should take careful note.
Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and author of the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His upcoming book, Not Peace But A Sword: The Great Chasm Between Christianity and Islam, will be available March 25.
From Atlas Shrugs: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/
Which equates to 185 victims in a country of more than 300 million.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has put out its data on hate crimes from 2011. The good news is that the number of hate crimes was down to 6,222 incidents involving 7,254 offenses. That is a 6 percent drop from the preceding year (when 6,628 hate crime incidents involving 7,699 offenses were reported) and it’s the lowest since 1994 (extraordinary when you consider the population growth). To put that in context, in 2011, with total U.S. population of more than 300 million people, some 1,203,564 violent crimes and 9,063,173 property crimes were reported.
In an ideal country, we’d have no hate crimes. But in the United States it is safe to say that hate crimes, that is the number of crimes based on racial, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, religious or disability bias, are a minuscule proportion of total crime, and are perpetrated by 5,731 individuals. (That is about .19 percent of the population, less than one-quarter of 1 percent.)
There are two items in the data that caught my eye. Both would challenge some common tropes you hear in mainstream media.
First, among religious hate crimes, Jews make up the overwhelming number of victims (63.2 percent), but the total number, again, is tiny (936). Anti-Muslim hate crimes (in a country in which the left and groups like CAIR tell us is rife with Islamophobia) are much more rare. Muslim hate-crime victims make up only 12.5 percent of the anti-religious hate crimes. That is 185 victims. Any crime based on bias is to be deplored, but we don’t have either rampant anti-Semitic crime or Islamophobia crime. When the Anti-Defamation League says that “that anti-Semitism is still a serious and deeply entrenched problem in America,” I have to say bunk, at least if you are looking at FBI crime stats.
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
Found at The Jawa Report
We Muslims Cannot Co-Exist With You
by Detlef Kleinert
Why the persecution of Christians in the Muslim world is increasing. Where sharia reigns, non-Muslims have lost all rights.
In Tahrir Square in Cairo, a recent placard announced: “85 million people want the implementation of sharia.” About 10,000 Salafists had gathered to demand strict adherence to the Koran in the constitution. What this means in practice was explained by a terrorist, after he and others had murdered 60 Catholics in Iraq: “You Christians are all ‘kuffar’ (infidels); we cannot co-exist with you!”
So it is that, worldwide, about 100 million Christians are being persecuted, humiliated, and ultimately murdered. Especially in Islamic countries. The more strictly the Koran is enforced, the more merciless is the systematic displacement, the murderous terror.
Some examples: In Indonesia in recent years, more than 1,000 churches were burned. In the last 30 years in Egypt, more than 1,800 Copts have been murdered for religious reasons. In the Fall of 2011, imams in more than 20 Upper Egyptian mosques called for an assault against churches and the murder of Christians. Security forces withdrew.
Religious Hate Propaganda
Religious hate propaganda is not confined to mosques. It is played on tapes everywhere, in bazaars, in taxis and in private residences. Islam researcher, Rita Breuer: “In most Muslim-leaning countries, it is no longer necessary to be secretive about spreading anti-Christian propaganda. It is acceptable and in many places even in good taste.”
The consequence, according to Breuer: “Equal rights for non-Muslim citizens cannot exist in an explicitly Islamic-tilted country.” Where sharia reigns, non-Muslims have lost all rights. “There has never been an Islamic state without religious discrimination.”
Rita Breuer, who has long been active as an aid worker in Islamic countries, also explains Islamic hate of Christians theologically. Sura 4, verse 171 says unmistakably: “Jesus, son of Mary, is the envoy of Allah.” Naturally, the religious founder of Christianity, God’s son, cannot, may not be more divine than Mohammed, who was “only” a human being. Therefore, belief in Jesus Christ challenges the entire Islamic belief structure. So the “idolaters,” according to sura 9, verse 17, “will abide forever in the fire.”
Religious Freedom is only Theoretical
Here there is nothing of the compassion which Mouhanad Khorchide believes he sees in Islam. (“Islam is Compassion,” Herder Publications). And when he says contemporary Muslims should regard the Koran in a historical context, that may apply to educated Muslims in Western lands. But, where Islam is the state doctrine, other principals are in control.
In Turkey, for example, where there theoretically is religious freedom. Rita Breuer: “In nominally laicist Turkey, you can observe an outright hysterical persecution of the Christian mission and whatever it is assumed to be.” In 2007 in eastern Turkish Malatya, two Turks who had converted to Christianity and a German pastor were “gruesomely butchered.”
It’s not an isolated case. In sharia, apostasy — dropping out of the Islamic faith — is punishable by death. In many Islamic countries, apostates are under sentence of death; elsewhere, the “merciful” representatives of the faith call for lynch justice. In Egypt, for example, “many imams call the faithful to the killing of converts,” says Breuer. “Whoever follows their call need fear no punishment.”
However, while it is churches in the Western world that preach tolerance and many theologians babble about a “dialogue between equals,” the climate of hostility finds ever more adherents in the Islamic world. Breuer: “The wave of re-Islamization in the Islamic world and renewed politicization of religion is like a creeping poison for the inter-religious climate, and works considerably to the disadvantage of Christians.”
The liberals have not prevailed in the internal Islamic dispute — the radical Islamists have. There is no question — this will also have its effects on the varied trends in Islam in the Western world.
Pseudo-Dialogue is no Good for Anyone
And let us not forget: the sham dialogue here at home is not helping endangered Christians in the Islamic world. They are directed to a clear position taken by Western churches. It is like a denial of reality, when theologians — as in the Catholic Church in Vienna — repeatedly paint a positive and idealized picture of Islam. An Islam which is compatible with Christian values — the “true Islam of peace and freedom, of equal rights for all people, of tolerance and pluralism.”
Except, as Rita Breuer knows, “This allegedly true Islam does not exist.” On the contrary, the hate campaign against Christians is growing, here as well. “Even though actively militant Muslims are a minority, passive acceptance of violence is very high.” This is a sentence which should make everyone ponder migration and integration.
From Gates if Vienna: http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/
Oh, that’s right, I forgot, tolerance does not apply to them does it? Of course not, tolerance, as defined by the Left means that certain groups must stamp out all vestiges of other groups, so as to not be offended!
Brussels replaced its popular Christmas tree exhibit this year at the city center due to concerns that it may offend the local Muslim population.
The Right Perspective reported:
Government officials in Brussels, Belgium banned Wednesday a popular Christmas tree exhibit out of concerns that the local Muslim population found it “offensive.”
An “electronic winter tree,” will take the place of the traditional Christmas Tree and Nativity scene at the city center of Grand Place, reports Brussels News.
The electronic sculpture will stand 25 meters (82 feet) tall and consists of a set of television screens, reports Brussels Expat. “During the daytime you can climb to the top of the tree where you will be able to enjoy a panoramic view of the city,” the website explains. “As soon as it becomes dark the tree turns into a spectacle of light and sound. Every ten minutes an amazing show will unfold.”
City councilwoman Bianca Debaets believes a “misplaced argument” over religious sensitivities has moved Brussels to put up the light sculpture. She points to the fact that it display not be referred to “Christmas” in any way to make her point.
“I suspect that the reference to the Christian religion was the decisive factor” in replacing the tree, she told reporters. “For a lot of people who are not Christians, the tree there is offensive to them.”
And what about all the Christians who are sincerely offended over NOT having the tree? Oh, of course, those “intolerant” Christians will not go apeshit and riot like those “tolerant Muslims.
From The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/
From Bare Naked Islam
We won’t hold him being atheist against him.
mooslims Don’t Like Buddhists Any More Than Christians or Jews…Matter of Fact They Hate Everybody Who is Not One of Them…Wait…mooslims are Split into 2 Groups and THEY Hate Each Other
by 1389 on October 5, 2012
The pretext for this was a picture of a burned Qur’an supposedly posted on Facebook.
If one intends to do evil, any excuse is as good (or bad) as any other.
On YouTube: Video Link
Published on Oct 4, 2012 by SDAMatt2a
Two Hindu temples too!
About 25 thousand Muslims set on fire and destroyed 22 Buddhist temples and hundreds of homes in south-eastern Bangladesh, one of the rarest and most violent attacks against the Buddhist community in the country. The violence took place on the night of September 29th and was sparked a photo posted on Facebook, deemed “offensive” against Islam. According to some protesters, a Buddhist in the area posted the image on the social network. For the moment, the authorities have arrested a young man, Uttam Kumar Barua, but it is unclear whether he is really responsible for the having posted the photo. During the disorder, two Hindu temples were also demolished.
The violence has affected dozens of villages of the upazila (sub-districts) of Ramu, Ukhia, Patia and Teknaf (Chittagong Division). The most serious losses were reported in Ramu, where 15 Buddhist temples were razed to the ground and more than 100 houses burnt. It all started around 10 pm (local time), when hundreds of people invaded the area of Choumuhani, staging a protest. The crowd soon swelled, reaching thousands of people and breaking the security cordon of police. Around midnight, people started to spread gunpowder and gasoline, and set fire to temples and homes. Among the places of worship destroyed, there was also the 250 year old temple of Shima Bihar,.
So far police have arrested 26 people for public disorder. According to local authorities, Muslim Rohingya, the Muslim minority originally from Myanmar’s Rakhine State, fomented the protests. For months, this community has been a victim of ethnic persecution: the country, in fact, does not recognize the Rohingya as an ethnic group, but considers them illegal immigrants from Bangladesh.
Bangladesh is a Muslim-majority country (90%). With a population of about 161milioni of people, it is one of the poorest nations in the world, but the third largest Islamic state in the world. Hindus are about 9% of the population, Buddhists and Christians, a minority of the small percentage of just 1%. However, the Buddhist community has never experienced violence on this scale.
From 1389 Blog: http://1389blog.com/
Photo from Poretto @ Bastion of Liberty
This image in this morning’s email brought this meditation from 2006 to mind:
To the secular, nothing is sacred. Then again, why should it be? They’re “secular.”
Back in 2006 National Geographic and other media echo chambers thought enough of this “discovery” to headline it, Jesus May Have Walked on Ice, Not Water, Scientists Say . I’m not nearly so objective. After I read the story, I thought it could more reasonably be headlined, Scientist Confirms Popular Theory That Most Scientists Are Atheistic Asses with Too Much Time and Money on their Hands, Sensible People Say
The New Testament says that Jesus walked on water, but a Florida university professor believes there could be a less miraculous explanation — he walked on a floating piece of ice….
Nof, a professor of oceanography at Florida State University, said on Tuesday that his study found an unusual combination of water and atmospheric conditions in what is now northern Israel could have led to ice formation on the Sea of Galilee…..
“If you ask me if I believe someone walked on water, no, I don’t,” Nof said. “Maybe somebody walked on the ice, I don’t know. I believe that something natural was there that explains it.”
“We leave to others the question of whether or not our research explains the biblical account.”
We leave to others the question of whether or not this research is worth diddly-squat. What is of broader interest is the present state of the secular mindset to all things religious.
Religious in the Christian sense, that is, since the current global climate of “Fear of Muslims” seems to have created a shortage of “scientific research” into the various miracles and powers assigned to Allah in the Koran. Indeed, given the reaction to a drawing of the Prophet with a bomb in his turban, it is not hard to imagine that even if a “scientist” were to notice “something natural that explains” Allah, his next thought would be something on the order of “Why should I put my head on the chopping block?” Jesus, being a more forgiving God, is safer game.
Of course, it is, as scientists are wont to say, ‘only a theory.’ This is used in two ways.
When it comes to a central tenet of modern science, Darwinism for example, the word “theory” is used in a manner that merges forcefully into the word “fact,” and a great deal of effort is put into why “The Theory of Evolution” really means “The Absolute and Forever Established Fact of How the World and Life and Everything Else Came to Be and Everyone Else Can Just Shut UP and Sit Down.”
Nof opts for the Non-Denial Denial use of “Theory” in his paper. The Non-concluding Conclusion to his paper, “Is there a paleolimnological explanation for ‘walking on water’ in the Sea of Galilee,” reads:
We hesitate to draw any conclusion regarding the implications of this study to the actual events that took place at Tabgha during the last few (or several) thousand years. Our springs ice calculation may or may not be related to the origin of the account of Christ walking on water. The whole story may have originated in local ancient folklore which happened to be told best in the Christian Bible. It is hoped, however, that archeologists, religion scholars, anthropologists and believers will examine such implications in detail.
Translation: “I just pulled the pin and threw the grenade in the building. Can’t blame me. I was just the hand grenade’s messenger. And, by the way, you may cower and abase yourself when you note the insertion of the word “paleolimnnological” in the title. Makes it sound real solid scientific, don’t it?”
Of course, when Nof gets a little attention from a supportive and loving media, he phrases it a bit differently, “If you ask me if I believe someone walked on water, no, I don’t,” Nof said. “Maybe somebody walked on the ice, I don’t know. I believe that something natural was there that explains it.”
Nof’s entitled to his ‘belief’ in “something natural.” That belief system is not only the foundation of his career, but of his self-limited life itself. It is, in a very real sense, his religion.
As far as the whole “Jesus walked on the water” issue goes, my own belief is: “I don’t know. I wasn’t there. I can’t seem to find the weather report from that day online. And there’s no video tape that I’m aware of. Just some eye witnesses, with all that implies.”
I’m also aware of another theory that holds that the Star of Bethlehem was a supernova that just happened to show up in the sky at Christ’s birth. Arthur C. Clarke used this to good effect in his short story “The Star.” T.S. Eliot used it earlier in “The Journey of the Magi.” In a much less distinguished manner, I’ve even used it myself in Sunday Meditation: The Star @ AMERICAN DIGEST where I noted, in passing,
In time stronger sciences would rise upon the structures of the proto-sciences of astrology and alchemy. These sciences would push the first sciences into the realm of myth, speculation, and popular fantasy. The new sciences, you see, were much, much more about Reality. They would never be tossed aside in their time as so many playthings of mankind’s youth. The authority of astronomy, biology, physics, chemistry and others was certain. Unlike astrology and alchemy, they would never be questioned. We had the evidence. There was no doubt. They were as eternal and as fixed in the truth as… well, as astrology was in 5 B.C.
All of which gets us back to pretty much where we are today where Christ is revealed to have been, at the very least, pretty good at ice-skating. And, with a supernova at birth and a frozen lake near the end, you would have to say, even as a secular scientist, that Jesus had a great sense of timing as well as a way with words.
Nof seems to have a sense of timing and a way with words as well. I’m sure there are nods of approval and various other high fives pinging into his email today from other true believers world-wide. After all, it seems that the only thing that makes a bigger splash in Science these days than a cure for cancer is some bit of “cutting-edge research” (almost always with the aid of computer modeling) that either warms the globe or disparages religion.
Why? Because it is a central tenet of faith, of pure faith, in the Secular Religion, that traditional Christianity is the “Anti-Darwin” to that faith. Strange when you consider that, in terms of actual dogma and actual acts, Islam is far more hostile to all the core tenets of science, but — as I noted above — it really isn’t very safe to take too close a look at that collection of ergot-derived insights out of the desert. Those adherents are a bit more lethal when it comes to accepting slights on their religion. But then Christianity is the dominant religion of the First World and that’s what we’re discussing here — not which faith is right, but which faith is to be master. It seems that for Science to triumph as the new religion, Christ has to die again — and this time he’s got to stay dead.
There are fundamentalist Christians who hold that everything in the Bible is as the Bible says it is. And there are fundamentalist Scientists, like Nof, who hold that nothing in the Bible is as it says it is.
My very small puppy in this fight says that there is a lot in Science that lets all of us live longer and better lives while there is a lot in Christianity that lets us live deeper and more meaningful lives.
I don’t look to Christianity to bring me the weather reports for tomorrow. At the same time I don’t look to Science to ever, in its widest dreams, reveal the core of the miracle and mystery of being a conscious entity who has been granted the gift of being able, in my better moments, to witness — even for an inch of time — the wonder of Creation.
I know that there are many zealots of the Secular Faith who will think the less of me for not being “tough minded” enough just to face up to the fact that everything really is “purposeless matter hovering in the dark.” I know that habit of mind well. I wore it like a pre-fab Medal of Honor for many years. Then one day I had had enough of Nothingness and I sent it back.
I guess you could say that being a Secular Atheist started to feel like trying to walk on thin ice.
Mooslims Have No Intention of Assimilating into Any Culture – Their Goal is to Destroy Every Culture Except Theirs
It’s just Muslims being Muslims, otherwise known as the 21st Century ‘Green’ Plague, an epidemic that will eventually cause the deaths of millions of Christians and other non-Muslims.
There is a simple cure: Mass deportations and total bans on Muslim immigration. Unfortunately, those who can, won’t. And those who would, can’t. Don’t be smug, America, Australia, and Canada, we are not immune. The terminal disease known as Islam is already here…coming soon to a city near you.
From Bare Naked Islam: http://www.barenakedislam.com/
At least no legitimate church would ordain as ministers militant freaks like Kittredge Cherry of Metropolitan Community Churches, who blasphemously prays to her warped notion of an “Erotic Christ” — at least, not unless you count Episcopalians:
A day after a legislative body of the Episcopal Church voted to sell the denomination’s New York headquarters amid budget cuts and declining membership, church leaders on Saturday adopted legislation to give transgenders the right to become lay and ordained ministers. …
Leaders of the church are also scheduled to vote on a liturgy for same-sex weddings during the convention, which concludes on Thursday.
As a consequence of ramming liberal degeneracy down the congregration’s throat:
The bishops’ move overlooks the fact that 200,000 members and 300 parishes have left the denomination in the past few years partly due to the church’s leftist policies on social and political issues. Nine years ago, the church approved its first openly gay bishop. …
In recent years, the membership of the Episcopal Church, which is rooted in the Church of England, has declined to below two million, and the average Sunday attendance is as low as 657,831.
Their progress has been impressive — assuming the objective is to destroy the church from within. But attendance still tops CNN viewership. Maybe they should ordain Anderson Poopchuter as a minister.
(Highlights by ZTW)
Athiest hedonism: Their poster campaign on London buses in 2009 was supported by Richard Dawkins (right). Its fatuous slogan gets to the heart of why people have turned away from biblical religion — not because it is irrational but because it puts constraints on their behaviour
To judge from what we are reading and hearing almost every day at the moment, it would seem Britain is in the throes of a war of religion. A war, that is, between religion and atheism. Professor Richard Dawkins, the Savanarola of atheism, regularly hurls his thunderbolts at believers. Christianity, says the church, is under siege. Christians are being prevented from wearing the crucifix at work, being barred from adoption panels. Even Delia Smith has now brought her rolling pin to the fight to defend the faith.
At the heart of this great argument lies the assumption on the part of the anti-religion camp that this is a battle between reason and obscurantism, between rationality on the one hand and knuckle-dragging ignorance and prejudice on the other. And of course, that anti-religion camp is on the side of reason, and thus of intelligence, science, progress and freedom; whereas religious believers would undo the Enlightenment and take us all back to the dark ages of credulity, superstition and the shackling of the mind.
This assumption is based on a further given: that in the West this is the age of reason. And we think this, in large measure, because we have put religion, or faith, in a box labelled in very large letters, “Un-reason”. Faith and reason, religion and science are supposedly inimical to each other. There is no overlap. They knock each other out.
So it follows that people who are intelligent can have no religious faith; those who are religious are either imbeciles or insane. Not only that, religious people are narrow, dogmatic, intolerant and unpleasant. Those with no religious faith are broad-minded, open, liberal and thoroughly splendid people whom you’d be delighted to meet at a dinner party. Little casts a chill over a fashionable table more than the disclosure that a guest believes in God.
I have a rather different take on this great division of our age. My view is that while we may be in a post-biblical — and post-moral — age, we have not disposed of belief. Far from it. We have just changed what we believe in. Our society may have junked the Judaeo-Christian foundations of the West for secularism. But this has given rise to a set of other religions. Secular religions. Anti-religion religions.
These are also based on a set of dogmas. They proselytise. They involve faith. But unlike the Judaeo-Christian thinking they usurp, these secular anti-religions suspend truth and reason. What’s more, I would say that it was the Judaic foundations of the West which, far from denying reason, gave the world both reason and science in the first place.
God has been pronounced dead, and in his place have come man-made ideologies — in which people worship not a divine presence but an idea.
These ideas, which brook no dissent, give rise inescapably to intolerance and indeed to tyranny. Indeed, they are far more tyrannical in their effect than the God of the Hebrew Bible who gets such a bad press for being so authoritarian. In fact, he has a truly terrible time getting his way. His people are always complaining, refusing to do what he tells them, blaming him for everything and always, always arguing with him. But ideologies which represent the will of man bend everything to the governing idea, which cannot be gainsaid. There can be no argument with them.
Rather than being rational, I suggest these are irrational; not tolerant at all, but deeply illiberal; not open to other ideas, but as dogmatic as any medieval pope. Indeed, these atheistic ideologies are reminiscent not just of religion but of medieval persecutions, witch-hunts and inquisitions.
Read the rest at Standpoint Magazine: http://www.standpointmag.co.uk/node/4411/full
Found at American Power Blog: http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/
islam Growing in America – Christianity Declining – Of Course mooslim Takeover Can’t Happen Here…That’s What Europe Said
EUROPE HERE WE COME
American Muslims grew in number over the past decade, outnumbering Jews for the first time in most of the Midwest and part of the South, while most mainline churches lost adherents, according to a census of American religions released on Tuesday.
Some 158 million Americans were classified as “unclaimed” by any religion in the survey.
Among major religions, the census found the number of Catholics, the largest single faith, declined 5 percent to 58.9 million during the decade.
“Catholics had the largest numeric decline,” including big losses in Maine where a priest abuse scandal came to light, Jones said. In the New England region, Catholic funerals are outnumbering baptisms, he added.
Among the other largest U.S. faiths, adherents to the Southern Baptist Convention held steady at 19.9 million over the decade, the United Methodist Church lost 4 percent to 9.9 million adherents, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America lost 18 percent to 4.2 million, and the Episcopal Church lost 15 percent of its adherents to 1.95 million.
But of course it can’t happen here. But then that’s what Europe said.
From Sultan Knish:http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/
Via Washington Examiner:
In a homily delivered Saturday, Bishop Daniel R. Jenky of the Diocese of Peoria, Illinois challenged President Obama’s HHS mandate, suggesting that the president was following the same path as Hitler and Stalin.
“Hitler and Stalin, at their better moments, would just barely tolerate some churches remaining open, but would not tolerate any competition with the state in education, social services, and health care,” Jenky said. “In clear violation of our First Amendment rights, Barack Obama – with his radical, pro abortion and extreme secularist agenda, now seems intent on following a similar path.” Jenky added.
Another refreshingly non-PC statement made in the same sermon, Bishop Jenky noted how the Church survived “wave after wave of Jihads.”
“For 2,000 years the enemies of Christ have certainly tried their best. But think about it. The Church survived and even flourished during centuries of terrible persecution, during the days of the Roman Empire.
The Church survived barbarian invasions. The Church survived wave after wave of Jihads. The Church survived the age of revolution. The Church survived Nazism and Communism.”
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
Please read, sign and forward. The endless aggression, misogyny and brutality of Islamic supremacists goes unchallenged by the forces of good in the free world. And why? Because their religion dictates it, sanctions it, commands it, and that somehow makes it sacrosanct? How obscene.
Almost three-quarters of women from Pakistan’s Hindu communities have faced sexual harassment while nearly half, complained of religious discrimination at workplaces, educational institutions and neighbourhoods. A report, prepared by the National Commission for Justice and Peace (Pakistan), states that about 74 per cent of the Hindu women faced sexual harassment.
Pakistan was created as an Islamic nation in 1947, and religious minorities are treated as second class citizens under the country’s Islamic laws. Over the years, hundreds of thousands of Hindus have been converted to Islam, and many more have been forced to flee the country. In 1971 alone, the Pakistani Army was blamed for the genocide of over one million of Hindus in erstwhile East Pakistan (present day Bangladesh).
Pakistan Hindu Post requests YOUR support in urging Pakistan, to urgently act to prevent further discrimination and victimization of the Hindu community, especially Hindu women. The slow and steady dissolution of the Hindu minority has to stop.
Please sign this petition and pledge support of YOUR organization and its members, to this petition that is addressed to Honorable Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State, US Dept. of State
Ambassador Sherry Rehman, Embassy of Pakistan, Washington D.C
Judith E. Golub, Director of Government Relations, USCIRF
Ambassador Suzan D Johnson-Cook, Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom, U.S. Department of State; Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor
By Doug Bandow
Open Doors has released its World Watch List of the 50 worst persecutors of Christians worldwide.
Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty, said Thomas Jefferson, and that includes religious freedom. Religious persecution is tragically common abroad.
While members of all faiths are sometimes at risk somewhere, Christians are constantly victimized almost everywhere. And in many of these cases the threat is violence, imprisonment, and even death. Martyrdom apparently is more common today than during Roman times.
The California-based group Open Doors has released its latest World Watch List of the 50 worst persecutors of Christians around the globe. A Baker’s Dozen are communist or former communist states, led by North Korea. An incredible 38 are Muslim, including several of Washington’s allies. (Seven are both communist/former communist and Islamic, truly a toxic combination.) The other six are a potpourri — Hindu India, Buddhist Burma and Bhutan, conflict-ridden Colombia, and Eritrea and Ethiopia, which are both repressive and religiously divided.
Topping the World Watch List is the so-called Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, which leads any parade of the world’s repressive, impoverished, or just plain awful places. Explains Open Doors: “Defiantly Communist in the Stalinist style, a bizarre quasi-religion was built around the founder of the country, Kim Il Sung. Anyone with ‘another god’ is automatically persecuted, which is why the 200,000-400,000 Christians in this country must remain deeply underground.” At least a quarter of them may be confined to labor camps.
Number two is Afghanistan, where Americans and Europeans continue to die trying to create a Western-style liberal democracy. The status of Christians continues to decline. Reports Open Doors: “Despite having signed all international agreements designed to protect the freedom of religion, the government in the current setting is not even able to guarantee the most basic tenants of this right.” To the contrary, mobs cheerfully murder Americans and other non-Muslims when copies of the Koran are accidentally burned.
Another “friend” of Washington, Saudi Arabia, is number three. “Religious freedom does not exist in this heartland of Islam where citizens are only allowed to adhere to one religion,” notes Open Doors: “Apostasy — conversion to another religion — is punishable by death if the accused does not recant.” Of course, the Saudi royals live licentiously when abroad while posing as defenders of Islam at home.
Fourth is Somalia, another Muslim land. This area no longer constitutes a traditional nation. Alas, says Open Doors, “The overall persecution situation in Somalia tightened a bit more in the country. The main persecution engine is Islamic extremism.”
Iran, most in the news over fears that it might be developing nuclear weapons, ranks number five. “Religious persecution of certain minorities has intensified in Iran since 2005,” concludes Open Doors, including of Baha’is, Sufi Muslims, and Christians. Indeed, the group adds, “almost all Christian activity is illegal, especially when it occurs in Persian languages.” The regime has publicly denounced the expansion of Christianity, which it blamed on “the enemies of Islam.”
The Maldives comes next at six, a small island nation which simply bans other faiths. States Open Doors: “As every Maldivian citizen has to be Muslim, all deviant religious convictions are strictly forbidden.” Believers must “practice their faith in utmost secrecy, always in fear of being discovered.”
Number seven is Uzbekistan, where “All activities of unregistered churches are strictly forbidden, both inside and outside the churches. Youth activities are forbidden, outreaches are forbidden, seminars and training are forbidden.” Uzbekistan is a Muslim state that spent seven decades under Communism, a tragic mix almost guaranteeing religious persecution.
Also in the news is Yemen, which falls to eight on the World Watch List. Reports Open Doors: “Islam is the state religion and sharia is the source of all legislation. There is some religious freedom for foreigners, but evangelism is prohibited; several expatriate workers were deported in the past for Christian activities. Yemenis who leave Islam may face the death penalty as a result.”
Persecutor number nine is Iraq, a nation nominally liberated with American blood. Unfortunately, the U.S. invasion unleashed civil chaos and conflict which may have consumed 200,000 lives. The Christian community ended up as collateral damage. Explains Open Doors: “A true exodus of Christians is going on in Iraq. Christians are fleeing the country.” And for good reason: “Christian individuals are still being threatened, robbed, raped, or kidnapped and churches attacked.” Moreover, the situation is deteriorating even in Kurdistan, which until recently had been relatively safe for Christians.
Another not-so-loyal ally, Pakistan, rounds out the negative top ten. “Christians are a beleaguered minority… caught between Islamic militant organizations that routinely target Christians for violence, and an Islamizing culture that makes Christians feel less and less a part of Pakistan,” says Open Doors.
Read the rest at The American Spectator at: http://spectator.org/archives/2012/03/23/on-the-watch-for-religious-per
Found at Ship of Fools.com
Folks… This is The Abominable State of Affairs in Our Nation – WAKE UP! Blatant Religious Discrimination Against Christianity But Appeasement of Islam.
REJECTED! What the NY Times WON’T Run: Counter-Jihad Facts
What the NY Times Will Run: Anti-Catholic Smear Ads
Did you see the virulently anti-Catholic ad that ran in the New York Times last week? That ad inspired AFDI/SIOA, in cooperation with SION (Stop Islamization of Nations), to create the same ad but for one thing: different religion. The craven quislings at the New York Times rejected our ad.
Art executed by the inimitable Big Fur Hat
Bob Christie, Senior Vice President of Corporate Communications for the New York Times, just called me to advise me that they would be accepting my ad, but considering the situation on the ground in Afghanistan, now would not be a good time, as they did not want to enflame an already hot situation. They will be reconsidering it for publication in “a few months.”
So I said to Mr. Christie, “Isn’t this the very point of the ad? If you feared the Catholics were going to attack the New York Times building, would you have run that ad?”
Mr. Christie said, “I’m not here to discuss the anti-Catholic ad.”
I said, “But I am, it’s the exact same ad.”
He said, “No, it’s not.”
I said, “I can’t believe you’re bowing to this Islamic barbarity and thuggery. I can’t believe this is the narrative. You’re not accepting my ad. You’re rejecting my ad. You can’t even say it.”
We used the same language as the anti-Catholic ad. The only difference is, ours was true and what we describe is true. The anti-Catholic ad was written by fallacious feminazis.
It is most disingenous for the New York Times to refuse to run our counter-jihad ad based on their “concern for US troops in Afghanistan.” Liars. Who has done more to jeopardize our troops and American citizens than the pro-jihadist New York Times? They are notorious for their treasonous reportage.
The New York Times leaked FISA and admitted that they released this information knowing that it would damage national security. Porter Goss told the Senate at that time that the New York Times leaks had damaged our intelligence gathering capability, and in so doing, our national security.
The NY Times exposed a “highly classified Pentagon order” authorizing Special Operations forces to hunt al-Qaida leaders in mountains of Pakistan. The New York Times exposed SWIFT (which put military and civilians at great risk of jihad). SWIFT was a legal secret program that gave the government access to a massive database of international financial transactions, using “broad subpoenas to collect the financial records from an international system.”
“President Bush is concerned that once again The New York Times has chosen to expose a classified program that is working to protect our citizens.” (here)
But they have no reservation submitting to the bloody demands of sharia. This is surrender to savagery.
UPDATE: Here is the follow-up letter from Christie of The New York Times:
TEXT of ads below:
Posted by Gatordoug
People in Great Britain are now forced to fight for a very basic right. The right to wear a cross
Imagine how awful it will be for any Christians who fail to escape the rotting remnants of Britain after Muslims have achieved the majority if it’s this bad already:
Britain’s Conservative [sic]-led government plans to argue in a European Court of Human Rights case that employers are entitled to ban the visible wearing of crosses at work because displaying the symbol is not a recognized “requirement” of the Christian faith. …
At the center of the applicants’ case is Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which states, “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.”
Moonbattery also has the story of the origin of this fight
The issue has been brought to a head in part by Nadia Eweida:
Eweida, a Coptic Christian and British Airways staffer at Heathrow Airport, was told in 2006 to remove or cover up a small cross she wears around her neck. She refused and was sent home on unpaid leave. Eweida noted that colleagues of other religions, including Muslims and Sikhs, were allowed to wear religious items such as hijabs, turbans and religious bracelets.
So, how long? How long until this fight comes to America? Folks it is a fight that Christians, or anyone that respects basic human rights does not want. But, we have little choice, we must fight this. And even if you are a non-believer, or of a different faith, do not think this fight foes not hold dire implications for you.
THanks Gator Doug at: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/