Muhammad's birthday celebrated in German Protestant church

Hearing of churches and people that claim Christianity, I think back to a passage in the Bible.

When people will claim to be Christian and say to God "But God we preached and ministered in Your name" and God says "But I never knew you".

Besides churches that do this, the same passage always reminds me of Jimmy Carter.

these church goers are nothing but like sheep ready for slaughter! bunch of ignorant uninformed ones at that!

I hope the dhimmi 'christian' Deutschers didn't also make a birthday cake for the pedophile "prophet", because, in frosting it, they might have accidentally written the name of "allah" in the curlicues of the sugary coating and thereby insulted over a billion Muslims in one fell cupcake!

(See related 'conehead name of allah' in the "Burger King ice cream jihad" story over on Jidhadwatch)

And of course they will then be invited by the soldiers of Allah to celebrate Christmas in their mosque?

The muslims that attended must have been the "moderates".

A new civilization is born. Chrislam, Islamochristianity, call it what you will. A fitting way fr Europe to take its final curtain call, and go quietly. Or perhaps one could borrow the title of that pre-World War I song (circa 1913), with Europe playing the part of the driver who has to "get out and get under/get out and get under/to fix up his automobile" but without, alas, any automobile to fix.

Really, this is a quite unnecessary loss. It needn't be this way. It is entirely avoidable. Just learn about Islam. Accept no substitutes for real knowledge. And then act accordingly, to defend, if not the swamp in which the Western world now swims, then the clear streams that have been muddied, all those clear things we've dimmed by guesses.

8: Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;
9: And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.

Fred Sobiech must think Christ made the wrong decision. Evidently, ruling "all the kingdoms of the world" is what the religious life is about, because it is certainly what Mohammed whose life Fred Sobiech was celebrating thought:

I was ordered to fight all men until they say "there is no god but Allah."

and

The gates of Paradise are under the shadow of the swords

Oh, for God's sake..

Wake up world, Allah is Satan !

A cross over Mohammed.....

Fascinating article by Patrick Poole courtesy of FPM

Britain’s Tariq TV
By Patrick Poole
FrontPageMagazine.com | May 25, 2006

Just days after the 7/7 suicide bombings in London last summer that killed 52 innocent civilians, England was in an uproar when the London Times reported that Tariq Ramadan – a Swiss citizen accused by several nations of having longtime terrorist ties and who in the past has proved skittish at denouncing Palestinian suicide bombings – was scheduled to speak in London at a taxpayer-sponsored event. As Europe’s most outspoken Muslim and a self-proclaimed “moderate,” Ramadan and the British Muslim community lashed back, decrying the protests as “Islamophobia.”

But less than a year after those murderous attacks and the public outcry surrounding Ramadan’s visit to London, there was hardly a whimper of protest when on May 1st, Tariq Ramadan took over the primetime airwaves of Britain’s Channel 4 (a not-for-profit, publicly-owned station) in an hour-long program scripted and presented by Ramadan himself. The program, Dispatches: The Muslim Reformation, was clearly intended to be a public response to Ramadan’s international critics and actively promoted his call to European Muslims to follow his plan of integration, confrontation, and cultural empowerment. Thanks to some friends in the UK, I was able to view the program.

Observers in America may recall the tempest in 2004 concerning Tariq Ramadan when he was denied a visa to the U.S. just days before he was to assume a three-year professorship of “religion, conflict and peacebuilding” at the University of Notre Dame. The Department of Homeland Security provided no reason for their decision, but many suspected that Ramadan’s ties to terrorist organizations, including the Muslim Brotherhood (founded by Tariq Ramadan’s grandfather, Hasan al-Banna), and his open association with terrorist sympathizers, including Muslim Brotherhood cleric Youssef Qaradawi, were to blame.

Almost immediately after the DHS decision was announced, Ramadan’s visa denial was condemned by the New York Times, Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, and the L.A. Times, in addition to the usual suspects in academia who expressed their outrage over the supposed suppression of free inquiry and free speech. Earlier this year, the ACLU filed a lawsuit against the U.S. government naming Ramadan as a plaintiff and challenging provisions of the Patriot Act for denying Ramadan an entry visa.

An op-ed by Paul Donnelly published at the time by the Washington Post described Ramadan as a “Muslim Martin Luther.” This was far from the first time that the U.S. mainstream media had rallied to Tariq Ramadan’s cause and lavished him with praise: in 2000, Time Magazine had named Ramadan one of their top 100 Innovators for the 21st Century.

Just why has Tariq Ramadan’s message of “moderate” and “contextualized” Islam raised so many suspicions? And what exactly was the message he conveyed during his recent Channel 4 program in England? The answers are important for understanding the social tensions in Europe between Westerners there and the 20 million Muslims that have immigrated to Europe in recent decades, as well as taking a look into the future at the identical cultural conflicts that loom on the horizon for America.

Tariq TV

The May 1st program on Channel 4 presented by Tariq Ramadan serves as an excellent snapshot of the social problems in Europe and the ideology espoused by Ramadan and his supporters. The Muslim Reformation was part of Channel 4’s popular investigative program, Dispatches, whose most recent groundbreaking expose was catching RyanAir employees sleeping on the job earlier this year. Ramadan is also a regular fixture on Channel 4’s Sharia TV.

Even though The Muslim Reformation was part of Channel 4’s Dispatches investigative series, this should not be interpreted to mean that the program was a critical look at Ramadan: the program was filmed by a production company he is associated with (Crescent Films), and he scripted, narrated and presented the program in its entirety. Tariq Ramadan had total control over what was said and what was shown. It should be no surprise then that none of Ramadan’s critics were interviewed to pester him with questions about his terrorist ties or his public statements that have been criticized for anti-Semitism, excusing Palestinian suicide bombings or challenging the alleged “moderation” of his view of Islam.

Most of the program is dedicated to recording visits that Ramadan makes with certain Muslim leaders in the UK, as well as trips he makes to Paris, Copenhagen, Cologne and Pakistan. The key theme he centers on in his discussions is the doctrine of ijtihad, an Islamic legal practice that allows for the reinterpretation of Islamic texts, which he advocates for and tries to contrast with “literalist” Islamic interpretations of the Qur’an. He states early on in the program that ijtihad is “an alternative to radicalism and the literal approach to Islam,” which he says “has been my personal jihad for many years.” He claims further that “Muslims in Europe want to reopen the debate and look at the Qur’an with new eyes.”

Early in the Channel 4 program he gives his version of ijtihad a spin in a discussion he has with Dr. Musharraf Hussain of the Karimia Institute in Nottingham regarding the Qur’anic injunction to cut off the hands of thieves (Sura 5:38). This discussion of the application of Shari’a law is important because of previous statements made by Ramadan’s brother, Hani, in September 2002 article in Le Monde where he advocated for the stoning of adulterous women. Tariq Ramadan was later confronted with his brother’s statements in a televised debate with French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarzoky at which time he advocated for a “moratorium” on the imposition of Islamic punishments.

In answer to this public relations problem, here is what Dr. Hussain had to say:

I think we have no right as the slaves and servants of God in any way to challenge or change the divine decree. What it is doing to us is setting for us a very high ideal of a fair punishment and a very powerful deterrent to protect human societies and to rid them of the evil of theft. This verse is laying down a law which is to be applied in an Islamic context and an Islamic state. We’re not talking about the application of this law in a non-Muslim democracy. The law itself, the divine law, is indeed very wise; it is very just. It would save our chief constables an enormous amount of headache. It is all about zero tolerance that crimes of this nature of burglary, of stealing, of theft are of a very severe nature and they have to be curtailed and they have to be stopped and this is a very powerful deterrent and just divine decree, really.

In an attempt to contrast his “moderate” position with Hussain’s “literalist” interpretation of the Quranic injunction in question, Ramadan responded by stating in reply:

My view is that these verses were revealed for particular context which assumes a high level of social justice and equality. These conditions do not exist today, so the punishment should not be enforced.

What is striking when these two positions are compared is that they are in effect saying exactly the same thing. Both affirm that the divine laws expressed in the Qur’an are immutable (Ramadan stating such prior to his interview with Hussain) and acknowledge the abiding validity of Islamic laws. Both agree that Shari’a law is not appropriate in the present context of a (currently) non-Muslim Britain. But they both view these extreme forms of punishment as representing a high view of “social justice and equality” that by inference mean that current Western norms fall short of. It is clear that both Ramadan and Hussain believe that this “social justice and equality” is something that that societies should strive for. At best, Ramadan’s moratorium on the imposition of Shari’a law is clearly temporary, and the contrast he tries to represent between his position and that of Dr. Hussain is really a distinction without a difference.

Later in the program, Ramadan travels to Paris to meet with an old associate, Yamin Makry of the Young Muslims of France organization, which Ramadan prefaces by saying,

Elsewhere in Europe, opportunities for Muslims to live their faith and to participate in society sometimes seems to be getting worse…the French state has not allowed its Muslim and Arab citizens real equal citizenship.

Both Ramadan and Makry accuse French society for harboring latent racism that they contend was the primary cause of the car-burning intifada last November throughout the cities of France. Ramadan bluntly states that the French riots by young Muslims “had nothing to do with Islam; it was an outburst of pent-up frustration” over the perceived inequality by Muslims in French society.

This theme of White European social guilt and dismissing violence by Muslims is picked up again as Ramadan traveled to Copenhagen to discuss the protests surrounding the publication of cartoons by the Danish paper Jyllands-Posten characterizing the Islamic Prophet Muhammad. As Ramadan explains, the international wave of protests and violence by Muslims that followed, including more than 50 deaths and the burning of several Western embassies in the Middle East, was the responsibility of Westerners, not the Muslims who were actually engaged in the violent activities:

The Danish newspaper was, in my view, deliberately provoking a reaction…Publishing the cartoons was in my view a calculated provocation aimed at all Muslims. What it has done is to make my work and the work of mainstream Muslims more difficult. The cartoon affair was just more fuel on the fires of hatred which are fanned daily by Western policy on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the occupation of Iraq. These issues polarize Muslim opinion and have led to the rise of extremist Islamic political groups in Europe. It creates an us-and-them version of the world that looks back to the idea of the non-Muslim world as a “House of War” – a vision like that of the four young bombers who brought such terror to the streets of London. I am completely against these acts of terror carried out in the name of my religion, but many Muslims sympathize with the Palestinian leaders who have used suicide bombers as a weapon against Israel. They claim when the oppressor has the tanks and the troops, it is legitimate for young Palestinians to become human bombs.

As Ramadan makes clear, the publication of the cartoons wasn’t just intended to provoke Muslims – it was part of the Western pro-Zionist conspiracy. It is indeed telling how Ramadan seamlessly links the Danish Cartoon intifada with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as if it were a part of an ideological feedback loop – the West is always to blame for their racism and religious bigotry and Muslims are never responsible for their acts of violence.

Also telling is his pretended rejection of suicide bombing. While claiming to be “against these acts of terror,” he immediately qualifies the reasonableness of those who advocate for terrorism against Israel. This position is taken straight from the American leftist playbook: “I’m personally opposed to suicide bombings, but I would never prevent someone from exercising their right to conduct one against the Zionist oppressors.”

Ramadan identifies these Western policies as the cause of the rise of extremist Islamic political groups and the source of the “us-and-them” worldview of the “four young” (and it should be noted – Muslim) 7/7 London suicide bombers.

Admittedly, not everything that Ramadan says in the program borders on the extreme. Take, for instance, this statement made early on in the program:

European Muslims do not see the world as their ancestors did, divided into a medieval “House of Islam” and the rest as a hostile “House of War.”

This would be a major advance in Muslim-Western relations if it was proved true, but does this statement jibe with the state of affairs he presents during the program? Especially in his discussion of the recent French car-burning intifada and the Danish Cartoon protests, didn’t he claim that young Muslims in Europe felt alienated from the Western cultures they inhabit? Doesn’t his justification of violence by Muslims in reaction to this alleged alienation and in response to the West’s “pro-Zionist” policies assume the Manichean dichotomy that he claims that European Muslims have now rejected? And does he not identify a vision of “us-and-them” resulting from Western pro-Zionist policies that has increased “extreme Islamic political groups” and provoked the 7/7 suicide bombers? His rosy assessment of the shift in belief amongst European Muslims about their role in Western society is belied by the very evidence he presents throughout the program.

To his credit, in Ramadan’s closing remarks he doesn’t hesitate to direct some criticism at the Muslim community in Europe and in the Muslim world:

As I come to the end of my journey I am convinced that Muslims in Europe have to find a path between the secular West and the traditional East. Islam in the Muslim majority countries is trapped; it is trapped by undemocratic regimes and reactionary clerics…

So far, so good, but he immediately qualifies his position with this reversal:

…Resistance to change is reinforced by resentment at what Muslims see as the double standards of Western policies towards the Muslim world.

Yet again, Tariq Ramadan contends that the problems of Muslims living in the West and the cultural adaptations they need to make to integrate into Western societies are not really in their own hands, but the hands of non-Muslim Westerners. The West is responsible for the alleged policies and double standards that fuel their resentment. Ramadan provides justification for Muslims in the West for their refusal to socially integrate until Western culture reverses it’s internal and foreign policies to their liking and abandons the very values that have made the West a bastion of personal and political freedoms that many of the Muslim immigrants in Europe could not find in their own Muslim countries.

It might be tempting to dismiss Tariq Ramadan and the approach he advocates in his Channel 4 program as the isolated views of one Muslim man in the West. It should be kept in mind that not only is Ramadan a prolific Islamic thinker, writer and speaker with a dozen books in publication and hundreds of recorded lectures that sell more than 50,000 units per year circulating in the European Muslim community and beyond. Ramadan is also looked to as THE “moderate” response to Islamist extremists and terrorists by Western academic, media and political elites, as witnessed by Time Magazine’s designation of Ramadan as one of the top 100 Innovators of the 21st Century. It is hardly an exaggeration to say that Ramadan has assumed the leading role in setting the cultural agenda for Muslims throughout Europe today. Just how many other Muslims would you think get their own free primetime program on Channel 4 or the BBC?

What makes Ramadan’s rhetoric so troubling is that it is far and away the dominant voice of Muslims in Europe today. Equally disconcerting is that it is built upon a paradigm of duplicity that underlies the “moderate” position of Muslims in the West, as well as justifying a policy of cultural blackmail by Muslims purposefully delaying their integration into the cultures of their adopted countries until the West accedes to their demands. In effect, Ramadan is telling the West that their mountain must come to Muhammad. In the end, any accommodation of Muslims to Western culture must be predicated by a compromise by Westerners of Western values. Ramadan’s program of ijtihad is not a call for modernizing Islam, but rather, a battle plan for his Muslim audience in the West to follow to Islamize the West. All evidence indicates that Tariq Ramadan’s battle plan is succeeding.

If you want to hear some really unctuous, sanitised pap about Islam, at least presented by a Brit, although it seems to have been scripted by Muslims, try listening to "The Real Mohammed" presented by Clive Andersen, which was broadcast on BBC Radio 5, last Saturday but can be downloaded at the following address:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/fivelive/listen/audioarchive.shtml

After listening to this total whitewash job any ordinary listener would be left wondering whether they should immediately convert to Islam or write to the Pope demanding that Mohammed be made an honorary saint.They did have one or two very restrained criticisms from Ayaan Hersi Ali, but said twice she was Danish, and made no mention of death threats. Apparently Mohammed came to reform and tidy up Christianity and if Ayesha had not been physically fully mature at 9, opinion, in Arab society at the time, would not have stood for the outrage of his sleeping with her. It's 2hrs long bit I defy you to bear it for that amount of time.

wallyUK-

So all pedophiles need to do is convert immediately to Islam and plead religious freedom?

Those mature 9 years old! Hubba-hubba!

I know all I need to know about Mohammad from the Koran and Hadiths.

Nauseating, mad and vile.

All the whitewash in the known universe couldn't turn his black heart even grey.

One of the good things about the ch4 Ramadan programme was that he mentioned that the Danish had passed a law requiring people who wanted to marry someone from abroad had to be at least 24 and have at least £5000 in the bank and Muslims felt it was aimed at them. I immediately wrote to my MP and suggested the same legislation for the UK.

Has Ramadan not given a thought as to why the young muslim males don't have jobs?

Could it be they won't take orders from women. They disrespect women because they aren't covered. They have a giant chip on their shoulders. They have no moral fiber. They believe in a cult that reinforces all the evils of the world. They have to bow to the floor several times a day. They get mad at swirlies. They get mad if they see a dog or pig. And if they get excited they scream allahu akbar.

So, Mr. Ramadan, why would anyone want to hire these guys?

Here you can see the smirking dhimmi-idiot who is responsible for Mo's birthday-party on Palm Sunday:
http://www.evkirchebochum.de/online/home_1813.php

And that's (in short) a translation of what he wants to preach to us "islamophobe" infidels:

He says, that it was a test case about credibility of "us Christans". A test case every religion and every democracy is confrontated with. He says because freedom of religion is as valuable as freedom of expression, Christans and Muslims have no other chance than to "have dialogue". And that it would be "our" (Christian) duty to guarantee that nowhere on earth , people are refused their relgious rights.

He says, many people had commented that celebration. Some of them full of joy and hope, because they considered this celebration just a matter of course among neighbours and a far reaching signal for tolerance and dialogue.

Some people commentede that full of fear and horror.(Thanks to god - at least there are a few sane people in this madhouse!But let's hear what reverand Hofmann thinks about this sane people:)
He blames them for being full of prejudices against their Muslim neighbours. He even accused these Christians to bear burning people on stakes in their minds.

On the opposite those Christians who attended that Mohammed's birthday service had - to his opinion - learned that Islam means everything that is needed to maintain good neigbourhood: wisdom, immersion in god and inner blessedness.

blahblahblah and so on. This moron seems to be a hopeful aspirant to the world-dhimmi-award 2006. And I myself unfortunately feel violently ill by all this mawkish crap.

Those rats within the Churches who've appointed
themselves as the peace makers, who will at all
costs avoid this Clash of Civilizations, will
enevitably be those that are to blame when Islam
explodes in Europe, with all of it's ancient
barbaric ways.

The hard truth is that Islam is a bully ideology. Similar to Naziism or Soviet Communism. When I have trained with Muslim Armies and lived around Muslim societies I have observed the bully mentality: Any peceived weakness is despised. The "stronger" are expected to prey on the "weaker" (whether physical handicap, female, minority, etc.). If the "stronger" show mercy to the "weaker" they are perceived as weak. Insecure, truly weak men rise to the top by crossing all moral boundaries. Islam allows men to cross all moral/ethical boundaries. In fact, it encourages this.

Despite the bully culture, Muslim males are generally some of the most cowardly men in the world. Muslims make awful soldiers because they are generally undisciplined and weak. The officers always expect special treatment and will not lead from the front. I don't know how many Saudi officers I have been around that expected others to carry their rucksack. I trained with the Israelis for about 6 months: The secret of Israel's success lies in the incompetence/weakness of conventional Arab, Muslim Armies. The IDF is not that good, but it's enemies really are that bad. Muslims just cannot fight.

Suicide-Murder and throat-slitting (of unarmed POWs) are the most cowardly/weak actions a man can commit. They require absolutely no military skills and can be committed by pregnant women. In fact, many suicide-murderers are now men dressed as women. These operations require no risk of life or man-to-man combat. We don't praise those who commit suicide in the West, they are cowards. Muslim men driven toward these operations are usually small in stature, and have deep insecurity complexes. They are weak and cowardly. Committing suicide-murder is their one way to gain some perceived self-respect. They have no real reason to live, as they are usually losers in civilian life.

Despite all this, many Westerners are terrified of the dreaded "Jihadists". They cower over the risk of offending Islam. This fear and respect shown to the weak Islamist bullies helps drive more bullying. These insecure, loser men are emboldened by every show of fear by the West. Giving in, by appeasing Islam, is the exact wrong action to take in the face of this threat.

What we require is ruthless strength against weak, insecure men. When they are faced with opponents who show backbone and courage, they will fall apart. They will then prey on the next "weaker", which will be in their own Muslim society.

We must start making fun of these cowardly losers. We, as a Western culture, must start making fun of Mohammed (9 year old sex partner, kept man, baby, etc. etc. This must be proclaimed throughout the world). We, as a Western culture, must boldly point out the ridiculous fallacies in the Koran and Hadiths: Jesus wasn't crucified despite all the secular historic documentation. The Jewish temple didn't exist despite all hard archeology and history. Mary was the sister of Moses, despite over 1000 years of separation. Gospels and Hebrew scripture are "true" and yet the Koran (written 600 years after the last New Testament writings) screws up everything.

Islam is a friggin joke, and the Islamists are cowardly and insecure men. If those in the West would be bold, Islam would recede under the rock it came from. So what if they blow up a few more trains or buildings. We all have to die sometime. Wouldn't it be best to live and die brave and free?????? Actually, by showing courage far fewer of us would die.

Random thoughts.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer must be turning in his grave.

Oh noes, Religious Tolerance Alert...

hello 123, you might be onto something. I found a site which showed Iran's hard-line president standing on a stool to shake hands. He had to look taller. I can't find it right now but when I do I will post it.

Bravo! hello 123

We must not be afraid, they are cowards and militarily we can destroy them.

All we need is the will!

Yes let make fun of them as cartoons of Mo will destroy them .

"Semper fidelis" my friend "Semper fidelis"

The creeping seditious nature of Islam is just too subtle for most people, including church and political leaders. If they haven't seen it by now, they never will.

123hello...Muslims are not cowards...give them a rusty knife, and a hostage or prisoner, and watch the bravery come out. Look what courage it took to brutalize those children at the Belsen school, or the sheer heroics of the Janjaweed fighting off those Christian attackers in Sudan. And the mullahs and Imams, who train and send off suicide bombers, but never strap on a bomb themselves, what bravery they display. And those torture rooms found in Iraqi cities, with blood all over the walls, a sure sign that brave operations were conducted there. All over the world, Islamic jihadists are showing what they are made of. Just give them a helpless victim and they will show you bravery. Remember how brave Mohammad and his band of pirates were when they built a fire on Kinnahs chest, and when he was near death, Mohammad gave him to a maniac for beheading. Now thats the kind of bravery muslims aspire to. If it was good enough for Mohammad, it's good enough for them...

I don't know about others here, but I am quickly becoming a quite happy agnostic, I am a Christian, but I am beginning to see Christianity as being as morally vile as Islam. We all know what Islam teaches, kill and then kill somemore. But has anyone thought about how morally disgusting modern Christianity and its pacifism is? The dominant view points of all the Christian churches is this evil absolutist pacifism and this covorting with Islam comes of this mentality. It is every bit as sick as Islam's pathologies, both become enemies of human dignity and progress. If all Christianity has to offer is pacifist, appeasemeny b.s than it is criminal trash that human kind can be rid of. What kind of God wants you to lay down and embrace evil, and spew some nebulous tripe about love. Some love, letting people be murdered and oppressed. One god is murderous tyrant and the other is polyanious,vacous twit. It seems better morality comes from outside organized religion. If neither religions has anything better to say than murder on the case of Islam and pacifism in the case of Christianity all I can say is good riddance. I look forward to the day when their worthless church is a dance club or something. It is beyond vile that Christians who bray on about morality would embrace someone like old mo.

"..passion of Christ, leading to Good Friday, the day Jesus of Nazareth was crucified.”

Should that not read "the day Jesus of Nazareth SON OF GOD, was crucified"?

Why the Omission i wonder.

"I am beginning to see Christianity as being as morally vile as Islam."

I refuse to believe that Christ would approve much of the weak-kneed dhimmi reaction displayed by many so-called Christians.
Much of it is due to just plain ignorance of the evil nature of Islam and kumbayah, give-peace-a-chance sentimentality.
This has got to change.
Thankfully, thanks to the brave efforts of people like Robert and Hugh the word is getting out (I am trying to get clergy I meet to become aware of the nature of Islam) and hopefuly we will see some change.

Would Christ have advised we take into our homes someone who has time and time again vowed to kill, convert or enslave us and our families?
That is exactly what we are doing inviting Islam into Western countries.
Or would he instead have advised caution as in in the following cases :

Mat 10:14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.

Mat 7:6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

The following does not advise we allow our enemies to kill us and our families but that we should pray for them.

Mat 5:44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

Even Christ's discples carried a weapon, as when the slaves ear was severed at he arrest of Jesus.

Holy heck ! I don't believe I am reading this.

Thanks, Eisvogel!

Looking forward to watching the next snuff movie, starring Gert Hofman the 'oppressor' of muslims... you know what they do with 'oppressors'...

Corni, you really onto it, aren't you? I remember when you first started posting here, like some kind of jitterbug, but by the looks of your recent posts you are 'evolving' into my kind of 'radical'...
But seriously, how can we be anything but?

Tariq Ramadan is as real as the jihad itself. The difference between him and OBL or Bakr Bashir or Zarqawi is only about strategy, but never about the underlying concept of conquest and booty and subjugation of the infidels until all the world belongs to Allah.

Abdullahshirk:

Sadly, there seem to be an ever increasing number of Christian priests of whatever denomination, who suck up to Mohammedan clerics in open admiration in how they control their flock, something most of them have never had in their lifetime.

In the days of old when they could really suck it to their congregation they abused their power, for the last 30 years or so they have been losing it. In Eurabia at least. But for many the priest-hood is also a power-trip, sadly. They see the Imams and muftis onto something THEY haven't got, and they are envious.
'REversions' of some of these fools don't surprise me.

Mike_W:

"I am beginning to see Christianity as being as morally vile as Islam."

Guard against your urges for hyperbole, my friend (unless these were not your words).

A shameful and cowardly act, indeed, from our Euro-Vicar; but please. While some Christians may (and are) morally vile, that is not a platform from which to indict Christianity itself.

Read Cardinal Pell's (Archbishop of Sydney) recent letter; the Catholic Church may yet destroy Islam with ink, paper, and prayers.

Knight4AO,

I was responding to abdulalshirk.

There is not a snowflakes chance in hell of my ever saying something like that about Christianity.
Some of the so-called Christians however, might warrant that sentiment.

Mike_W:

Whew!

Late reporting indicates that when the blew out the candles on Mohammed's birthday cake, it exploded, killing seven non-believers.

Correction: "Late reporting indicates that when the Vicar blew out..."

Happy Birthday to you
Happy Birthday to you
Happy Birthday dear Mohammed
Happy Birthday to "KABOOM!"

LOL Charlemagne's Funny Bone

Many witty posts today. There was one by massachussettesrepublican yesterday.

"The saudis on the bus go BOOM!BOOM!BOOM!BOOM!"

Tx guys, for some humour amongst this grim reality.

Ohhhhhhhhhhhh, for he's a jolly good fellow
For he's a jolly good fellow
For he's a jolly good fe-eh-lllllllowwwwwaaararrrgghhh.... aaaaraarrrrrrrhgg...
thud.

Okay boys and girls, how about nice a game of pin the blindfold on the hostage?

To All Freedom Lovers:

This may be a little OT but I think that it is related in a remote way.
There is a commentary in the Conservative Voice Daily by columist Rob Hood. The commentary is entitled "Losing Freedom, The UN Attacks the Second Amendment."
Now how does this relate to the issue at hand? The erosion of our sovereignty to a foriegn entity! The liberals in the United States giving into the UN, the German Protestants giving in to the Mohammadians, ALL OF THEIR OWN FREE WILL!!!
Read the commentary and see if I'm off the mark here.

For those serious about freedom and keeping them, the website to the article/commentary by Rob Hood is newsletter@theconservativevoice.com.

Freedom, it may be free,
But it aint cheap!

Funny, but I have the distinct feeling that God is something immensely larger than being the `head dude´ in one or the other `religion´ or `sect´...
and older, much older too, ...heaps more than one or the other recent story of a couple of thousand years ago about this or that dude walking on water or doing small girls and the trash comic books that resulted thereof...
God is huge, everything included...

Well good for you cosmic, that sounds positively...cosmic.

Yeah,and we´ve got to help ourselves, there ain´t no white-bearded old man in the sky, no-one to reach down and help us...
its the black ants against the green ants...

cosmicAvenger: "and older, much older too, ...heaps more than one or the other recent story of a couple of thousand years ago..."

Cosmic, very heavy, man. Keep writing like that and you're liable to be sued for plagerism by Anne Rice.

..what, that smiling not-so-fair-coloured lady?
..gasp..she must have smoked the same weed.., wow, but now I know why she´s smiling all the time...

Bwahahahahahah!