[anti]NorthBear
Member
+0|6880|Malmoe, Sweden
I know you know I know what you mean...

I live in Sweden and we are christians. I was born into it, and so are all sweeds if the are pasive...
But I don´t consider my self as a christian, I don´t belive in God and Jesus etc...

It´s the same thing with Islam and the muslims, it´s the fanatic few who are burning flags...
J0hn.F.Kenedy
Member
+-1|6974|Longueuil
There is a War that as been during since they wrote the Coran between christian and muslam so about 2000 years and it gotta be ended....
kilroy0097
Kilroy Is Here!
+81|7061|Bryan/College Station, TX
Trolls can move along and not even bother reading.

Gotten from a friend's LJ I thought it was insightful enough and well documented. I had to repeat it here to add to this topic for those intelligent readers who might want to continue debating or talking about the issue. Obviously I agree with his tone and his point in which the Muslim culture is very much hypocratic and very much a violence prone culture. For a religion who's spirit is much more than what these mutated Muslims think it is. The same can be said about many religions, even Christianity, which has mutated to some odd creation of man which does not follow the original teachings of the religion.

Start Blog:

A true Muslim moderate is one who protests desecrations of all faiths. Those who don't are not moderates but hypocrites, opportunists and agents for the rioters, using merely different means to advance the same goal: to impose upon the West, with its traditions of freedom of speech, a set of taboos that is exclusive to the Islamic faith. These are not defenders of religion, but Muslim supremacists trying to force their dictates upon the liberal West.

And these "moderates'' are aided and abetted by Western "moderates" who publish pictures of the Virgin Mary covered with elephant dung, and celebrate the "Piss Christ'' (a crucifix sitting in a jar of urine) as art deserving public subsidy, but are seized with a sudden religious sensitivity when the subject is Muhammad.
This is an excerpt from an article by Charles Krauthammer entitled
God Save Us From the Voices of Reason.

He brings up an interesting point in that there is a level of hypocrisy from the Islamic side in their tacit approval of the denigration of Judaism and Christianity (examples might be the Syrian TV show that featured a Rabbi killing a gentile boy to use his blood in the passover matzo balls, or the Dhimmi policies of conquered Christian regions of the Middle East and Europe that still exist in many places in the Islamic world).  Why is it not even worthy of mention that those are outrages, yet these cartoons are (even if the "moderate" voices decry the violence from the marches?  Which of course brings up an interesting point...that the cartoons were published in September yet there was little outcry until late January/early February pales next to the facts that a major Egyptian newspaper published the cartoons in October of 2005 (during Ramadan), and that the three most provacative cartoons are not in fact part of the set (in fact one is not even a cartoon but a photo of a french man at a pig calling competition wearing a stocking on his head and a fake pig snout.

BTW, in case you have not seen them...they are at http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004413.htm at full size and here as well. https://michellemalkin.com/archives/images/facesgallery.jpg


Now for the hypocrisy of the Western Moderates (say CNN, or the NYT, or Fox News) all of whom have chosen not to show these cartoons because they might offend (never thinking that not showing might offend as well).  The hypocrisy in my view there is that they preach that they should be able to say anything and offend anyone but that in this case they get to choose that you, their consumer, do not have the good judgement to know that these cartoons are too offensive to show.  The side effect of this is that one might think that these cartoons are truly so heinous that the attacks and protests are justified.  After all they are too provacative for the NYT to publish so they must be pretty darn nasty.  Now, thanx to the joys of the New Media, you get to make up your mind yourself as opposed to having the NYT editorial board, or the CNN producers, or the Fox Nes producers do it for you.


So, I guess my question is this...is it hypocritical for the US Media to not publish these cartoons out of deference to the Islamc religion when they will publish articles such as The 52 Funniest Things About the Upcoming Death Of the Pope  (that featured such pithy notes as 47. Upon death, Pope's face frozen in sickening smile, eyes wide open  and teeth exposed, like a baboon. or 27. We'll never get to hear his hilarious post-tracheotomy rendition  of "Come on Eileen." or 23. Doctors examining the body discover that the Pope was not only a woman,  but also Hitler. or 9. Bush on the tragic event: "Our thoughts and prayers go out to this great man and all of his many children." or 8. Bush continued: "He touched all of us in places no one else could reach.")

End Blog.
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." - Sinclair Lewis

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard