Posts Tagged “Islam”

1099 Siege of JerusalemIt’s been a disappointing week for former House speaker Newt Gingrich. He’d presumed himself to be Donald “it’s my own orange hair!” Trump’s choice as running mate, but alas, it was not to be. That “honor” fell to Indiana’s evangelical-in-chief Mike Pence. In the wake of the recent attack in Nice, France (WebCite cached article), the Newtster decided to lash out, just when it became apparent the Trumpster had rejected him. His targets were, as one might suspect, Muslims in the US. As US News & World Report explains, Newtie demanded that Muslims in the US who like “shari’a law” be deported forthwith (cached):

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is responding to Thursday night’s truck attack in France by arguing for the expulsion from the U.S. of any Muslim who believes in Sharia law.

Gingrich is being considered as a possible running mate by presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.

The former Georgia congressman said on Fox News Channel’s “Hannity” that the U.S. “should frankly test every person here who is of a Muslim background, and if they believe in Sharia, they should be deported. Sharia is incompatible with Western civilization.”

What’s more, he blamed this attack on none other than President Barack Obama:

Gingrich is calling the attack in Nice, France, which killed at least 80 people, “the fault of Western elites who lack the guts to do what is right, to do what is necessary, and to tell us the truth, and that starts with Barack Obama.”

Yes, Newtie. It’s certainly the case that Obama metaphorically put a gun to a sociopathic French Muslim’s head and forced the guy to go on a truck rampage through a Bastille Day crowd. Absolutely! Why, it can’t possibly have worked any other way!

I’m curious as to how the Newtster plans to carry out his “test” of American Muslims’ reverence for “shari’a law.” Imagine a scenario in which a Muslim who actually supports “shari’a law” — but who wants to stay so that he can work with the Muslim Brotherhood and President Obama to make sure it’s enforced here — would deal with it:

ICE agent: Mr Muslim, do you believe in “shari’a law”?

Shari’a-loving Muslim: (lying) No!

ICE agent: Oh, well, OK Mr Muslim, you can stay!

Shari’a-loving Muslim: Wow! Thanks, Mr ICE Agent! (goes back to plotting a takeover of the US)

I mean, seriously … what the fuck? I won’t even go into how Newtie-boy thinks the government is supposed to determine which immigrants comes from “a Muslim background.” As I’ve noted many times before, Neocrusaders like Newtie haven’t the first clue what “shari’a law” is, in the first place. As it turns out, it’s not a single iconic entity; it means different things to different Muslims, and is interpreted variously. Also, not all Muslims even want it; many who’ve come to the US have done so because they’re avoiding it!

It’s true there are murderous, savage Muslims in the world. There’s no doubt of it! It’s also true that some of them are right here in the US and have carried out horrific attacks in the name of their fierce religiofascism. But with that said, a proper response to one form of religiofascism is not to be religiofascist right back at it! Meeting sanctimonious rage with more sanctimonious rage, doesn’t cure the sanctimonious rage. A lot of the American Muslims whom the Newtster would like to deport, aren’t our enemies — and might even be our allies. All it takes is to spend some time figuring out what they’re all about, in order to know the difference. Castigating them all in one swoop, based on the bogeyman of “shari’a law,” isn’t going to cut it. It’s time for Newtie and his fellow Neocrusaders to fucking grow the hell up for once and stop acting like spoiled children. Their juvenile act is getting really old.

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments No Comments »

Gustave Doré / Crusades / Crusade against the Moors of Granada / via Wikimedia CommonsIronically, on the heels of the bakery massacre in Dakha, Bangladesh, I offer two more examples of a movement I call the Great Neocrusade … a campaign by militant American Christianists against Islam and Muslims here in the ‘States. Ever since the Paris and San Bernardino attacks, this movement has gone from being more or less rhetorical, and has manifested physically in the form of retribution against Muslims (as well as non-Muslims erroneously thought to be Muslims).

The first item I have is from Buzzfeed News, which reports on an attack in front of a Brooklyn mosque (WebCite cached article):

Two teenage Muslims boys were viciously beaten outside a Brooklyn mosque early Sunday morning as their attacker called them terrorists, according to Mohamed Bahe, the director of the mosque.

The incident allegedly happened around 1:18 a.m. at the Muslim Community Center of Brooklyn in Sunset Park, after lengthy evening prayers common during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.

Police initially said they had no record of the incident, however photos provided to BuzzFeed News showed multiple officers and police vehicles at the scene.

The NYPD denies this was a “bias” incident, however, they already lied to Buzzfeed about having been called to the scene and had to be confronted with contrary evidence before admitting otherwise … so their claims can hardly be taken at face value.

In the next item, WKYC-TV in Cleveland reports a foreigner had been falsely arrested as a terrorist in Avon, OH (cached):

The City of Avon and the Avon Police Department issued a statement of apology to a hotel patron the Avon Police Department arrested last week after a miscommunication over ties to ISIS.…

On Wednesday, June 29, the Avon Police Department received a 911 call from the sister of a woman who was working as a desk clerk at the Fairfield Inn and Suites on Colorado Avenue.

The caller reported her sister told her there was a male in the lobby “in full head dress with multiple disposable phones pledging his allegiance to ISIS.”

Avon Police then received a second 911 call from the desk clerk’s father who also requested assistance on behalf of his daughter.…

Officers, with guns drawn, ordered the man to drop his phone and get on the ground. After the man didn’t initially respond to the commands of the officers, police continued to give commands until the man complied and laid down.

Officers arrested the man, conducted a search, and did not find any weapons.

Contact was then made with the front desk clerk and responding officers found the man never made any statements related to ISIS, and there had been a miscommunication about the situation between the desk clerk and her relatives.

So, two liars called 911 to report a Muslim “pledging his allegiance to ISIS” and cops stupidly fall for it. Nice.

Look, as I’ve blogged so many times before: I get it. Really. I do. Honest! I understand the sanctimonious furor here. I get that Muslims around the world, and even here in the ‘States, have lanched terror attacks. I also really get that the Islamists who launch these attacks are enraged religionists who can’t and won’t tolerate anything that doesn’t jibe with their own beliefs, hence their terrorism. Yes, I get all that. Really!

What I don’t understand is the assumption that each and every Muslim in the world must be a terrorist, too, and that all Muslims are required to kill as many “infidels” as they can. The number of Islamist terrorists in the world is actually very small. If all Muslims everywhere were terrorists, then terror attacks would be going on in pretty much every city in the world, each and every day. With over 3 million Muslims in the US, the carnage would have to be truly staggering. There’d have to be dozens of Islamist terror attacks, and hundreds of deaths, each day in American alone.

Seems to me the way to deal with one bunch of violently-intolerant religiofascists isn’t to be violently intolerant right back at them. But hey, what could this cynical, cold-hearted, godless agnostic heathen possibly know about such things?

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments No Comments »

'Islam violent?! How dare you!!!' / Jack Higgins, Chicago Sun-Times / via CAIR ChicagoOnce again, the world has been treated to an example of the sanctimonious piety of the so-called “religion of peace.” This time, Islamist militants stomped into a bakery in an upscale neighborhood of Dakha, Bangladesh’s capitol, and as CNN reports, a bunch of innocent people are now dead (WebCite cached article):

Bangladeshi troops stormed an upscale bakery in Dhaka’s diplomatic enclave Saturday morning, ending an 11-hour siege by militants who killed 20 people and two police officers, officials said.

It was the deadliest and boldest act of terror in a country that has become increasingly numb to ever-escalating violence by Islamist militants.

The victims — most of them foreigners — were among roughly three dozen people taken hostage when attackers stormed the Holey Artisan Bakery on Friday evening with guns, explosives and other, sharp weapons Friday evening, authorities said.

CNN goes on to explain that this is the most savage and audacious of a number of Islamist attacks in Bangladesh in the last year or two. Several of these were very public events, too. I’ve even blogged about some of them. Among the reasons the militants have been able to organize as well as they have, is that Bangladeshi officials have been doing the dance of triangulation … i.e. trying to appease them in the hope that they’ll stop, but at the same time going after them just enough to be able to say they’re going after them. That a lot of officials have more or less openly said they don’t blame the militants for what they’ve done, hasn’t helped.

CNN also explains that, while ISIS/ISIL/IS/Daesh/whatever-the-fuck-you-want-to-call-that-barbaric-brood has accepted responsibility for this attack, it’s thought another group — al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent (aka IQIS) — carried out this attack.

Note, too, this attack comes on the heels of the attack a couple days ago on the Ataturk airport in Istanbul, Turkey. As Maajid Nawaz explains in the Daily Beast, this has been a particularly savage Ramadan, and that’s been ISIS’s plan (cached). They’ve called for a worldwide “month of jihad,” it seems.

Sadly, many Christianists will react to all of this with a rather vile kind of sanctimonious glee. They’ll think — and maybe even say out loud — something like, “You see? Islam is an inherently-violent religion! This proves it! We Christians aren’t like that, we’re peace-loving!” It’s true that savagery of this sort is, at the moment, more or less a product of Islamism. But with that said, Christians need to accept their religion isn’t immune to this sort of thing, either. There really is such a thing as Christian terrorism, even if there’s a strong tendency not to admit it. And the way to deal with the raging intolerance of Islamist militants is not to be fiercely intolerant right back at them. OK?

Photo credit: Jack Higgins/Chicago Sun-Times, via CAIR Chicago.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments No Comments »

Rainbow FlagThis is the eighth in a series of posts I plan about the recent Orlando gay-nightclub shooting, by an American Muslim who appears to have been influenced by ISIS and other violent Islamists. By now my readers will surely know a great deal about this horrific event. The topic of this post is:

Christianists Keep Showing Their True Hateful Colors

I’m not at all surprised I have to revisit one of the topics I already covered, regarding the Pulse nightclub massacre. Sadly, Christianists are all too predictable. It’s not enough that a few sanctimoniously-enraged homophobic hatemongering preachers actually praised the killing of dozens of gays and the wounding of dozens more. No, I knew more would support them. KDFW-TV in Dallas, TX reports on one more pious Christian doing so (locally-cached article):

Leaders of several U.S. churches are praising the actions of a terrorist who killed 49 people at a gay night club in Orlando.

Millions have expressed their shock and sadness since the June 12th attack, but some pastors say they wish the loss of life had been greater.…

While some are speaking out against, what they call, hate speech, Fort Worth Pastor Donnie Romero says he stands with [Pastor Roger] Jimenez [of Verity Baptist Church in Sacramento CA], posting a video of his own on Thursday.

“These 50 Sodomites were all perverts and pedophiles and they are the scum of the earth and the earth is a little bit better place now, and I’ll even take it a little further I heard on the news today that there are still several dozen of these q****s in ICU and I will pray that God will finish the job that that man started,” he said in the video.

Romero did not back down from his comments when Fox 4 asked him if he really believed the world is better off without those people.

“Absolutely I do,” said Romero “The Bible teaches they are predators, and I believe that every Sodomite is a pedophile and is a predator.”

Yes, folks, this creature wants the 53 wounded during the massacre to finish dying for him and for his Jesus. KDFW includes the requisite condemnations of Romero’s vile spew, but unsurprisingly, nothing has been done to Romero about his comments. He hasn’t been confronted, disciplined, punished or corrected by any of his fellow Christians. At least, I haven’t found any news stories saying it’s happened.

Really, that’s the problem here. Lots of Christians are quick to condemn words like these, but they’re not quick to directly confront or punish those who say them. All of these guys still have their pulpits and have been left untouched.

Christians never really do much of anything to other Christians, even when they’ve crossed the line of propriety. They either can’t or won’t summon the courage to deal with extremists in their midst.

At some point, any Christians who claim to object to such language — spewed in the name of their religion by credentialed clergy — are going to have to get off their asses and actually do something about them. Until I see them having done so, call me unconvinced they truly object to any of this.

Photo credit: Richard Datchler, via Flickr.

Hat tip: Friendly Atheist, Dispatches from the Culture Wars, Raw Story & many others.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments No Comments »

'Wishing a Blessed Ramadan to our Muslim neighbors' sign / via Spring Grove Area (PA) school board member Matthew Jansen, via TwitterAmerica’s Christianists are having a bad time of it recently. They no longer can handle the existence of those insolent Muslim types in the midst of their precious Christian nation. The Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando FL just over a week ago was the last straw, it appears, and they’re not taking any more shit from any more Muslims. Oh, and they’re not going to stand for any good Christians wishing them well, either. As the York (PA) Dispatch explains, at least one vocal Christianist — and public official — in Pennsylvania is upset over a “blessed Ramadan” sign put up by a church there (WebCite cached article):

[The Rev. Christopher] Rodkey, pastor of St. Paul’s United Church of Christ in Dallastown, earlier this month changed the sign in front of the 205 W. Main St. house of worship, as he does regularly.

This particular time, however, he changed it to read, “Wishing a blessed Ramadan to our Muslim neighbors,” a nod to the monthlong Islamic holiday that began June 6.

On Saturday, June 11, a message was left on his cellphone by a man saying he was “shocked” by the “despicable,” “unbelievable” sign and that Islam is a “godless,” “pagan” religion.

“Are you sick? Is there something wrong with you?” the man asked after promising to share a photo of the sign on Facebook and Twitter “so everybody can see this, what you’ve done.”

Although he didn’t leave his name with the message, that man was Matthew Jansen, a Spring Grove school board member and an elected delegate to next month’s Republican National Convention in Cleveland, where he intends to vote for Donald Trump.

The Dispatch spoke with Jansen and obligingly regurgitated this Christofascist’s Neocrusade talking-points:

[Jansen] acknowledged he was irate when he called the cellphone, and the reason he left the message was the “greater issue of Islam.”

“The very next day after I left this message, 49 Americans were murdered by somebody who claims to be an Islamist,” he said, referencing the Orlando nightclub shootings committed by an American Muslim.

“It’s not a religion. It’s not a cult. It’s a system” designed to promote “global Sharia,” he said of the faith.

“Sharia law is inconsistent with the values and philosophies of western cultures,” Jansen said, adding he saw the sign in front of St. Paul’s as a blessing to a “pagan” religion.

“I think (St. Paul’s and Rodkey) deserve some pushback,” he said.

Jansen, who said he’s Protestant, said he doesn’t have a problem with any other religions. “This wasn’t any kind of a discriminatory thing,” he said.

Note the putative arguments here, which — as I’ve noted here on this blog — the Religious Right has been reeling off for years:

  1. “Islam isn’t a religion, it’s a political ideology”: This, of course, is absurd on its face. Some Muslims are politically-oriented, it’s true … but then, so too are a lot of Christians! So pardon me for wondering what the hell the difference is between them? I don’t see one.
  2. Islam equals ‘Shari’a Law'”: Most of the Neocrusaders who fall for this whine don’t even know what shari’a law is. They don’t know that it’s not the same thing as the religion of Islam; that not all Muslims want it; that even those who do, don’t agree on what it is; and they insist it’s about to be imposed on the US, even though the First Amendment explicitly forbids religious law. In short, they’re fucking ignorant and have no clue what they’re talking about. They just use “shari’a” as a snarl word to rationalize raging and fuming about Islam.
  3. “Islam is a pagan religion”: A lot of them base this on some notion that the deity of Islam, known as al-Lah (often spelled “Allah”), is an ancient moon god. The trouble is, aside from the fact that the crescent moon is sometimes used as a symbol in Islam, there’s really no association to speak of between them. It’s true that Islam, as founded by Mohammad, was influenced by the Arabic pagan traditions of his time … but it was also influenced by Judaism and Christianity, and is wholly monotheistic. In fact, it’s even more monotheistic than Christianity, whose central deity is a weird, logic-defying three-in-one and one-in-three figure.

Once again, we see a sanctimoniously furious Christofascist who’s trying to start up a pissing contest over whose religion can be more intolerant than someone else’s. It’s at times like this that I’m proud to be a cynical, skeptical, cold-hearted, godless agnostic heathen who rejected religion (and all other forms of metaphysics) long ago and wants no part of any such conflict.

Oh, and for anyone who might say the aforementioned Orlando massacre somehow justifies Jansen’s putrid rant … please note that he left his message on Rodkey’s phone on June 11, a full day before that horrid event. So don’t go there — just don’t. Oh, and please note: Christians, too, are guilty of terrorism, themselves. Their body count might not be as high, but radical Christianists are every bit as violent and religiofascist as any radical Islamist might be.

Photo credit: Matthew Jansen, via Twitter.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments No Comments »

rainbow flag #usa #carlifornia #sanfrancisco #gaycommunity #rainbow #flag #sfThis is the seventh in a series of posts I plan about the recent Orlando gay-nightclub shooting, by an American Muslim who appears to have been influenced by ISIS and other violent Islamists. By now my readers will surely know a great deal about this horrific event. The topic of this post is:

Making a Game of the Language of Terror

The FBI just released redacted transcripts of the 911 calls the Orlando shooter made during his massacre (WebCite cached article). The redactions have outraged most folks on the Right, such as House Speaker Paul Ryan, as reported by the Daily Beast, among a multitude of other media outlets (cached):

House Speaker Paul Ryan criticized the decision to redact parts of the transcript, likening it to censorship and echoing Donald Trump and other Republicans’ complaint that President Obama would not use the term “radical Islamic terrorism” to describe the attack.

“Selectively editing this transcript is preposterous,” Ryan said. “We know the shooter was a radical Islamist extremist inspired by ISIS. We also know he intentionally targeted the LGBT community. The administration should release the full, unredacted transcript so the public is clear-eyed about who did this, and why.”

It is believed that Mateen pledged allegiance to ISIS in the call, but the specific group was removed from the transcript of his original 911 call.

The Right’s sanctimonious fury hinges mainly on the accusation that the Obama administration is being “politically correct,” avoiding providing any connection between the shooter and his religion, Islam. There’s just one tiny little problem with that: The FBI’s transcript itself directly contradicts that contention! Here’s an excerpt from the FBI (emphasis mine):

In these calls, the shooter, who identified himself as an Islamic soldier, told the crisis negotiator that he was the person who pledged his allegiance to [omitted], and told the negotiator to tell America to stop bombing Syria and Iraq and that is why he was “out here right now.”

Did you catch that? I hope so. The FBI itself — and in its own words — explicitly reported the shooter had said he was “an Islamic soldier.” That’s right, folks. The FBI — supposedly hamstrung by its putative effort never to mention Islam in connection with the Pulse nightclub shooting — actually did so; they did it clearly and unambiguously. There’s no doubt about it … it’s there, in their own words.

Looking over what they released, I’d say the FBI redacted mentions specifically of ISIS/ISIL/IS/Daesh/whatever-the-fuck-you-want-to-call-that-barbaric-brood and its leader, as well as the content of hostage negotiations. It’s pretty easy to see why they’d not want to release the latter; it’d provide people insights into how hostage negotiators work, which they’d obviously prefer weren’t common knowledge. It’s harder to understand the omission of the name of ISIS and its leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. They seem to want to deprive that primitive horde of recruiting material, however, that ship has already sailed — it’s been widely reported already, based on information the FBI and others have already provided, that the Orlando shooter had professed allegiance to them. ISIS can use any or all of those reports in its recruiting propaganda. The FBI redacting it from the transcript deprives them of nothing.

This move is also consistent with the Obama administration’s unwillingness, overall, to lend too much credence to the Islamist terrorists’ claims that they’re fighting for Islam. They’re trying to avoid tarring and feathering the whole religion. In this case, as I noted, they didn’t entirely remove all of that from the transcript. What’s more, it’s kind of foolish to avoid associating these savages with the religion they follow. To say the butchers are “radical Islamists” is most certainly not the same as saying that all Muslims are murderous radicals. It means only that some of them are. To note that some Muslims are radical isn’t even unique to their religion; pretty much all religions have radical extremist elements. Yes, even the “religion of love,” Christianity!

While this policy is misguided and naïve (as I’ve said often), it’s hardly scandalous. It’s a diplomatic approach, and as such, is a matter of judgement … and that’s a subjective thing. So reasonable minds can and will disagree on such matters. Diplomacy isn’t the same thing as “political correctness,” which is what most of the Right thinks is behind this effort.

In the end, what America’s Religious Right is really after, is ammunition they can use against their religion’s chief rival in the world. Unlike the Obama administration, they truly do wish to tar and feather the entire religion of Islam. They use events like the Orlando massacre to imply — or sometimes state outright — that Islam is an inherently barbaric and violent religion, one that requires all of its adherents to slaughter innocents any time they choose. What they ignore is that their own religion, Christianity, also happens to harbor extremists of its own. When this is pointed out to them, they tend to get their panties in bunches and spew laughable protests like, “But those guys aren’t ‘Real’ Christians,” as though there is such a thing as a “‘Real’ Christian.” (To be clear, there isn’t! To think so is to fall for the “no true Scotsman” fallacy.) In other words … if someone does to their religion what they feel compelled to do to Islam, they refuse to stand for it. That they’d use tactics against others that they don’t want used on them, directly contradicts the teachings of the founder of their own religion, who expounded “the Golden Rule”, and unambiguously forbid them ever to be hypocritical.

Photo credit: Hai Yang, via Flickr.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments No Comments »

Rainbow flag on white background - harvey milk plaza, san francisco (2012) (8148105584)This is the sixth in a series of posts I plan about the recent Orlando gay-nightclub shooting, by an American Muslim who appears to have been influenced by ISIS and other violent Islamists. By now my readers will surely know a great deal about this horrific event. The topic of this post is:

Terrorism Isn’t Just an “Islam” Problem

A lot of Americans — especially on the Right — tend to view terrorism, especially when it occurs within the US, as solely the product of Islam. The only terrorists we’ve dealt with, they’d tell you, are Muslims. Thus, as they see it, terrorism an an Islam problem.

This has led to all sorts of idiotic tripe; for instance, Breitbart announced that fierce Religious Rightist Newt Gingrich called for a Congressional inquiry into “Islamic supremacism” (WebCite cached article):

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich called Tuesday for the creation of a congressional commission to examine the radical Islamic terrorist threat.

Gingrich said Tuesday in a Facebook video chat:

We can no more afford to have fanatic terrorists at home just because they’re American citizens, be allowed to run around, get organized and kill people, than we can afford to bring in thousands of unvetted and unverified Syrian refugees. So I believe the president is profoundly, fundamentally wrong. I believe the Congress should create a commission on Islamic supremacism and terrorism in the United States. I think we should start looking at serious new laws.…

Gingrich noted that he welcomes the “modern Muslim” who accepts the authority of “secular law” and the reality of “diversity,” but that adherents of Sharia law should be inadmissible to the United States.

Gingrich’s commission would surely resemble the anti-Muslim show-trials Rep. Peter King hosted a few some 5 years ago. Those never went anywhere, since they were never intended to do anything other than allow King and other Neocrusaders to grandstand. Also note the requisite bellyaching about the bogeyman of “shari’a law” in the Newtster’s Neocrusading comments. Perhaps he imagines this investigation somehow will prove his contention, a few years ago, that “radical Islamists” are “secular atheists” and vice versa. (In case you didn’t realize it, that would be a staggering contradiction: “Secular atheists” are non-religious, while “radical Islamists” are exceedingly religious. It’s literally not possible to be both at the same time.)

I’ve said it before and will say it again: Terrorism — both worldwide and in the US — is most assuredly not just an “Islam” problem. It’s a “religious extremist” problem! And extremism can be found within any religion.

The reality of terrorism in the US is that there have been Christian terror attacks in addition to Islamist attacks — not to mention ordinary, mundane, sociopathic attacks.

Many people refuse to believe there is such a thing as Christian terror, but there is! Among the most recent examples of it is the Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood shooting, just last November (cached). There was also a guy who shot up Austin TX almost a year and a half ago (cached). There’s also a guy who was indicted for conspiring to kill Muslims in upstate New York (cached). Another guy conspired to kill Muslims and the president using some kind of radiation weapon (cached). And another creep tried to bomb the Kansas clinic that Dr George Tiller had worked at (cached).

Ultimately, any given American is much more likely to be attacked by a criminal with no religious motivation at all, or a Rightist with a potentially Christian motivation, than fall prey to a raging Islamist barbarian.

For Christianists like Newtie, or any other Neocrusaders, to scream and holler about how horrible and violence-prone Islam is, without acknowledging the violent militancy of some of their own co-religionists, is hypocritical. And hypocrisy is something that their own Jesus clearly, explicitly, and unambiguously forbid them ever to engage in. They should clean up their own religion before running around trumpeting about the faults of others. But of course, they will never do so.

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments No Comments »