Richard Dawkins enrages Muslims by referring to destroyers of Timbuktu library as "Islamic barbarians"

CivilizedMan.jpg


Dawkins is the victim here of a very common Islamic supremacist tactic: to claim that any criticism of any jihadist action is a criticism of all Muslims, such criticism being not allowed under any circumstances in acceptable public discourse. The mainstream media and Islamic supremacist spokesmen did the same thing with our AFDI ad above, claiming that we were calling all Muslims "savages," as if every last Muslim supported the bloody and savage jihad against Israeli civilians.

And so Dawkins has to explain the obvious, as we do again and again and again, that he didn't mean all Muslims, and as he does, and as we do, the original point is lost -- which is the goal of this absurd Islamic supremacist victimhood posturing in the first place. Dawkins' original point was that those who destroyed the manuscripts in Timbuktu were barbarians. And they were. And they were acting in the name of Islam and its contempt for everything it considers jahiliyya, the society of unbelievers. Instead of addressing that, and determining to combat these ideas among their fellow Muslims, these Muslims went after Dawkins. So it always is: instead of fighting against the violent jihadists they profess to oppose, Islamic supremacists in the U.S. focus all their energy on attacking the non-Muslims who dare to oppose those jihadists.

"'A priceless heritage destroyed by Islamic barbarians': Atheist Professor Dawkins outrages Muslims with comments over Mali extremists wrecking library," by Mark Duell in the Daily Mail, January 31:

Atheist Richard Dawkins has outraged Muslims after describing looters who destroyed manuscripts in Mali as ‘Islamic barbarians’.

The 71-year-old author of The God Delusion was referring to the severe damage caused by Islamist extremists to a sacred library in Timbuktu but his remarks were seen as insulting to all Muslims.

Oxford University academic Professor Dawkins told his 600,000 Twitter followers on Tuesday: ‘Like Alexandria, like Bamiyan, Timbuktu's priceless manuscript heritage destroyed by Islamic barbarians.’

But his comments were criticised, with some followers claiming he was unjustly attacking Islam and others saying he should be considering vandalism committed by Christians, reported the Daily Telegraph.

Muslim Twitter user ‘Shawa5i Al Nasseri’ from the United Arab Emirates said: 'You call us barbarians, truly no respect', before later adding: 'How do you explain this "destroyed by Islamic barbarians?”’

Professor Dawkins responded to the comments by saying: ‘You mean you were one of those who burned the books in Timbuktu? No? I thought not. So I wasn't calling you a barbarian was I.’

He also said to all of his followers: ‘I was calling Islamic BARBARIANS barbarians’, adding: ‘By “Islamic barbarians” I mean those Muslims who are also barbarians. I do not of course mean all Muslims.’

Professor Dawkins later added: ‘Xtian (Christian) barbarians murder abortion doctors. Most Xtians (Christians) are not barbarians. Stalin was an atheist barbarian. Most atheists are not barbarians.’

On Monday Islamists were said to have burned down the world-famous Ahmed Baba Institute library containing priceless manuscripts and artefacts.'...

| 146 Comments
del.icio.us | Digg this | Email | FaceBook | Twitter | Print | Tweet

146 Comments

| Leave a comment

Prof Dawkins might, just might, be coming to his senses. One can but hope.

Professor Dawkins later added: ‘Xtian (Christian) barbarians murder abortion doctors.

No Christian has ever murdered an abortion doctor...Did they shout 'Jesus saves' while committing these barbaric acts?
As far as I am concerned a Mahoundian is a Mahoundian is a jihadist by obligation...Allah wouldn't have it any other way...

Yes, I was wondering if this might be an eye-opener for Dawkins. But I doubt it. He's too locked into his atheistic agenda to look beyond the surface. Just look at what he lumps together: Stalin and murdering abortionists.
Number of abortionists killed in US since Roe v Wade : about 9.
Number of people killed by Stalin:
about 60,000,000.
He would have done better just to refer to the burners as barbarians. No point saying "Islamic" unless you are prepared to expand on that. Which Dawkins is not, quite clearly.
Muslims and Christians are more or less the same in his mind.
Where are the 20,000 terror attacks committed by Christians in last decade?
He doesn't bother to consider that the Timbuktu burners were acting according to Islamic teaching. Those who killed the abortionists were following their own guidance. They must have been pro-choice on terminating abortionists.

Duh_swami and Gerard...

So you guys are knocking Dawkins for the very same thing that the Muslim was knocking him for?

Hypocrites

Not at all. I accept that not every muslim is a terrorist. But it is also true that 90%+ terrorists are muslim. It is also true that Christian texts and Islamic texts to a large extent explain the different behaviours of these 2 groups. No hypocrisy in that.
It does indeed remain the case that a fallacy is at work in the anti-Dawkins tweet, as Robert has said. And as RS explained in one of his Jihadwatch videos, if I refer to a green coffee mug that does not mean I am saying all coffee mugs are green. I am not arguing against Dawkins' logic here but rather his lack of discernment in the way he lumps together ALL religions.
This is just a general observation about Dawkins. What he said about not calling all muslims barbaric is of course correct. I think he just stepped on a hornets' nest.

I have had a soft spot for Dawkins for some time. As a professional atheist he spends a hell of a lot more time talking and thinking about God than most people, including the professional clergy who are too busy thinking of their own advancement, their own little projects and -- far too often-- their own sordid little secrets than to bother with God.

Also, it is hard not to hear the Dawkins quotes in bold above in Basil Fawlty's voice.

Boy, this one will really cause the leftists' heads to smoke and discombobulate just like a Star Trek android after Kirk gives them a logical paradox.

"Dawkins hates Christianity so we have to support him..but...but...he's attacking Islam and thus Multiculturalism...but...he hates Christianity like we do...but...he agrees with conservatives about Islam....does not compute...DOES NOT COMPUTE!

Islamic barbarians are in fact destroying timeless treasures in Mali, Syria, Egypt, etc. It is horrifying that more in the cultural property/antiquities/anti-art theft/anti-smuggling/heritage community aren't up in arms about the destruction of so much of human history by Islamic barbarians.

Do non-Muslims smuggle, steal, and destroy cultural property, art, and antiquities? Sure, but they do not do so to advance their religion, and it is being done nowhere as systematically as in the Arab Spring countries of the Islamic world.

Furthermore, a lot of the looting is used to buy weapons for the jihadists to carry out attacks against civilians. One good thing about this Dawkins flap is to bring more attention to the problem.

Richard Dawkins was absolutely spot on when he described the thugs as Islamic barbarians. Islam has a long and inglorious history of this sort of action, having been responsible for the destruction of vast swathes of priceless, irreplaceable manuscripts and cultural treasures from different parts of the world whenever it has managed to get its filthy paws on them.

Take Nalanda as an example. This vast centre of learning in India had flourished for several centuries and had attracted scholars from as far afield as Japan and Byzantium. Its library was the largest repository of knowledge in the East, reputed to hold hundreds of thousands of manuscripts. In 1193 it was destroyed by Islamic barbarians, to whom it's wealth of knowledge meant nothing. It was said to have taken six months to burn the manuscripts. The scholars were no doubt butchered.

Don't think that Islam has changed one iota since then. They would treat our cultural treasures in exactly the same way if they ever got the chance. The books in the British Library mean no more to them than the manuscripts in Timbuktu. They would burn them all if they could. The artifacts in the British Museum, the paintings in the Louvre, and Michelangelo’s frescoes in the Sistine Chapel would all be destroyed if Islam has its way, because that is what Islam does. It places no value whatsoever on any work that was created outside the aegis of Islam. Hence when it gains control of a territory anything which existed beforehand is seen as valueless and is likely to be destroyed, particularly if it is important to the indigenous people as Islam loves to rub their faces in the dirt.

I'm afraid I must agree that Professor Dawkins owes an apology. To barbarians. I've never heard of barbarians being that concerned with destroying books or other artifacts. This is a propensity of civilized human beings whose idea of civilization does not include tolerance (which is true of a great many civilizations in history, e.g. Islamic civilization).

It is sad and difficult to see Dawkins equate, the infinitely disparate, Judeo Christianity with islam. One should expect more intelligence and accuracy from a professor, no matter the bias.

Christianity nowhere orders nor authorizes uncountable times every criminal act and behavior imaginable, against others of any persuasion. Even better, in Christianity, not only is the Golden Rule emphasized, but even more, the Ten Commandments, perhaps the most important core of Christianity, are an absolute command against every act of criminal butchery and hatred authorized and demanded uncountable times by islam.

No, the abortionist murderers were never excused, nor ordered, nor authorized by all, nor any part of Christianity, period. They are offered absolutely no reward in any afterlife, whatsoever.

But all criminal acts and many other acts, unimaginable, including lies and half-truths, deceptions unlimited, are required within the written texts of the islam trilogy, for the pleasure of the anti-god of islam, who confers upon these gullible victim islamic warriors, who act out the infernal and eternally commanded butchery, the ridiculous absurd, simple minded, eternal whores in the sky, something you offer to child sexual addicts.

Many muslims are such by deceit and deception, until they learn or tire of the reality, and the considerable and increasing effort to live with cognitive dissonance, which does take its toll, over time, usually creating apostates, which islamics try ever so hard to prevent.

But the danger is always and ever present, that often progression occurs into degrees of hard core Islamism, and hell ensues. From merely supporting islamics as applauders, and cheerleaders, to acts of crimes of hatred, the greatest and their dearest vile, ugly, and addictive core of islam-distilled hatred.

Dawkins, though an equal opportunity critic of all religions, saves particular opprobrium for Islam.
Take this, for example, in 2011:
Islam deserves criticism on account of the logical consequences of its dogma, namely, that the murder of fellow human beings is to be rewarded with sensual pleasure in a hedonistic ‘Paradise’- a concept born in the fantasies of an Arab rebel some fourteen centuries ago. The religion of Mohammed is a dangerous system when the teachings and example of the ‘prophet’ are believed and followed.

There's more and a video >> http://thebattleoftours.blogspot.hk/2011/07/richard-dawkins-on-islam.html

Christians have found justification in their faith for all sorts of horrible acts through history.

There is perfect logic in killing abortionists if one believes in an afterlife, for every child conceived, of either eternal bliss or eternal torment, the former being attainable only if one makes his or her way out of the mother's womb and is sprinkled with water accompanied by the appropriate mumbo jumbo. By this logic, the abortionist condemns the unborn to hell (the Catholic Church recently closed Limbo, as I understand) and so certainly deserves to die. Of course not all Christians believe this theology, but the premises are certainly not far out of the mainstream.

Jesus said that he came to bring not peace but a sword. Christians these days fail to recognize that he did just that.

For all that, Christians (and the adherents of other non-Islamic religions) are orders of magnitude less likely to murder innocents for religious reasons as are Muslims.

You are reading that verse about 'not peace but a sword' in exactly the same ignoring-the-context way that Muslims do.

They love that verse, when engaged in their usual tactic of Whataboutery.

The *normal*, standard, historic reading of that verse, especially in the context in which one encounters it in the gospels, is that Jesus is telling his followers that, because their faith *may* put them at odds with their families and societies (the sword is capable of being read as *metaphorical*, describing DIVISION, not physical fighting and killing), **they** will **be** persecuted.

He is NOT telling his disciples, 'take up the sword, go forth and persecute and kill anybody who disagrees with you". There is absolutely no way that that particular passage, or the whole chapter in which it occurs, can be read in that way.

Rather, he is talking about the Irene Sendlers and the Maximilien Kolbes, the Sophie Scholls, the Lina Joys and the present-day Christians (apostate from Islam) in Iran, or the Christians who are being tossed into the gulags in North Korea. That is: about all people who either become Christians and then are mercilessly attacked and persecuted by kin and/ or their former co-religionists and fellow citizens; or those Christians who because of a conscious and deepening obedience to Christian principles find themselves at odds with and being attacked by a regime or a state that is either anti-Christian or that, though nominally Christian, is in fact acting in an immoral and oppressive fashion.

He is telling his followers that they are going to be persecuted, sometimes by their nearest and dearest. And if you read the whole chapter, you will see that he does NOT tell them to pick up a sword and start whacking right back; let alone set out to inflict violence on anybody who won't accept the Gospel.

In fact, the only clear advice he gives about what to do when persecuted, is this: 'if they persecute you in one city, go to the next".

"No Christian has ever murdered an abortion doctor...Did they shout 'Jesus saves' while committing these barbaric acts?"

lol, good one, Duh_Swami!! ...add to the fact that no where in Christian doctrine does it instruct Christian to commit such evil acts; unlike islamic doctrine that is full of such instruction for muslims to kill the infidel, etc.

Ok, so not all muslims are terrorists, but why are the majority of terrorists muslim? ...hmm. Gosh, is there a connection between terrorists and the unholy quran? Methinks yes! Hey and I don't trust *ANY* muslim.

Perhaps while attacking Christians for the evil you suggest they have done for centuries now, you could possibly supply examples, and show just where in scripture the justification for the violence is to be found.

I would suggest you actually study the subject, before offering up vagrant opinions. (Def: vagrant opinion - an opinion with no means of support).

Well said Pam and agreed. There's a striking parallel between Islam and Communism here. I was in a sociology class and my Communist prof talked about the uselessness of art, music and culture, which he just saw as something frivolous and unnecessary-as well as a consequence of the class-based society we live in.

That's when I began to have serious misgivings about Communism and eventually lost interest in it. Not to mention the fact that I realized I was being brainwashed by a hard-left ideology.

Don't get me wrong, I think there are real social problems that need to be addressed, but they can be dealt with within the confines of Capitalism. I think socialists have their hearts in the right place, but not their minds.

Capitalism does create misery for millions and shifts wealth and power to a small minority-but we can fix that without having to shift to a totalitarian system like Communism.

Islam is basically the reorganization of human societies around the ideas of one child-raping mass murdering psychopath.

I'm sorry, but you have your way of interpreting the sword verse, and I have mine, and mine seems to have been accepted by an awful lot of Christians (and more recently by Irish and Yugoslav Christians) over the last couple millennia, so I would say that you shouldn't dismiss it out of hand.

We could probably have a similar debate over interpretation of many verses concerning slavery. Project Gutenberg has some fascinating pro-slavery texts citing the Bible. And anti-slavery texts citing the Bible.

That said, I'm outahere because this is really not the best place to be debating the merits of Christianity. Please have the last word.

Well said, DDA, thanks for jumping in and adding the correct detailed analysis.

And Champ, point well added, so far as I'm concerned. I likewise, no matter what, have always varying degrees of no trust with each of them.

There are those at the low information end of their islam journey or spectrum, who are so confused by their recruiter's and handler's decepions and lies, they represent minimal danger, for a time. But that does not imply to me any reason at all for any trust, (as a baby viper can envenomate), even in a beginner state, to make that clear.

Other non-muslims may conduct themselves how they wish, with danger or low information naivette, but personally, I know the trilogy with great depth of its vile evils, instructions, and requirements.

When you have well examined that trilogy, the medinan authentic version, authorized by al azur, you know you are dealing with a very angry and untrustworthy viper, whom you never trust, whether small or large and bearded.

Very much like the the Aesop fable of the farmer and the viper, (who indeed, would be stupidly trusting enough to take pity on a freezing viper and put it in your pocket to warm up, or by the fireplace, to warm up?), or even perhaps more a metaphor for the islamic-muslim, the fable of the frog and the scorpion, crossing the river, who's nature is "just that way" to sting, although we know why, with the muslim.

I read the source materials, too.

Perfect metaphors for islamic behavior, those fables, I believe!

There is also this:

"What a Debate,Muslim Scholar Al-Haddad and His Surprising Statements"

http://www.antisharia.com/2012/02/19/what-a-debatemuslim-scholar-al-haddad-and-his-surprising-statements/

Who is Al-Haddad?

Haitham Al-Haddad is a Muslim scholar who teaches what is the Islam of Muhammad and the Caliphate that in one way or another lasted till 1924 .He is a member of the UK’s Islamic Sharia Council.

A majority in the Nederlands parliament tried to block entrance into the Nederlands of Al-Haddad for his views.He was invited to an Amsterdam University to debate with a politician and a journalist, about the position of Islam in the West.Al-Haddad had been invited by the Amsterdam Islamic students association.

Al-Haddad says in the Debate that Women and Men who are Adulterers are to be Stoned

1.From minute 1:50 till minute 3 you hear nothing but after that the sound is fine.

2.But before,around minute 30 a woman in the audience began arguing with Al-Haddad and a minute later she was allowed to sit at the table and participate.And incredibly Al-Haddad claimed that he had been approached by European women who had committed adultery and wanted to go to a Muslim country to be stoned for their bad deeds.

Later an Iranian ex-Muslim begins to ask him a question

Asked by him,a member of the audience,who left Islam what the cleric thought of him, al-Haddad told him apostates should be killed in an Islamic country.

About Irak

He also said 1.5 million have been killed in Irak because of Western democracy.The lady asks him about stoning women and Al-Haddad finally says that many Western women had even asked him to be stoned to death."

AND ALSO

"Oriana Fallaci(1929-2006),Italian Journalist,Atheist and Feminist,who was Anti-Islam,also said she was a Christian Atheist"

http://www.antisharia.com/2011/11/13/oriana-fallaci1929-2006italian-journalist-and-feministwho-was-anti-islamalso-said-she-was-a-christian-atheist/

Handy sources for the devious vipers and scorpions fable examples, even one with an east asian or Indian twist, the Mark of Vishnu, for example.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Farmer_and_the_Viper

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scorpion_and_the_Frog

Works for me, good fables of great merit.

This site here has got brains.

You wrote: Jesus said that he came to bring not peace but a sword. Christians these days fail to recognize that he did just that.

Now, just remind me. That's the same Jesus who waited peacefully n the Garden of Gethsemane for the Romans to come and arrest him, taking Him to certain death. And as they came for Him, he told a disciple to put away his sword.

You're a clown!

PS Get an education! The Bible was taken apart line by line during The Enlightenment. Christianity, what's left of it, now exists in secular societies as a quaint museum piece. Islam, on the other hand, still believes their that Al Qur'an is the literal Word of Allah and is relevant for all times and places.
You're a clown and an ignoramus!

Ahem! I'm an Irish Christian and I DO not agree with your bogus interpretation of said verse, nor should any *serious* student of the Bible.

Here's a verse that explains what Jesus meant by the sword ...

"For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart." -- Hebrews 4:12

Also, you must consider the CONTEXT of Matthew 10:34, which states ...

"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword."

The verses that follow give the reader it's context, here they are:

"For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household. Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me." -- Matthew 10: 35-37

So you see, Jesus came to bring a sword: the word of God, the word of Truth; and oftentimes that divides families.

Grow a brain, why dontcha ...

Don't just read one verse, take it out of context, and then build an entire wrongheaded theology based upon that one verse. Instead, read the entire chapter where that verse came from--and other verses, as well--to grasp the context and FULL meaning of what's being written. Jeez.


You got the smarts there, Champ.

Fair play t'ya.

"I'm afraid I must agree that Professor Dawkins owes an apology. To barbarians."

Indeed; not all barbarians are Muslims. Some barbarians are the good guys, fighting against the Cult of Doom (resemblances to Islam purely coincidental):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNrux_8W8Tg&list=PL821FE01F930BB3C9

Karl Pov

I second your thoughts, it is very hard for me to grasp the reality that among the counter-Jihadists, there exists people who condemn Muslims for their belief in divisive and arcane theology but at the same time they themselves are proponents of other faith systems that encouraged slavery and inspired political leaders like Charlamegne who fought the Saxons to further the cause of Christianity, constant raids forced Widikund the saxony leader to capitulate and become baptised, this happened before, and the Muslims know it, the West knows it, so Islam is given a chance to reform its ways of violent and stealth campaigns just the way Christians ceased to kill the Witches.

Islam's seeming untoucahability in the West is the product of both the Western dependence on the eastern oil wells and the protection of the monotheistic religious systems, had Islam been a secular insidious ideology akin to the Nazi ideology or communism, it would have been confined to the dustbin of history by now.

It breaks my heart to see excellent counter-Jihadists bending over backwards to give the Biblical verses a better outlook, I thought such feats were reserved for the Mohammedans, I don't know how any Muslim or Christian could whitewash the Old testament or the Quran.

Maybe the abortionists' killers didn't directly act out a passage of the Bible, but the Muslim suicide bombers also ioften detonate in unIslamic styles and their leaders often reject that. The crux here is that the inspiration is derived from such books. Inn thought people who oppose the murder of the apostates of Islam would oppose the eternal damnation of the so-called 'unsaved'.

All you 'offended Christians' here would do well to read Meeker's post.
You are, in effect indirectly supporting Islam in the name of religion generally; there is NOTHING to be gained comparing religions- Islamists do this all the time in defence of theirs. Any you are doing the same!

Remember, the main difference is that Christianity has been reformed- largely ignoring the God of the old testament (who was just as violent and savage as Allah) in favour of his 'sanitised' version, Jesus.
Islam has not and cannot be reformed.

Also... those who claim Dawkins hates Christians- you are all ignorant and have not read his work. It is your hatred of atheism driving this belief, the usual intolerance of the religious.

For your further education, Dawkins attends church on occasion and has very civil debates with all sides (except Creationists), including a forthcoming meeting with Rowan Williams, former AoC.

So, for those saying 'get a brain' and 'this site has smarts', perhaps you overestimate your own intellect??

Very deceptive article above, if some-one only reads what Mr Spencer writes and quotes, we are led to believe that the library was destroyed.

The article finishes with

On Monday Islamists were said to have burned down the world-famous Ahmed Baba Institute library containing priceless manuscripts and artefacts.'…

It is when we look at the DM Link that we read that

However a South African university said yesterday that the extremists damaged or stole only a limited number of manuscripts in Timbuktu before they fled the fabled desert city.

People in the city reported that there was no malicious destruction of any library or collection, said the University of Cape Town, which helped fund a state-of-the-art library to house manuscripts.

Neither he DM article or Mr Spencer say anything about the muslims who due to their foresight to remove most the manuscripts

Timbuktu Texts Saved From Burning
Librarians, Security Guard Spirited Away Mali Artifacts After Islamist Rebels Tried to Destroy Them

An estimated 28,000 of the library's artifacts were smuggled out of town by donkey cart, said Prof. Abdoulaye Cissé and security guard Abba Alhadi, who worked to relocate the documents. Gunmen managed to burn only a few hundred papers, but even those were backed up digitally, said the library's bookkeepers…..

More

Islamists sent a more-menacing message on Dec. 30, when they came to the old library, which houses the bulk of the literature. They told the guard, Mr. Alhadi, that they planned to convert the building into a Quranic school.

Over the next two nights, Messrs. Cissé and Alhadi met in darkness, and began stuffing texts into empty burlap millet sacks. They stacked the bags onto donkey carts, stashed them in bedrooms, and over the next few days, carted them to small boats along the nearby Niger River. From there, the boats sailed four days south to the first town under government control, Mopti.

A truck, the two men said, carried the priceless artifacts to the capital, Bamako, where officials with the University of Cape Town said they are safe.

On Wednesday, Ansar Dine gunmen came to the library, said Mr. Alhadi. The elderly guard refused to let them in, then hobbled away on his cane. The militants broke in, taking a refrigerator, mattresses and plastic chairs—but no manuscripts.

"We knew that what we had here was threatened," said Mr. Cissé, a history professor and acting director for Timbuktu's Ahmed Baba Institute for Higher Studies and Islamic Research. "So I said, 'We're going to have to start moving them out.' "


""For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household. Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me." -- Matthew 10: 35-37"

Gee, swell guy. He merely came to turn people against each other. What marvelous intentions! And he merely demands that you love him more than your own family members...gee, no resemblances to a cult leader there, right?

I love my parents and siblings more than the character "Jesus", despite their (and my) human flaws, since they, among other things, have--thus far--been able to stop short of threatening to torture and burn me for all eternity for merely disagreeing with them on some religious matter. In fact, my family members have not even threatened to burn and torture me over disagreements on important issues...that's a big plus in their favour.


It is a serious mistake to attack Dawkins like some of the comments above. The idea that he has just started revealing the horrors of islam is totally wrong. He has regularly referred to islam as the most dangerous religious force in the world today. Both he and his fellow atheist, Sam Harris, have pointed over many years that islam has no concept of what constitutes a civil society. He also avoids the trap of blaming 'islamic fundamentalists' by declaring that it is the fundamentals of islam that are wrong.

Of course, he also attacks religion in general, but he tends to do it from a science point of view i.e. he doesn't beleive in supernatural beings, angels, jinns, devils etc.

Far more insidious than Dawkins are those Christians that want to have 'interfaith dialogue' with islamists. In fact some Christians prefer islamists to atheists because "at least they believe in God". They are far more dangerous than Dawkins. We should welcome him into our anti-jihadist camp.

You wrote: 'Maybe the abortionists' killers didn't directly act out a passage of the Bible, but the Muslim suicide bombers also often detonate in unIslamic styles and their leaders often reject that.'

You're a troll and a clown! How can anyone 'detonate in an unIslamic style'...??!!

And could you point to any passage in The Bible that instructs Christians to murder abortionists? No! You're a d****head!!

You got the smarts there, Champ.

Fair play t'ya.

~~~~~~

Hi, London Jim! ...thank you, dear friend :)

Buraq,

I think you're a clown with all your name calling and bullying. Do you think that you represent the best of Christianity? I bet you do. I bet you do.

As for passages giving sanction to judge others:

"Those who rebuke the wicked will have delight, and a good blessing will come upon them." –Prov. 24:25

Open your mouth for the speechless, in the cause of all who are appointed to die. Open your mouth, judge righteously... plead the cause of the... needy. -Prov. 31:8-9

He who is spiritual judges all things… for… we have the mind of Christ. –1 Cor 2:15-16

It's easy to interpret Bible verses any way you want to. The same goes for the Koran. Nutters like you should feel right at home with Islamists.

…Even better, in Christianity, not only is the Golden Rule emphasized, but even more, the Ten Commandments, perhaps the most important core of Christianity, are an absolute command against every act of criminal butchery and hatred authorized and demanded uncountable times by islam.
---------
From ex: BBC ‘Aleister Crowley – The Other Loss Ness Monster’ a unidentified individual stated at the 17:50 mark “… Crowley understood quite early in his life that religions have a self-life, they have a life expectancy and what is appropriate in one eon is inappropriate in another. We started off with the tablets of the law, which were broken. In their place was put the Decalogue, the Ten Commandments, the harsh commandments; thou shalt not, suitable for children. Don’t stick your fingers in the electric sockets, don’t play with the fire, their children’s rules. Now we’ve moved beyond that. The Book of the Law is a charter of universal freedom. It gives every individual, every man and every woman on this planet rights and we’ve grown-up enough to actually exercise those rights and to take responsibility for our own actions.”

How far off the mark is this to Dawkin's athiest screed?


Hey we loooove you, Buraq! ..so pay no attention to cuda's nasty remark. You can spot a clown--or a trouble maker--with ease, and you aren't afraid to confront them. I think that's awesome!

More cheering from the peanut gallery in an echo chamber...

"I love my parents and siblings more than the character "Jesus"

~~~~~~~~~~

The above comment should offend all Christians, including Robert Spencer ...

In the past this same poster has made similar hateful comments about Jesus, the Bible, etc; and then directed them towards Christians because he hates Christians, as well; but this comment about our LORD and Savior tops them all!

I find it shocking, yet not surprising, that said poster would write such a thing; since many here are Christians whom love our precious Savior. But most notably the site owner is a Christian, so KofK has just lowered-a-rope on Robert's site, and he should be ashamed of himself, since Jesus is the heart and soul of our Faith.

Lastly, for Christians only ...

"If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first." -- John 15:18

And of course this verse, too ...

"Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces." -- Matthew 7:6

You wrote: 'It's easy to interpret Bible verses any way you want to. The same goes for the Koran.'

I feel sorry for poor sods like you! You clearly have zilch understanding of just how different Islam is from every other religion in the world. The Bible and Al Qur'an could not be more different. There is no interpretation in Islam!
Al Qur'an states clearly that there's nothing to interpret. That means if two verses contradict each other, you take the chronologically later verse. It's called abrogation.
The Bible doesn't have abrogation, so you have no choice but to interpret when verses appear to contradict one another.

You're just another ignoramus badly in need of an education. Spend some time reading JW, especially Room 101. Wise up! You're light years behind the curve.

Clown!

Nobody is 'attacking' Mr Dawkins here, Zoltix, yet I do agree that his mind would be well-lent to the counter-jihad, and should be welcomed, even as a latecomer.

ps ...

And I would expect this sort of vile comment about Jesus--and the fact that said poster showed *very* poor decorum towards the site owner--from an islamic supremacist, not from a supposed ally in this fight against islam/sharia. Hmm.

"‘Xtian (Christian) barbarians murder abortion doctors."

Even while being verbally attacked by Muslims he can't help but take a cheap shot at Christians and Christianity!

This is false. Christianity does not teach or condone any such behavior. No one who is a follower of Christ does such a thing.

***

This man has made his living and his fame by raging against religion, mostly Christianity. Maybe when he starts getting death threats for his comments about Islam he'll wake up and see the difference between Islam and Christianity.

Or not.

You *definitely* need an education, so take Buraq's advice and get one; but you do have that certain Something, so perhaps there's hope for you afterall ...

And I would also like to recommend one of Robert's great books to help with your learning experience:

"Religion of Peace?: Why Christianity Is and Islam Isn't"

Awesome book!

Anothermust read, "The Truth About Muhammad" ...that's a real eye opener, as well.

oops: Another must read ...

Oh, and "Kranky ole Krowbar" is in DESPERATE need of an education, too, so I recommend Robert's book to him also:

"Religion of Peace?: Why Christianity Is and Islam Isn't"

High time he grew a brain, as well ...

@ Karl Pov

"I'm sorry, but you have your way of interpreting the sword verse, and I have mine,"

Yes, it's called accurate vs. inaccurate. DOA's is correct. Yours is incorrect.

"That said, I'm outahere because this is really not the best place to be debating the merits of Christianity."


Behold the usual tactic of the "B-b-b-u-t Christians do it too!" crowd.

YOU are the one who brings up Christianity, and when you're called out on it you run away.

@ Karl Pov

"I'm sorry, but you have your way of interpreting the sword verse, and I have mine,"

Yes, it's called accurate vs. inaccurate. DDA's is correct. Yours is incorrect.

"That said, I'm outahere because this is really not the best place to be debating the merits of Christianity."


Behold the usual tactic of the "B-b-b-u-t Christians do it too!" crowd.

YOU are the one who brings up Christianity, and when you're called out on it you run away.

As soon as I saw the name Richard Dawkins, I knew the Christianity-haters would be flooding this place!

@ Hawy -

"It breaks my heart to see excellent counter-Jihadists bending over backwards to give the Biblical verses a better outlook, I thought such feats were reserved for the Mohammedans, I don't know how any Muslim or Christian could whitewash the Old testament or the Quran."

Show me where the Bible has open-ended commands for Jews or Christians to commit violence against unbelievers. Then show me where Jews or Christians are committing such acts, all over the world, on a regular basis, in obedience to such commands.

"As soon as I saw the name Richard Dawkins, I knew the Christianity-haters would be flooding this place!"

Yes, I agree, Mo ...

Richard Dawkins, along with many posters here, have chosen to remain in darkness about who Jesus is and why He came. They *choose* to hate and to misinterpret the words of Jesus and the Bible on the whole. It's as if they really don't want to learn the truth about Jesus Christ. They reject Him and His message, which means they are rejecting the Light ...in turn they remain in darkness, so they have chosen darkness over the Light. And when people die, well, this is what they'll receive: outter darkness. They should not be surprised come the day of judgment since this is what they've wanted all along. Take care, dear friend.

And Jesus addresses the core issue as to why people hate Him in John 7:7 ...

"The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify that what it does is evil."

I do have an education, thank you so much for your concern.

I am going to continue to point out the lack of knowledge, lack of respect for others opinions, lack of understanding, and lack of good manners in general when I see it come up on this site. I really doubt that Robert would want to hang out with you people in a public setting as it would look poorly upon himself as someone who IS educated.

In fact, you said yourself: I have that certain special something. Well that special something is an education. The fact that you recognize it but don't opine to say it is your lack of comprehension or your refusal to allow yourself to be wrong. Being able to admit that one can be wrong is the first sign of an educated individual. Like so many Muslims complaining in the world today that they think they are educated above everyone else do to their knowledge of the Koran, your thinking that Christianity is above every other religion in the world is a ridiculous notion. So go ahead and continue to cheer each other on like so many tempests in a teapot.

Just be sure that you know that there are those who disagree with you and who always will.

"I do have an education, thank you so much for your concern."

Ok, that's wonderful--but not where islam is concerned, you aren't!

In fact, you are profoundly ignorant on the key differences between islam and Christianity ...so backatcha!

And I was serious in recommending Robert's book:

"Religion of Peace? Why Christianity Is and Islam Isn't"

But I wasn't serious by stating that you have a certain Something; guess you don't recognize sarcasm when it's presented to you.

Regardless, I really hope that you educate yourself on the subject of islam vs Christianity; it matters if you're going to post on Jihad Watch. Yea even Robert Spencer would agree with that, lol!

And if you can't take the heat, then get of the kitchen, small fry.

Well, considering that I believe all religions to be useless, I don't really care whether or not one is "better" than the next. They are all about of vs. them.

An attitude with you seem well acquainted with.

What I do care about is what the adherents of a particular religion do to others. Whether or not they practice violence and intimidation against those who are different. Islam is most assuredly the worst offender in the room. I have said this many times in the past on this site. I have also seen my fellow athiests on this site attacked by so-called Christians with their own set of rules.

I suggest that you do some of your own education and try to stop seeing in black and white.

I meant to say that "They are all about us vs. them." not of vs. them.

typo

"I don't really care whether or not one is "better" than the next."

Ok, now you don't make any sense ...if this is true, then why did YOU lay claim that Christianity is just as bad as islam, and on this same thread? You started this conversation, and yet now you pretend not to "care". Seems you want to run away from what you started. I say take responsibility for the false charges you leveled against Christianity by proving your point. And I guess since you can't prove your point with any solid basis, you instead pretend not to care. How convenient. Good-bye. Good riddance. I can no longer take you seriously; since all you want to do is throw sand and without merit on top of it.

I'm sorry, but your comments lure me back into this discussion, though as I say I don't think this is the best site to discuss Christianity.

You write:

"Richard Dawkins, along with many posters here, have chosen to remain in darkness about who Jesus is and why He came. They *choose* to hate and to misinterpret the words of Jesus and the Bible on the whole. It's as if they really don't want to learn the truth about Jesus Christ. They reject Him and His message, which means they are rejecting the Light ...in turn they remain in darkness, so they have chosen darkness over the Light. And when people die, well, this is what they'll receive: outter darkness. They should not be surprised come the day of judgment since this is what they've wanted all along. Take care, dear friend."

Do you realize how close this is to Muslim insistence that everyone knows Islam is the true religion, but infidels reject it out of sheer orneriness? The only difference is that Muslims aren't conditioned to hypocritically use words like "dear friend" for those they despise.

BTW, in case anyone wants to comment on my ignorance, please note that I have read the Bible cover to cover. (I have not yet managed this with the Quran, which as opposed to having numerous rather boring and useless sections is just one long bore.)

Can anyone recommend a site where we could more appropriately continue this discussion? I have no desire to run away, I just think Jihad Watch should concentrate on information about Islam, not arguments about Christianity. (A debate here about the merits of Islam would be perfectly appropriate, but no Muslims nor any of their fellow travelers seem to be interested.)

In no way does my above comment even come close to that of a mohemmedan slave.

And since you claim to have read the Bible cover to cover, then of course you would know this famous passage:

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." -- John 14:6

Your issue with Jesus being the only Way is with Him, not me ...

And as far as calling me a hypocrite for writing "dear friend" to Mo, you are wrong, I do most sincerely him a dear friend, and he knows it. Just ask him. He's a brother in Christ, and I deeply love all of my brother's and sister's in Christ.

Also, my comment does not compare to islamic supremacist since I am patterning Jesus, while muslims patter mohammed ...which is do or die! At no point did I demand posters listen to me, or else.

You're twisting my words. Guess that makes you a liar and a fool. I don't are HOW many times you've read the Bible, you are completely ignorant and on so many levels.

correction: I don't *care* HOW many times you've read the Bible ...

"Ok, now you don't make any sense ...if this is true, then why did YOU lay claim that Christianity is just as bad as islam, and on this same thread?"


You would be wrong. You have continued to make assumptions about me and my character which are patently false. I never said that Christianity is just as bad as Islam. It's all in your own minds that I think this. I swear, you Christians get so worked up sometimes without even thinking. Wait a minute, that sounds a lot like some of the stories that Robert posts on this site. How do you like that?

"I never said that Christianity is just as bad as Islam."

You're absolutely right. You never wrote that. I do apologize. I just read back through the comments on this thread and discovered that I mistook your comment for a different nincompoop, Karl Rov. So sorry. You're more of the opinion that *Christians* are just as bad as muslims, not that Christianity itself is just as bad. Big dif, right? Wrong! You and Karl are two peas in a pod. Hey you might just become the best of buds.

I still HIGHLY recommend you read Robert's book:

"Religion of Peace? Why Christianity Is and Islam Isn't"

No, really, put DOWN the Bible and read his book and stat. Maybe that will make more sense to you and get through your thick skull. God I hope so. But in your case, perhaps that's hoping for too much. Best of luck.

See ya!

Champ, you might check my contributions to this thread. I never wrote anything remotely like "Christianity is just as bad as Islam." Rather the contrary, though historically Christianity (Christianity as practiced by those who call themselves Christians, not some Platonic ideal you may derive from a combination of Scripture and your own moral ideals) has had its problems. Before responding, please read Matthew 7:16.

Jesus has deniability about the misdeeds of those who appropriated his name. Muhammad does not. He actively set a precedent in atrocious violence.

Sorry I misinterpreted your "dear friend" comment.

"You're more of the opinion that *Christians* are just as bad as muslims, not that Christianity itself is just as bad. Big dif, right? Wrong!"

Nope, wrong again. I never said that, nor do I think that. Let me make a suggestion for you:

Have you ever seen the original "Bad News Bears"? I'm thinking of the part where Walter Matthau gives a speech to the team about the word "assume". If you get a chance, check it out.

Do you own a mirror? Well, good, sit down and have long hard look at yourself, since you are making a lot of *assumptions* about Christians on this thread.

You've done nothing but make one snide remark after another about them, as if this is your big chance to rail on them due to the subject matter.

And you aren't the only one guilty of this, a few others have used this thread as their opportunity to rail on Christians, as well. I consider this pretty pathetic, especially since this forum is suppose to be focused on the threat of islam/sharia. Not Christians. They pose no threat to your life and liberties. Most Christians I know are law abiding citizens who support our freedoms.

Also, lets not split hairs on whether or not you actually stated that Christians are just as bad as muslims. Okay, so you didn't actually write those exact words, but the general message is there. And if you didn't mean to send that message, then may I suggest sending a clearer message ...I mean c'mon!

Karl, okay Matthew 7:16 states:

"You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they?"

Your point, please?

"Sorry I misinterpreted your "dear friend" comment."

No problem, it happens ...

Never mind, Karl, I already know your point ...

You're aiming to play the moral equivalency game with me between islam and Christianity, but I'm not gonna play.

Sorry if the point is too hard for you to understand. The point is that if Christians do evil, it is not unreasonable to suspect that Christianity is imperfect. I know that every time I show Christians doing evil, you will retort that they weren't "real" Christians.

For a halfway objective observer, that won't wash. When somebody who considers himself a Christian does evil, I assume he has at least been exposed to Christian doctrine, and I observe that his exposure to Christian doctrine has failed to prevent him from doing evil. I'm not talking about working on the Sabbath (incidentally a death penalty offense according to Scripture), I'm talking about (for instance, one among many I could cite) the Holocaust. The perpetrators of the Holocaust were overwhelmingly brought up as Catholics or Protestants. Or, in one word: Christians. By their fruits shall you know them.

That said, I don't think Christian doctrine compels its adherents to do evil. By contrast, I believe that Islamic doctrine, properly understood, does put its adherents on the path of violence against those who believe differently, which to me is the path to evil.

Now where exactly am I writing, or have I ever written, that Islam and Christianity are morally equivalent?

Richard Dawkins enrages Muslims by referring to destroyers of Timbuktu library as "Islamic barbarians"
........................

I, for one, am very glad to see this kind of courage and plainspokenness from Richard Dawkins, his other views notwithstanding.

More:

But his comments were criticised, with some followers claiming he was unjustly attacking Islam and others saying he should be considering vandalism committed by Christians...
........................

And that vandalism would be...what, exactly? Even though this library held mostly Islamic texts, much of the funding for the site came from helpful Infidels—in this case, primarily from South Africa.

Karl, your last comment proves that you are completely off y'ur rocker! ...so I'm done here, and I won't attempt to reason with a fool like you.

Enjoy the final word; as I won't be back to read your idiocy.

Apologist for Islamic barbarism Gunung Semeru wrote:

Very deceptive article above...
........................

This is like giving the Taliban a free pass for their destruction of so much of the contents of the Kabul Museum during the 1990s, because the brave director was able to save a few pieces of art there.

It is abundantly clear that Ansar Dine *intended* to completely destroy the library.

I treasure libraries—the idea that Islamists would set fire to a library without intending to destroy the site and its contents is ludicrous.

More:

Neither he DM article or Mr Spencer say anything about the muslims who due to their foresight to remove most the manuscripts
........................

Well, I will—kudos to them. Similarly, I have also praised the director of the Kabul Museum, and the director of the Maldives National Museum, who, although unable to save any of the artifacts there, at least mourned their destruction:

"It begins: Muslims in Maldives smash Buddhist statues in National Museum"

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/02/it-begins-muslims-in-maldives-smash-buddhist-statues-in-national-museum.html

The presence of a few "moderate" Muslims who attempt to protect "Jahillya", alas, does *nothing* to change the propensity of pious Muslims from destroying art, manuscripts, and artifacts.

Besides the horrific destruction I've noted above, we have also seen the destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas, the burning of the Institute of Egypt, the sacking of the Cairo Museum, and the destruction of UNESCO sites in Timbuktu itself just recently by the same Ansar Dine.

Likewise, Saudi Arabia is quietly destroying archeological sites in the Arabian peninsula, Balkan and Syrian have destroyed many historical churches, and "Palestinian" Muslims are destroying Jewish and Christian sites in the Holy Land.

We have also seen the call from Imams for the destruction of the pyramids and other ancient Egyptian sites along the Nile, and the call to destroy art in the West, as well.

More:

"We knew that what we had here was threatened," said Mr. Cissé, a history professor and acting director for Timbuktu's Ahmed Baba Institute for Higher Studies and Islamic Research. "So I said, 'We're going to have to start moving them out.' "
........................

Why would these curators have believed that these manuscripts were threatened, if—as Gunung Semeru would have it—"Islamists" present no real threat to such priceless artifacts?

The fact is that the heritage of mankind is under attack by pious Muslims all over the world—and your meretricious insinuations do *nothing* to change that appalling fact.

"Karl Pov" enjoys being a trouble maker on Jihad Watch. Hey check out this thread, if you're interested in prior nonsense ...

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/07/gorin-dutch-website-airs-heretical-questioning-of-srebrenica-genocide.html

And he used the same on that thread that he used here; where when confronted with his nonsense by others he claims innocence or becomes dismissive. Hmm. Yea don't waste your time with this clown.

Karl Pov, Hawy, Cuda, et al, why do you feel it incumbent upon yourselves to insult, take issue with and generally pick fights with the Christians who post here?

Islam is a threat to all civilized men, be they Christian, Jew, Atheist or “other”. It is Muslims that are beheading, raping, etc. not Christians.

So, if you are atheists as you claim, what does it matter to you what Christians believe or don’t believe?

What I see is an atmosphere of bigotry and contentiousness on your part, directed at people that mean no harm to you – or anyone else for that matter.

Why do you persist in this?

correction: And he used the same "mo: modus operandi" on that thread that he used here ...

BTW, I decided to research "Karl Pov's" prior comments; since I had never dealth with this poster before, and big surprise, all I found was the same BS on other threads.

Thank you, Davegreybeard! ...you are always so fair-minded and reasonable; someone that other posters can certainly learn from.

Hi Champ, I love hearing you talk about your faith and I love your fighting spirit.

Hope all is well with you and yours.

Hi Champ, I love hearing you talk about your faith and I love your fighting spirit.

Hope all is well with you and yours.

Hi, Davegreybeard ...thank you so much, dear friend! I've always admired and respected your comments, so your kind word mean a lot to me. :)

You ask:

"Karl Pov, Hawy, Cuda, et al, why do you feel it incumbent upon yourselves to insult, take issue with and generally pick fights with the Christians who post here?"

1) I don't believe I've insulted anyone in this thread. If you disagree, perhaps you could point out any insults in my posts. I may have insulted others at various points in my online posting, going back some decades, but I try to avoid it as it's generally not a great idea.

2) I take issue with assertions I think are wrong. On this site, I have no great dispute with the idea that Islam is dangerous. I do dispute sanctimonious denial that Christians, too, have some problems (as do unbelievers, Jews, etc.). I find it strange that adherents of a religion which teaches humility consider themselves and their fellow adherents to be immune (uniquely so, I suppose) to the attractions of evil, when history so clearly demonstrates the contrary.

3) I don't go out of my way to pick fights with Christians who post here. I agree with much of what they post. I'm not big on attaboys, however, so I usually post when I see something with which I disagree. Should I suppress my expression of disagreement? I thought that being ready and able to express disagreement was part of what is best in civilization.

Where in all this do you see my "bigotry and contentiousness"?

I said: "I love my parents and siblings more than the character "Jesus"..."

A pretty innocuous statement, I thought. It seems that Champ is utterly rattled and unhinged by the mere mention of a non-Christian, non-Muslim person's beliefs. Only a fundamentalist Christian or a devout Muslim would claim to love "Jesus" more than their actual loved ones in real life.

I only entered this thread when I saw that 3 Christians were knocking Dawkins for his denial that he was insulting all Muslims and conflating his statement that he was equating Islam with Christianity (which he did not do). I then insulted Buraq (quite less than the vulgar Buraq insulted me and others btw) when he started name calling and berating others on this site who I suppose were Athiests or had a different viewpoint. So I did not PICK these fights, I did the right thing and stood up for my fellow posters who expressed a point of view and who were being chastised for it. Champ is the cheerleader with the attaboys and since this seems to be a holy roller echo chamber we have continued on.

"Hi Champ, I love hearing you talk about your faith and I love your fighting spirit.

Hope all is well with you and yours. "

Can you see how this might just piss me off a little? He was just name calling (clown, buffoon, off your rocker to name a few) in the preceding posts and you call this fighting spirit while I am called out for picking fights with Christians on this site? Don't see a double standard there do you?

“Don't see a double standard there do you?”

Nope.

What I see, is a group of smug, self satisfied Atheists who, as is usually the case with them, have a chip on their shoulder and an axe to grind. They’ve got it all figured out and anyone who disagrees with them is immediately attacked as “uneducated”, a “denier of science” and generally, an ignorant fool that believes in fairy tales.

It is depressingly common to find that after an individual has declared that he is an Atheist, his very next breath will launch an attack on Christians. Not Buddhists, not Hindus, not even Muslims, but specifically Christians. That’s why it is so remarkable when just one of this crowd (Atheists) actually notices that there really is a religion that is a danger to all mankind and really does deserve full throated and vigorous condemnation. That rare condemnation by an Atheist of Islam, instead of Christianity, is why we are having this conversation.

You claim that all religions are “fairy tales” – perhaps you are right. But you can’t let it go at that can you? No, in the fashion of the worst form of religious bigotry, you are on a crusade to force everyone to believe as you believe. This is even though others, with their “fairy tales” mean you no ill will and actually wish you well. Why not allow those who believe in “fairy tales” to have them and just accept their good will?

Why do you insist on being a jerk?


“I'm talking about (for instance, one among many I could cite) the Holocaust. The perpetrators of the Holocaust were overwhelmingly brought up as Catholics or Protestants. Or, in one word: Christians. By their fruits shall you know them.”

A truly monstrous and outrageously insulting comment by you, guaranteed to “pick a fight” with almost any Christian.

I think you know it and I think you know why.

Why do you insist on being a jerk?

Why do you insist on being a bullying others into submission? I wouldn't dare tell others what to think and I have not attacked any group of people. Just the individuals who like to talk down to others as you have done and I will not stop or submit to your belittling of others. I have the right to opinions. Who here is being the jerk?

Let’s consider some of what you have said:

“Well, considering that I believe all religions to be useless, I don't really care whether or not one is "better" than the next. They are all about of (sic) vs. them.”

In this statement you conflate Christianity with Islam, and state that one is not “better” than the other. An assertion guaranteed to insult Christians, as it is a slander that is provably false. It is not Christians who are beheading by following the bible; it is Muslims who are murdering by following the Quran. So the sole purpose of your statement is specifically to attack Christianity and Christians.

In your next breath you admit as much when you say:

“Islam is most assuredly the worst offender in the room. I have said this many times in the past on this site. I have also seen my fellow atheists on this site attacked by so-called Christians with their own set of rules.”

So clearly, you DO recognize that Christianity is not “the worst offender in the room” and it therefore must be “better” than Islam. Yet when you are in a mood to insult and bait Christians “all religions are useless” and “one is not better than the other”

Why do you insist on being a jerk?

Well, I didn't say that one religion is better or not.

I said I don't really care whether or not one is better that the other.

Those are two different things.

You go on to say:

"So clearly, you DO recognize that Christianity is not “the worst offender in the room” and it therefore must be “better” than Islam."

What matters is not the religion, but what it's adherents do to others. Christianity was absolutely horrid hundreds of years ago. Thankfully, it went through a reformation and it's adherents don't commit the crimes that we see Islam's adherents doing today. That isn't to say that Christianity can't or won't become more violent in the future as with any belief system.

I would suggest that you read my comments, not read into them.

Again, thank you, Davegreybeard! ...you are so spot on. He is being a jerk but he doesn't see it. And the other poster IS "off his rocker" since now he's calling Hitler and company Christians? Oh sure, and I'm the Queen of England! No they weren't!

And why is Cuda upset with my name calling, but not upset by Karl's inane remark? Oh, did he say "double standard" a minute ago, too? Huh?

Cuda is attacking me on yet another thread now. His only contribution on that thread was to call me a bully, when in fact he's bullying. He needs a mirror!

He's being a jerk here, and he's being a jerk there. Yep, he's a jerk.

I like to point out to others on this site the bullies who make disparaging comments to others when they should be courteous. You have repeatedly called me and others names.

I call that being a bully.

@ Cuda

"It's easy to interpret Bible verses any way you want to. The same goes for the Koran. Nutters like you should feel right at home with Islamists."

Liar.

Misuse/abuse, sure. Properly interpret, no.

Now, stop claiming Islam and Christianity are equal, and instead show me where the Bible has open-ended commands for Jews or Christians to commit violence against unbelievers.

Then show me where Jews or Christians are committing such acts, all over the world, on a regular basis, in obedience to those commands.

***

It's so tiresome to hear this nonsense, over and over and OVER again.

I have no problem standing with atheists against jihad and sharia. But with very few exceptions, atheists cannot seem to set aside their loathing for Christianity and Christians in order to do so.

Again, you need a mirror since you are a full-blown bully.

Note your very *first* comment on this same thread on Jan 31 @9:09PM, you wrote:

~~~~~~~~~

Duh_swami and Gerard...

So you guys are knocking Dawkins for the very same thing that the Muslim was knocking him for?

Hypocrites

~~~~~~~~~~

Hey if that isn't "bullying", then I don't know what is. Seems you recognize bullying in others, but not in yourself? Hmm, where I come from that's known as __________!


@ Champ -

Thanks, tho' I'm a girl! Wish I'd had a better screen name before I came to JW. At this point I'm so used to it everywhere that I'd rather not change it.

@ Karl Pov

I had missed this vile comment from you before:

"The perpetrators of the Holocaust were overwhelmingly brought up as Catholics or Protestants. Or, in one word: Christians. By their fruits shall you know them."

What a piece of filth.

I will ask again, as I have asked others on this thread:

Show me where the Bible has open ended commands for Jews or Christians to commit violence against unbelievers.

Then show me where Jews or Christians are committing such acts, all over the world, in obedience to such commands.

I'll save you the time - THERE ARE NONE.

***

Now, take your Christianity-hatred elsewhere. There is no place for it here. This place is to discuss ISLAM, not for you and those like you to spew their lies and hatred against Christianity and Christians.

correction: that comment was @8:09, not @9:09

Gee, I'm sorry that you are offended by a strictly factual remark. I'm an unbeliever myself, but I have no problem recognizing that some unbelievers have done horrible things. I don't believe that belonging to the group of unbelievers makes me responsible for the crimes of all unbelievers.

You, on the other hand, seem terribly insulted by the fact that you belong to a group called Christians who, just like the group called unbelievers, include some who have done terrible things. And yet I thought that Christians were humble and recognized that they were all sinners. I really don't understand.

I don't deny that Muslims (as well my fellow unbelievers) have done much evil. I am offended, as was Jesus, by the self-righteousness and sanctimony of those who seem to think that their group, whether Pharisees or Christians, is exempt from evil. (Do I need to look up the relevant Gospel verses for you?) Does this make Christianity and Islam "morally equivalent"? Or does it mean that Christians and Muslims are both human beings?

@ Karl Pov


Show me where the Bible has open-ended commands for Jews or Christians to commit violence against unbelievers. Then show me where Jews or Christians are committing such acts, all over the world, on a regular basis, in obedience to such commands.

Hint: Passages about war don't count. They are descriptive not prescriptive. Passages about the Jewish laws of that time don't count, since they were for a particular time, for a particular people, for a particular reason.

In other words, there is NOTHING, therefore there are no examples of people doing it.


***

Now, how about letting go of your hatred of Christianity and and get back to the topic of this site, which is Islam?

OK Champ, according to your logic, my statement where I take exception to their knocking of Dawkins you can't see how they are being hypocrites? They are doing the same thing that Islamists do all the time and that is to belittle others way of thinking.

This is why I called them hypocrites in the first place.

You should be the one who needs a mirror. Islamists are very good at playing the victim and so are you.

Hi, Mo! ...oh sorry, my moniker confuses some people, too :)

And I'm glad that you caught this comment:

"The perpetrators of the Holocaust were overwhelmingly brought up as Catholics or Protestants. Or, in one word: Christians. By their fruits shall you know them."

Anyone leveling this lie is indeed off their rocker!

And it's very telling that Cuda got upset when I stated that stated that Karl was off his rocker (oh no!), yet he gives this person a pass for making such an insane comment about Nazi'? Go figure!

Ok, it doesn't make sense, not unless you understand that the Christian haters side with one another no matter what *lie* the other one puts forth. I think that Cuda is siding with Karl because they both hate Christians; they share this in common, and so it doesn't matter to them what the Truth is regarding whether or not the Nazi's were actually Christians ...of course they weren't!

I think what's more important to them is their shared HATRED for Christians, so the Truth on the subject, that Karl raised, takes a backseat. What do you think?

Here are a few as I quoted before to Buraq in a previous reply:

As for passages giving sanction to judge others:

"Those who rebuke the wicked will have delight, and a good blessing will come upon them." –Prov. 24:25

Open your mouth for the speechless, in the cause of all who are appointed to die. Open your mouth, judge righteously... plead the cause of the... needy. -Prov. 31:8-9

He who is spiritual judges all things… for… we have the mind of Christ. –1 Cor 2:15-16

No, I'm not saying that these quotes are evil, bad or anything. I'm saying that they could be interpreted by an individual who is looking to do evil and think that the Bible is sanctioning him to do so. I don't believe that every Christian is evil or every Muslim is good. There are good people and bad people. Belonging to a group doesn't make you either.


Mo, first off, let me point out that I have not written anything about the Bible containing "open ended commands for Jews or Christians to commit violence against unbelievers." I have pointed out that the moral strictures of Judeo-Christianity have performed unsatisfactorily in preventing such violence.

Your qualification "open ended" is interesting. Is it intended to exlude the extermination orders (e.g. Deuteronomy 7:16) handed down from Upstairs to the Hebrews regarding the indigenous peoples of Canaan? To their credit, the Hebrews weren't that good at genocide (consider for example the Amelekite in King David's army, even if he came to a bad end), and Upstairs made them suffer for it (see Joshua 23:13, Judges 2:3).

"I think that Cuda is siding with Karl because they both hate Christians; they share this in common, and so it doesn't matter to them what the Truth is regarding whether or not the Nazi's were actually Christians ...of course they weren't!"

This is what Wikipedia was made for.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nazi_Germany

I don't hate anyone. Those are feeling in your own head that you are ascribing to me. I pity you.

OK, Champ, back to your bullying!

@ Cuda -

Let's see. My request was: Show me where the Bible has open-ended commands for Jews or Christians to commit violence against unbelievers.

None of this fits that description.

My second request was: Then, show me where Jews or Christians are committing such acts, all over the world, in obedience to such commands.

Nothing on that.

As the kids on the interwebs say, EPIC FAIL.

Looks like you have no capacity for reading comprehension, since nothing you've posted here remotely fits what I asked for.

I will no longer waste my time with you.

How about Deut. 20: 16-18

Deuteronomy 20:16-18 (New International Version)

Page Options
Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email


=
=
>
>>

Show resourcesAdd parallel
Deuteronomy 20:16-18

16 However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. 17 Completely destroy[a] them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you. 18 Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the Lord your God.

I wouldn't think that Moses would sanction genocide but there it is.

@ Champ -

No worries.

I agree. There are atheists who are not hostile in that way, but they seem to be in the minority.

Quite often, they are of the sort demonstrated here. Their hatred for religion in general but Christianity in particular is extreme. Those people are unwilling or incapable of making distinctions when it comes to comparisons with Islam, and, in fact, resort to the sorts of lies, deliberate misuse of biblical verses and outright slander we've seen here.

My error (as is always the case) is in assuming that facts, logic and reason will have an impact on such people.

You'd think by now I'd know that's not so. I'm slowly learning it.

Cuda, what's interesting about these Christians is that when we point out that some Christians have done bad things over the last couple millennia (i.e. as long as Christianity has existed), they accuse us of hating all Christians. I wonder what they would say if we accused them of hating all Muslims? After all, this site is largely dedicated to chronicling the horrible things Muslims do, to others and for that matter to each other. Does this mean we should hate all Muslims? Robert Spencer denies it, and he's right. Islam doesn't ensure that its adherents will do evil, even if it does facilitate that tendency.

@ Champ -

No worries.

I agree. There are atheists who are not hostile in that way, but they seem to be in the minority.

Quite often, they are of the sort demonstrated here. Their hatred for religion in general but Christianity in particular is extreme. Those people are unwilling or incapable of making distinctions when it comes to comparisons with Islam, and, in fact, resort to the sorts of lies, deliberate misuse of biblical verses and outright slander we've seen here.

My error (as is always the case) is in assuming that facts, logic and reason will have an impact on such people.

You'd think by now I'd know that's not so. I'm slowly learning it.

Yes, it's sort of like the Steve Jobs reality distortion field. You try to point out what's wrong with their logic and they resort to the Chewbacca defense.

@ Cuda -


There is no bullying going on by Champ.

A Wiki link does not demonstrate that those in Nazi Germany committed their deeds because the Bible commanded them to do so.

You have produced none of the evidence I asked for in this regard. (That's because it does not exist.)

Go waste your time somewhere else. Perhaps a blog of your own? This place is for discussing ISLAM.

It's amazing how these Christians can without hesitation ridicule the perfectly accurate observation that the perpetrators of the Holocaust were overwhelmingly Christian. (As were, with the exception of the Soviets, the Allied forces which stopped it.) But they have this amazing circular logic: If a person does something really terrible, he can't "really" be a Christian.

Maybe he goes to Church every week, confesses his sins to a priest, takes communion, etc., but this doesn't mean anything.

I'm using the examples of Catholic practice. I don't know how the Lutherans manifested their Christianity but no doubt they did so, all the time they were murdering Jews, perhaps feeling solidarity with that filthy antisemite Martin Luther.

Go waste your time somewhere else. Perhaps a blog of your own? This place is for discussing ISLAM.


No thank you. I will state my opinions here.

I thought this was the Jihadwatch blog , not a blog about Islam. I thought that Robert would care about how ideas should be free to be expressed without ridicule and I'm sure he does. He wouldn't want anyone to hound someone out of a discussion. He wouldn't want the church condemning him before he could state his own opinions.

What I'm stating is that your *approach* was clearly BULLYING towards Duh_Swami and Gerard, and yet you fail to acknowledge this fact. You attacked them both by bluntly stating that they are HYPOCRITES. They are on our side, yet you treated them like dirt.

Your ad hominems attacks were completely unnecessary, and now you're making excuses for yourself and blame shifting.

I suggest you read the comments from "Davegreybeard" more carefully; as he made some excellent points to you specifically. Hope you read them and put them into practice. He is a good and very reasonable man, someone you could learn from.

They treated Richard Dawkins, who is on our side, like dirt. That is why I called them hypocrites.

And the fact that they WERE being hypocrites.

You are, with the utmost ferocity, attacking a straw man.

"A Wiki link does not demonstrate that those in Nazi Germany committed their deeds because the Bible commanded them to do so."

But no one here has asserted that the Bible ordered the perpetration of the Holocaust. (I'm being careful here to mention neither Nazis nor Germans specifically, since the perpetrators of the Holocaust were limited to neither group.) What I have written, and write again, that the Christian education which the overwhelming majority of the perpetrators received did nothing to prevent them from perpetrating the Holocaust, and that they overwhelmingly considered themselves Christians and manifested their Christianity the same as did Catholic and Lutheran American soldiers.

And let me take the opportunity to mention that I don't hate Christians. My aunt the nun is a wonderful person, as are other Christians (and Jews, and unbelievers) I know.

"There is no bullying going on by Champ."

Thank you, Mo!

@ Karl Pov

"But no one here has asserted that the Bible ordered the perpetration of the Holocaust."

The Wiki link was posted to prove that very point, or at least that Islam & Christianity are more or less the same. Yet you turn around and deny it. Remarkable.

Now, provide the evidence I've asked for several times now. I'm not going to repeat the request. My fingers are tired of typing it.

Nice attempt to get out of it all. The 'my aunt the nun' was a cute touch.

Now, about that evidence I asked for?

With all respect to the posters above—most of whom I do respect very highly—arguing for or against the validity of any faith system is really a distraction here.

Here is Richard Dawkins finally proving something of an ally, in recognizing the barbarism of Islam. I, for one, am glad to see it, whether or not I happen to agree with Mr. Dawkins on all other matters.

We need a "big tent", and for people of all persuasions to recognize the terrible threat Islam represents *to us all*—Christians, Jews, Atheists—people of all faiths or none. In the above story, they even present a threat to their less orthodox coreligionists.

We're all in this proverbial foxhole together—let's refrain from kicking each other's ankles, and focus on the issues we *can* agree on—the exitential threat of Islam.

I wholeheartedly agree.

Creepy cuda wrote to me:

"I don't hate anyone. Those are feeling in your own head that you are ascribing to me. I pity you."

No, well it seems that he hates me ...

The word "pity" can either mean compassion or contempt. Given his overall treatment of me here, and on that other thread where he's insisting that I'm a "bully", then it's obvious that he is not showing compassion in this instance, but contempt--which everyone knows is a form of hatred.

Further proof of his contempt/hatred for Christians can be found in his above snide remark to Karl by stating "those Christians", which shows utter contempt. By writing "those Christians" he shots himself in the foot--again.

Deny it all you want, cuda, but the proof is RIGHT there in black 'n white.

@ gravenimage -

I try not to get involved in that sort of thing. But when I see outright lies and disgraceful comments regarding the Holocaust, I can't just let it pass.

I apologize ...

Stating that you are "Creepy" was a bit much.

Please forgive me.

“I really don't understand.”

Well, you and I can certainly agree on your statement, above.

“I don't believe that belonging to the group of unbelievers makes me responsible for the crimes of all unbelievers. “

You say this out of one side of your mouth, while at the same time insinuating that Christians were responsible for the Holocaust because at some point some of perpetrators may have been raised as Christians.

Not only is it that you “really don’t understand” you are a liar, and not a very good one.

Why do you insist on being a jerk?

Oh, and it was Karl that wrote "THESE Christians", not you, so I apologize for that, as well.

Karl is also demonstrating contempt, just as you are by writing that you "pity" me, which in your case shows nothing but contempt.


"You say this out of one side of your mouth, while at the same time insinuating that Christians were responsible for the Holocaust because at some point some of perpetrators may have been raised as Christians."

As I said, Christians were responsible for perpetrating the Holocaust and Christians were res

"You say this out of one side of your mouth, while at the same time insinuating that Christians were responsible for the Holocaust because at some point some of perpetrators may have been raised as Christians."

"Raised as Christians" + never renouncing that faith + continuing to follow various Christian duties such as churchgoing = "Christians". Doing evil doesn't disqualify them. Again, aren't Christians supposed to be humble and admit that they are sinners? I've done evil; some of my fellow unbelievers have done enormous evil; and I can admit this. Why can't Christians admit that they and their coreligionists have done evil to one degree or another?

I wonder how many of the Christians participating in this thread (to whom I referred as "these Christians," using a demonstrative pronoun which seems to have provoked some of you to ignore the fact that it is restrictive and to imply that when I use it, it is all-inclusive), have actually picked up the Bible in 2012 or 2013? How many have bothered, with all the online sources available, even to look up the citations I gave? Why is it that I know the Bible better than those who say it is the Word of God? Anyone read the tale of sexual slavery, gang rape, collective guilt, dismemberment, genocide, and woman trafficking that makes up the last three chapters of Judges lately?

To all Atheists out there, how about this:

Suppose in my opening comments to any of you, I started off by noting how “silly” and “unscientific” you are because you proclaim there is no God. Yet you cannot possibly know this because you have absolutely no “scientific” explanation for the genesis of life – how foolish are you?

Then suppose I sprinkled my discourse with the FACT that one of the greatest mass murderers in human history, Stalin, was just following his Atheist ideology when he murdered millions. Perhaps I could go on to note that Stalin was only exceeded in slaughter by another Atheist mass murderer, Mao Zedong.

Then maybe I could slyly insinuate that Atheists as a group are suspect, because some of the most devout adherents to this ideology are all time world champions at dishing out brutality and human suffering.

Finally I could point out how “useless” Atheism is as an ideology, because it has never been the foundation of a successful society anywhere. And every time it has been tried it has resulted in massive human misery.

I COULD say those things and they would be true.

But I don’t.

Because it would create pointless animosity

And the resultant hostility would derail the discussion and prevent any useful discourse

And because I am not a jerk.

"I COULD say those things and they would be true."

Actually, only that second paragraph would be true, the rest are conclusions you have reached which are not true.

"I COULD say those things and they would be true.

"But I don’t.

"Because it would create pointless animosity

"And the resultant hostility would derail the discussion and prevent any useful discourse

"And because I am not a jerk."

Well, I sure thank you for that. I'd feel really really bad if you did say what you said, pardon, what you're saying you aren't saying. And thanks especially for refusing to imply that those who disagree with you are jerks. That would be insulting, and we all know that Christians don't do mean stuff like insulting people.

You are a credit to your faith.

"Not only is it that you 'really don’t understand' you are a liar, and not a very good one.".

Precisely, Davegreybeard! He may be convinced of his lies regarding the Holocaust, but no one familiar with the Truth is buying it.

And I love reading the "American Thinker", and he wrote an essay entitled: The Nazis and Christianity, which totally debunks Karl's claims ...

Excerpt:

Christianity had declined severely in Germany at the time the Nazis came to power, which is why the Nazis were able to come to power. In his book, The Dictators, Richard Overy states that in the decades preceding the First World War Germany was becoming increasingly secular, and that after that war, from 1918 to 1931, 2.4 million Evangelical Christians formally renounced their faith as well as almost half a million Catholics. In Prussia, only 21% of the population took communion and in Hamburg only five percent of the population took communion. Before Hitler, German religious leaders were publicly condemning the rise of moral relativism and decline of traditional religious values.


Weimar Germany largely had abandoned Christianity and increasingly was embracing hedonism, Marxism and paganism. There, decline of Christianity in Germany led directly to the rise of Nazism. Professor Henri Lichtenberger in his 1937 book, The Third Reich, describes the religious life of the Weimar Republic as a place in which the large cities were "spiritual cemeteries" with almost no believers at all, except for those who were members of the clergy. The middle class went through the motions, but lacked all living faith. The workers, influenced by socialism, were suspicious of the church. Even in the countryside, preachers had little influence on the people. In the 1938 book, The War Against God, by Sidney Dark and R.S. Essex, describes pre-Nazi antipathy toward Christianity by noting that churches had lost all their vitality and that their services were lifeless. Mower, in his 1938 book, Germany Puts the Clock Back, wrote that by 1920, God and Christianity had been in steady decline, a process that had begun in 1860. Mower talks about a culture not so much casual as vicious about sexuality. He writes of art sickened into atonal music, about the absence of any sense of sin, about entire graduating classes in high school turning up for birth control devices, and about the commonplace occurrence of abortion.

This hostility or indifference toward Christianity in Europe, and especially in Germany, led naturally to a profound anti-Christian sentiment in Nazi Germany. Nazis, more than most Germans, were indifferent or hostile to Christianity. Hitler originally appeared to just ignore Christianity. Dark and Essex write in their 1938 book that Mein Kampf has few passages which in any way refer to religion, none that refer to Hitler's own personal religion, or to the teaching of the Bible, nor any branch of Christian teaching. Jacob Marcus in his 1934 book by the Union of American Hebrew Congregations notes that "Though his parents were both Catholics, Hitler himself has apparently no interest in any organized religion." Marcus also has an entire section in his book about Nazi "anti-Christian anti-Semitism." Rauschning in 1938 wrote

"The purpose of the National Socialism fight against Christianity is the same: the total destruction of the last and most deep-rooted support of the forces of conservation. The destruction of the spirit of Christianity in Germany is certainly more far-reaching than appears on the surface...Such vestiges of living Christianity as remain are steadily degenerating in the direction of a superficial and unthinking deism" and that ultimate goal as "...the total abolition of Christianity, which is not a mere philosophical fad of the National Socialists but an iron necessity of their system."

Within a year of taking power, Hitler was saying:

"Christianity was incapable of uniting the Germans, and that only an entirely new world-theory was capable of doing so."

Here: http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/the_nazis_and_christianity.html

~~~~~~~~~~

Karl's *facts* do not line up with the Truth; and Hitler's above quote reveals that he certainly was NOT a practicing Christian. Karl does not know what he's talking about, and needs to educate himself. But perhaps hes believed his lies for so long, that maybe there's little hope he'll turn from them now.

At least we and others know the Truth about the Holocaust. I guess he can wallow in his own lies if he wants to, but he really has no business promoting such garbage here where most folks are genuinely interested in the Truth on the subject.


Now I know. The Holocaust was perpetrated not by Christians, but by fans of atonal music.

Bravo!! Your above comment to atheists is brilliant, Davegreybeard!!!

Yes, you made *excellent* points well worth their consideration ...

@ Karl Pov -

Hey, Karl, I'm still waiting. Show me where the Bible has open ended commands for Jews or Christians to commit violence against unbelievers. (Or anyone.)

Then show me where Jews or Christians are committing such acts, all over the world, on a regular basis, in obedience to those commands.

***

Now, how about that Islam? Anything to say on that? Or just more lies about Christians committing the Holocaust?

You have no idea what my "faith" is.

Jerk

You wrote:

"Now I know. The Holocaust was perpetrated not by Christians, but by fans of atonal music."

~~~~~~~~~

Clearly Karl is not interested in the Truth regarding the Holocaust, but only in sarcasm and/or lies. Apparently this is all we can expect from this person.

"Hey, Karl, I'm still waiting. Show me where the Bible has open ended commands for Jews or Christians to commit violence against unbelievers. (Or anyone.)

Then show me where Jews or Christians are committing such acts, all over the world, on a regular basis, in obedience to those commands."

Great questions, Mo!

Yea this should be easy for Karl, since supposedly hes read the ENTIRE Bible. Yea there's only one honest answer worth giving: that there aren't any directives in the Bible permitting Christians to commit such evil.

But given Karl's propensity to lie, I hold out little hope that he'll tell the Truth now, especially since he's already showered us with one egregious lie after another regarding the Holocaust.

Fascinating glimpse of history Champ, kind of all makes sense. Especially when you look at old photos and film clips of the crowds of thousands smiling Germans all screaming Sieg Hiel! as their new messiah passes by.

As they say, “if you don’t believe in something, you’ll fall for anything” – and they did.

@ Champ -

Yeah, just anther troll/troublemaker with nothing useful to say.

Too bad they can't all be banned. But then they'd come back under new screen names and whine about being martyrs for the cause of free speech.

"Too bad they can't all be banned. But then they'd come back under new screen names and whine about being martyrs for the cause of free speech."

Interesting sequence of sentences. In any case Jihad Watch is not a public institution and those in charge of it are free to ban anyone they like. I'm grateful that a forum is provided for views that aren't necessarily popular, but have no illusions that I have any inalienable right to participate.

You're absolutely right, Mo! Karl is a troll and a trouble maker with nothing to say ...

Yea, since when is LYING about the Holocaust--or lying about anything, for that matter--a worthy contribution? It isn't. And lies are not simply unpopular, they're evil.

Karl is dismissing his egregious lies by claiming that they just aren't "popular"? Wow; and that would be funny if lying weren't such a serious issue. Yes, compulsive liars like him should be banned. And if he keeps this up, then he will get banned. This site is not for dispensing disinformation/lies about the Holocaust like he's doing.

Karl needs to get off of his worthless Christian bashing bandwagon and do something productive with his efforts by fighting against the real enemy: islam

Thank you, Davegreybeard :)

"...Germans all screaming Sieg Hiel! as their new messiah passes by."

ahaha!!! ...funny but true!

Cuda, follow your concience and you will determine your trajectory.

Moslems do not have a monopoly on book burning, i recall christians burning Harry Potter books in the USA.

Then we have the burning of the Records of the Goa Inquisition (by Portuguese colonial authorities).

Most of the Goa Inquisition's records were destroyed after its abolition in 1812, and it is thus impossible to know the exact number of those put on trial and the punishments they were prescribed.

The Inquisition was established to punish apostate New Christians—Jews and Muslims who converted to Catholicism, as well as their descendants—who were now suspected of practicing their ancestral religion in secret.[2]
In Goa, the Inquisition also turned its attention to Indian converts from Hinduism or Islam who were thought to have returned to their original ways. In addition, the Inquisition prosecuted non-converts who broke prohibitions against the observance of Hindu or Muslim rites or interfered with Portuguese attempts to convert non-Christians to Catholicism.[2]
While its ostensible aim was to preserve the Catholic faith, the Inquisition was used against Indian Catholics and Hindus and also against Portuguese settlers from Europe (mostly New Christians and Jewish but also Old Christians) as an instrument of social control, as well as a method of confiscating property and enriching the Inquisitors

Interesting to note that the man who called for the inquisition was none other than a saint,.. St. Francis Xavier, in a 1545 letter to John III of Portugal, requested an Inquisition to be installed in Goa

The Vatican had no problems with nazis

"Blessed" Alojzije (Aloysius) Viktor Cardinal Stepinac (May 8, 1898 – February 10, 1960) was a Croatian Catholic Prelate. He was Archbishop of Zagreb from 1937 to 1960. In 1946, in a verdict that polarised public opinion both in Yugoslavia and beyond, a Belgrade court found him guilty of collaborating with the Ustaše and complicity in allowing the forced conversion of Orthodox Serbs to Catholicism. He was sentenced to 16 years in prison, but after five years was released and confined to his home parish of Krašić. He was appointed a Cardinal in 1952 by Pope Pius XII. In 1998 Pope John Paul II declared him a martyr and beatified him, which again polarised public opinion.

On February 26,1942, NDH Minister of the Interior Andrija Artukovic gave the following speech before the Sabor,or Croatian Parliament, announcing the official policy of the Croat government to make the NDH Juden frei (Jew free):

Immediately following the birth of the former Yugoslavia, all the enemies of the Croat people - the Jews, Communists and Freemasons - united to destroy the Croatian people and all their national characteristics... The Jews worked for and prepared the world revolution... The Jews, as one of the most dangerous international organizations, tried to achieve world Jewry... in order that the Jews might gain full mastery over all goods of the world and all the power in the world... The Jews wanted to achieve these aims not only through international Jewry as such, but also through the Communists. Communism is the child of Jewry and one of the principle levers for the world mastery of the Jews... The Judeo-Communists have tried to bring about the disintegration of the Croatian national body... The Croatian people, having re-established their independent state of Croatia, could not do otherwise but to clean off the poisonous damagers and insatiable parasites - Jews, Communists, Freemasons... The independent state of Croatia, as an Ustashi state,... settled the so-called Jewish question with a decisive and healthy grasp.

The Vatican dismissed the Croatian massacres and genocide against Orthodox Serbs and Jews as 'teething troubles of a new regime' in a statement by Monsignor Domenico Tardini of the Vatican state secretariat.

The Catholic Croats established an alliance with Bosnian Muslims in the NDH to ethnically cleanse and to exterminate the Orthodox Serbs. From April to November 1941, the Vice-President of the NDH was Bosnian Muslim Osman Kulenovic from Bihac. From November 1941 to April 1945, the Vice-President of the NDH was his brother Dzafer Kulenovic. Dzafer Kulenovic ordered that the Serbian Orthodox Church at Brcko be destroyed, the cemetery dug up, and the bones of the Orthodox Serbs be dispersed. In the Croat-Muslim NDH, not even the dead were spared

http://www.serbianna.com/columns/savich/007.shtml


Gunung Semeru wrote:

Moslems do not have a monopoly on book burning, i recall christians burning Harry Potter books in the USA.
..................................

I am no fan of book burning in general, and I am a particular fan of the Harry Potter books. Still, consider—these were books that these people had purchased—they were not destroying anyone else's property. In addition, they were not wiping out the existence of JK Rowling's work—any books damaged or destroyed were copies of multiple editions, not unique texts at all. Hence, any damage was in itself an expression of freedom of speech.

The rest is cut-and-paste—you didn't even bother to remove the footnote marks—and is mostly an off-topic rant about the Catholic Church's (alleged) affinity for Nazism.

I can't imagine what your point is—except it is, no doubt, yet more Tu Quoque.

Let your concience be your guide.

Let your conscience be your guide, as Jiminy Cricket sang.

I try to do just that London Jim, as I have done here.

Leave a comment

NOTE: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.







Not Peace But A Sword by Robert SpencerDid Muhammad Exist? The Muslim Brotherhood in America, by Robert SpencerIslamophobia: Thoughtcrime of the Totalitarian FutureMuslim Persecution of Christians, by Robert Spencer Obama and IslamThe Ground Zero Mosque: Second Wave of the 9/11 Attacks
The Complete Infidel’s Guide to the Koran


Stealth Jihad


The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam


The Truth About Muhammad


What they’re saying about Robert Spencer
“My comrade-in-arms, my pal, my buddy.”
Oriana Fallaci

“Robert Spencer incarnates intellectual courage when, all over the world, governments, intellectuals, churches, universities and media crawl under a hegemonic Universal Caliphate’s New Order. His achievement in the battle for the survival of free speech and dignity of man will remain as a fundamental monument to the love of, and the self-sacrifice for, liberty.”
Bat Ye’or

“Robert Spencer is indefatigable. He is keeping up the good fight long after many have already given up. I do not know what we would do without him. I appreciate all the intelligence and courage it takes to keep going despite the appeasement of the West.”
Ibn Warraq

“America's most informed, fearless, and compelling voice on modern jihadism.”
Andrew C. McCarthy, Senior Fellow at National Review Institute

“Robert Spencer is the leading voice of scholarship and reason in a world gone mad. If the West is to be saved, we will owe Robert Spencer an incalculable debt.”
Pamela Geller, Atlas Shrugs

"The consummate Islam critic and expert." — Bruce Bawer

“Over the years, we have become friends, and I have received his assistance on several pieces of legislation I proposed.”
Former Congressman Tom Tancredo

“Few people are capable of applying scholarship, analytical reasoning, and objectivity to their topic -- while simultaneously being readable and witty -- as can Robert Spencer.”
Raymond Ibrahim

“A national treasure...The acclaimed scholar of Islam.”
Frank Gaffney, Center for Security Policy

“I am indeed honored to call him my friend.”
Brad Thor, novelist

“A top American analyst of Islam....A serious scholar...I learn from him.”
Daniel Pipes

“A brilliant scholar and writer.”
Douglas Murray

"One of my best teachers."
Ashraf Ramelah, Voice of the Copts

“Thank God there’s at least one man with balls left in the West.”
Kathy Shaidle, Five Feet of Fury

“I read people like [Mark Steyn] and Bob Spencer and the rest of them, and I say, ‘Boortz, you’re pretending you’re an author. These people really are. They really write some entertaining, some standup stuff.’”
Neal Boortz

“Robert Spencer is the Stephen King of Jihad.”
Chris Gaubatz, Muslim Mafia

“Armed with facts and fearlessness, Spencer stands up for Western civilization.”
Michelle Malkin

“Widely read in conservative foreign policy circles.”
New York Times

“Widely read in many quarters in Washington.”
Washington Post

“A canny operative who likely has the inside track on the State Department’s Middle East affairs desk should the tea party win the White House.”
New York Magazine

“A hero of the American right.”
Karen Armstrong

"The leading anti-Islamic intellectual in the United States....The go-to Islam expert for the right wing."
Salon Magazine

“Robert Spencer is an Edward Said turned upside down.”
Stephen Suleyman Schwartz

“One of the nation's most notorious Islamophobes.”
Hamas-linked CAIR

"Geller and Spencer are probably the most important propagandizing Islamophobes in the world. These people's voices speak very loudly — not just here in the United States but overseas."
Heidi Beirach, Southern Poverty Law Center

“Satanic ignoramus.”
Khaleel Mohammed

“The Likud anti-Christ.”
Dar al-Hayat newspaper (Saudi Arabia)

“Zionist Crusader, missionary of hate, counter-Islam consultant.”
Al-Qaeda’s Adam Gadahn, “Azzam the American”



Follow me on Twitter
facebook islam
RSS feed

Monthly Archives



Donate
Jihad Watch is a 501 (c) 3 organization. Donations are tax-deductible.


Robert Spencer debates on The Quran Teaches WarVideo: Robert Spencer on CPAC Breitbart News
Crucified Again by Raymond Ibrahim
SIOAFreedom Defense InitiativeJihad Watch VideosAmerican Freedom Law Center
Note: Listing here does not imply endorsement of every view expressed at every linked site.

» ACT for America
» Always on Watch
» American Center for Democracy
» American Coptic Association
» American Council for Kosovo
» American Freedom Alliance
» American Freedom Law Center
» American Islamic Forum for Democracy
» American Sheepdogs
» American Thinker
» Americans Against Hate
» Americans for Legal Immigration
» Amerisrael
» Amillennialist Contra Mundum
» Annaqed
» A New Dark Age Is Dawning
» Answering Islam
» Answering Muslims
» Anti-CAIR
» Apostates of Islam
» Aramaic Broadcasting Network (ABN)
» Armies of Liberation
» Assyrian International News Agency
» Atlas Shrugs
» Atour — The State of Assyria
» Australian Islamist Monitor
» Biafra Nation
» Blazing Cat Fur
» Bosch Fawstin
» Brad Thor
» Brussels Journal
» CAIR Watch
» Campus Watch
» Caroline Glick
» Christians Under Attack
» Citizen Warrior
» Coalition for the Defense of Human Rights
» Conservative Nation News
» Copts.com
» Creeping Sharia
» Daniel Pipes
» David Horowitz Freedom Center
» The David Project
» David Thompson
» David Yerushalmi Law
» D. C. Watson
» Dearborn Underground
» DEBKAfile
» Dhimmitude.org
» Dry Bones
» Ellis Washington Report
» Europe News
» Eye On Islam
» Ezra Levant
» Faith Freedom International
» Father Zakaria
» Federale
» Five Feet of Fury
» Foundation for Democracy in Iran
» Free Congress Foundation
» The Free Copts
» Freedom Defense Initiative
» FrontPage Magazine.com
» Geert Wilders
» Genocide1915.info
» Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center
» History of Jihad
» Hizb ut-Tahrir Watch
» Honest Reporting
» Honor Killings
» Human Rights Congress for Bangladesh Minorities
» India Defence
» Infidel Blogger’s Alliance
» Infidels Are Cool
» The Intelligence Summit
» International Analyst Network
» International Free Press Society
» Internet Haganah
» The Investigative Project on Terrorism
» IOwnTheWorld.com
» IranPressNews
» Iran va Jahan
» Islam Review
» Islam Speaks
» Islam Versus Europe
» Islam Watch
» Islamic Terrorism in India
» Islamist Watch — Middle East Forum
» Israel Matzav
» JihadOnBuddhists.org
» Kejda Gjermani
» KRSI: Radio Sedaye Iran
» Liberated
» Logan's Warning
» Looking At the Left
» Mahdi Watch
» Mapping Sharia
» Mark Steyn
» Martin Kramer
» MEMRI TV
» Middle East Facts
» Middle East Quarterly
» Middle-East-Info.org
» Middle East Media Research Institute
» Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA)
» Militant Islam Monitor
» Morning Star
» Muhammad Tube
» The Muslim Issue
» Muslim World Today
» Myths and Facts
» National Vietnam & Gulf War Veterans Coalition
» NewsReal Blog
» No Mosques At Ground Zero
» Nonie Darwish
» Northeast Intelligence Network
» Occidental Jihadist
» One Jerusalem
» Open Speech
» Operation Give
» Operation Gratitude
» Organiser
» Orwellian Culture
» Palestinian Media Watch
» PamelaGeller.com
» Panun Kashmir
» Pedestrian Infidel
» The People's Cube
» The People of the Book
» Persecution Project
» Political Islam
» Politically Incorrect
» Politiskt Inkorrekt
» Q Society of Australia
» Radio Farda
» Radio Jihad
» RAWA: Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan
» Raymond Ibrahim
» Red Alerts
» Refugee Resettlement Watch
» Religion of Peace
» Republican Riot
» Reuters Middle East Watch
» The “Reverend” Jim Sutter
» SANE: Society of Americans for National Existence
» The Second Draft
» Shire Network News
» SITE Intelligence Group
» Small Wars Journal
» Smoke-Filled World
» The Snooper Report
» Snow Report Blog
» StandWithUs
» Steve Lackner
» The Stiletto Blog
» STOP! Honour Killings
» Sultan Knish
» Tell the Children the Truth
» Terrorism Awareness Project
» Theodore’s World
» Tom Gross Media
» Translating Jihad
» Una via per Oriana
» Undaunted
» United States Central Command
» Urban Infidel
» Walid Shoebat
» Winds of Jihad
» Women Against Shariah
» World Council for the Cedars Revolution
» Yid With Lid
» Z Street
» Zilla of the Resistance
» Zionist Conspiracy
David LittmanOriana Fallaci Thousands of Deadly Terror Attacks Since 9/11The incredible Reza Aslan automated insult generator! iGoogle Gadget
Site Meter