Dhimmitude at the WaPo: Anti-Catholic ad OK, truth about Islam nixed

The NYT seems to love totalitarian tyrannies. They covered up the truth about Soviet tyranny and murder in the past, and nowadays they cover up the truth about Moslem tyranny and murder.

koran...

Mass Murder.......................................009.005 - 033.061

Gang Rape (of female 'infidels')..................033.052

Beheadings........................................047.004

Crucifixions......................................005.033

Theft.............................................008.041

Tell Lies to non-muslims to benefit islam.........003.028

Cutting off hands and feet........................005.033

Treason...........................................008.067

Racism............................................005.041

I pray that in the near future the above is made known to all not by the propaganda machines (may they sink financially and forever be forgotten) but by a widely watched court proceeding.

Obama's campaign had to recruit outspoken, marginal and rebellious Catholics in order to subvert the Catholic church and seduce Catholic votes. Shariah-compliant socialism (Obama courts both Liberal Leftist elitists and global jihadists) is in opposition to the U.S. Constitution and also the basic doctrines of the Catholic faith. The sanctity of human life (no matter what stage), freedom of conscience, the Ten Commandments, etc., are in the way of the Obama team's plans for the New World Order/Caliphate scenario. Now that there is official church opposition, there is going to be outrageous political and very public demonization of the Catholic church. The arrogance of thinking a political movement has converted all U.S. Catholics to it is beyond belief. Think again.

If Catholics fire-bombed institutions that "offended" them, the NYT would change its tune:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/11/firebombed-french-mag-got-message-you-keep-abusing-islams-almighty-prophet-with-disgusting-and-disgr.html

Terrorism works...if you let it.

This was an ad, not an article. As such, Pamela should change her text from "attack on the Catholic Church" to "attack ad on the Catholic Church". The attack came from the Atheist organization, not the Washington Times. Also, describing the ad as hate filled is foolish when she runs the same ad describing Islam. Is Pamela running hate-filled ads? I don't think so. It's just her opinion that she is trying to get across, the same as with the Atheists. I do not have a problem with either ad.

I do have a problem with the Washington Times for NOT running AFDI/SIOA's ad.

Sorry, I meant to write Washington Post, not Washington Times.

Not that I don't share your concern about the motivations for the Times' refusal to print the altered ad but I feel I must insist the original FFRF ad is not about hate.

Only the other day, Donahue and Keller of the Catholic League came out powerfully for the idea that Catholics who don't accept the teachings of the church about abortion, contraception, sexual conduct in general, gay marriage, divorce, or women's ordination and their role within the hierarchy ought to just leave.

There's no place for liberals within the church, they said.

Love it or leave it.

And nobody that I know of has labeled their pronouncements hate speech directed at Catholics, at the Church, or even at the dissidents and liberals within the church they so urgently and un-gently invited to get out.

Now we see the FFRF doing exactly the same thing Donohue and Keller did, urging people who differ from the church authorities on just these issues in just these ways to leave the church.

So how is it hate for Catholics, the church, or the dissidents and liberals within the church when the FFRF does it unless it’s already the same hate with the same target when the Catholic League does it?

The conservatives within the church have made it pretty clear for a long while the church is not going to change to accommodate Catholic liberals and liberals should go away.

The FFRF has for a long time shared that opinion.

So, what’s your beef, really?

As for the Times, you know as well as I do that nobody is better at putting themselves in the right, no matter what they do, than those guys.

One of the joys of being at the top of the establishment is never, ever having to admit you are, or even could ever be, in the wrong.

For Wapo the great enemy is traditional Americanism (e.g., self-reliance, absolute values, limited government, strong Second Amendment emphasis, peace though strength, American exceptionalism, etc.) and not Islam. Yep, this is how stupid WaPo is. WaPo would deny this but the denial would not be rooted in truth or reality.

The coward traitors Washington Post (and other mainstream media)!!

http://newstime.co.nz/new-york-times-dangerous-truth-twisting.html

(video) Quisling & coward “New York Times”
dangerous truth twisting to Iran
— instead of Qur’an 2:282, 4:3

Btw, I read PG's ad urging moderate Muslims to leave Islam and it seems fair, to me.

They could both ads side by side and I would be fine with that!

Robert, this is precisely why I strenuousely avoid most media outlets; one has to spend literally hours clarifying the "information" presented to us in order to uncover just how much spin lies at its foundation.

As a God-bless-King-Billy Presbyterian who believes wholeheartedly that the Reformation was right, Uncle Kepha stands with the RC church on this one.

The men who gave us the First Amendment inserted the Free Exercise Clause to protect religion against the state. The Obama Adnminstration's attempt to force the RC church into the contraception (and abortion?) business is also the start of an attack on us Evangelicals, serious Buddhists (not the Hollywood kind) and a lot of others, and precisely the sort of thing which which the American Founders feared.

The WaPo's standing with the Obama administration (to be expected) is further evidence that Washington today is more First Amendment-challenged than at any other time in American history.

The Freedom From Religion outfit is liberal and its membership is largely liberal-left. I'm an atheist, raised in the horrid Catholic religion, and once attended a conference hosted by FFR. I was dumbstruck by the number of loons and lefties I encountered (including Howard Dean supporters!). This organization presented Helen What's-her-Name with a special journalism reward at the conference, the same Helen who hates Jews and said they should go back to Poland or Germany and leave "Palestine" to the Muslims. I have no problem with their wanting to get religion out of politics, but what they have to offer in the way of a morality is pure collectivism, the Obama kind.

What's the beef? Well for your simple mind comes a simple answer, their beef is that they are forced to deal with knuckle dragging ,mouth breathing morons such as yourself and the brain dead assholes at wapo asking questions like that which you have you have put up, and guess what you brain dead jerk, it is questions like your's that put's a light square onto the slim girl like shoulders of your's and the waste of intellect your oh so cute question costs. Why waste everyones time with such dribble. If your unable to admit to the ad being an outright smack on the face of any who do not share your ill informed perspective then what's the point of even engaging other's in the first place ? Without the balance and fair play people expect, why bother with your so called response or question as it were.The beef my friend lies with you, not your imagined adversaries. Why no fair play in running both ad's? Why demand changes to one ad and all the while a similar ad get's a free pass to go ' as is' to the printer? What is your side afraid of? the truth? Yeah that must be it, the truth frightens you to the point your at now, lies and attacks, you must be proud of yourselves.