| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Jihad Watch Vice President Hugh Fitzgerald's twenty points on Vatican dhimmitude:
Twenty Points for Archibishop Lajolo:1) If "the war on terrorism is seen linked to Western political strategy" and that this is responsible for "Christianphobia," then what explains the attacks on Hindus in Bangladesh in Kashimir? Or on Buddhists in Thailand, and the Bamiyan Buddhas -- the people and the artifacts -- in southern Thailand?
Is this because Hindu (and Sikh) and Buddhist villages and artifacts have also been linked "to Western political strategy"? And if they are so linked, how was it possible to link them, when 60-70 million Hindus were killed, over 250 years, according to the testimony not only of Hindus, but of complacent Muslim observers -- just read the "Rihla" of Ibn Battuta, as he calmly notes the mass enslavement of surviving Hindu villagers? At the time the United States, that center for "anti-terrorism," did not exist.
2) If "Christianphobia" is merely a result of the modern "war on terror" then what shall we make of the treatment of the Copts in Egypt over the past, say, 1300 years? Was it something they said or did that led to their slow and murderous asphyxiation, so that they have been reduced from being the entire population of Egypt, to about 10% of that population? And if the "war on terror" which has been linked "to Western political strategy" began, say, a few years ago, then what explains the murder of close to 100,000 Assyrian Christians, beginning within a year after the British soldiers left Iraq in 1932?
3) If "Christianphobia" is a recent phenomenon, then what explains, over 1350 years, the attacks on Christians and Christian sites -- let's start with the fabled churches of Byzantium -- everywhere that Islam conquered?
4) How is it, if "Christianphobia" is a recent phenomenon, that the Christians of North Africa, from which came some of the most important Fathers of the Chruch, including St. Augustine and before him Tertullian, all disappeared over time, or were reduced to levels, and to a role – as non-Muslims – of insignificance, so that where Tertullian and St. Augustine had once walked, the last French and Italian monks, pursuing a purely charitable vocation, had their throats slit by members of F.I.S., the Islamic Salvation Front of Algeria – years before that “war on terror” got started?
5) If “Christianphobia” originates in a reaction to the “war on terror” what explains the imprisonment and torture of foreign Christians, some for supposedly conducting Christian services, others for merely singing Christmas carols, over the past three decades (ever since foreign Christians were allowed in as workers) in Saudi Arabia? When English nurses sang Christmas carols and were punished for it in the 1970s, what connection did that have with a non-existent “war on terror”?
6) Why do the Christians of Ethiopia worry openly about the spread of Islam, and Islamic militancy, in their country? Are Ethiopians identified with the “Western war on terror”?
7) Why, ever since the founding of Pakistan, have Pakistani Christians been subject to assault and murder? Why did Archbishop John Joseph kill himself, years before the so-called “Western war on terror,” leaving a note that showed clearly he was protesting by his act the intolerable cruelty with which Christians were treated by Muslims in Pakistan?
8) Why, if it is the “linkage of “Christian West” to the “war on terror” that explains “Christianphobia” and not what can be found texts in Islam (Qur’an, hadith, and sira), have Indonesian Christians — 200,000 Christians in East Timor and Christians in the Moluccas, Sulawesia, and throughout the East Indian archipelago -- been subject to persecution and murder? Why were between 2,300 and 4,000 churches destroyed in Indonesia in the year 2003 alone, according to the British-based Barnabas Fund?
9) Why were hundreds of Maronite villagers in Damur, and thousands in other Christian villages, massacred by the Muslims in Lebanon in the 1970s? Was this a response to a non-existent “war on terror” that was supposedly linked to the West? Why does Habib Malik, why does Walid Phares, why does Franck Salameh, why do a hundred Maronite intellectuals and writers all deplore the misunderstanding of Islam in the West – and deeply resent the continuous efforts at appeasement by the Vatican in order to win some temporary reprieve not for Eastern Christians (the Copts, the Maronites, and others) but specifically for Roman Catholics?
10) The Vatican is seeing under its very eyes the first slow, now more rapid, Islamization of Europe. Does it care? What is it doing to rally the ranks of Believers? So far the most intelligent and brave opponents within Europe of that Islamization have not come from within the Vatican, but from the ranks of such traditional anti-clerics as Oriana Fallaci, who never fails to be as scathing on the Vatican as she is on the European left. Nor did Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh exactly strike a pious note – but of course, they had the luxury, you may say, of being able to tell the truth, while the Vatican has constantly to worry about the situation of the Christians in Arab lands. Never mind the Vatican’s general indifference to the Eastern Churches, including the Orthodox who have their own historic memory, and present experience, with the Jihad. Why is it that those who understand the situation perfectly, from within the Vatican, have not managed to take complete control of the response to what is now a mortal assault on Christian Europe? Why is this Archbishop Lajolo, despite Cardinals Biffi and Ratzinger, Sandro Magister, and a good many others (including the Cardinals from black Africa, who know perfectly well what Islam is all about), still allowed to speak his appeasing piece – his “peace” that passeth understanding?
11) Do many in the Vatican think that the way to deal with Islam is through concessions and negotiations — despite the fact that Islam is a belief-system whose adherents do not understand or respond in the slightest to any concession or yielding on the part of Islam’s opponents, except to take such yielding as a sign of weakness, and to make use of any temporary “truce” or hudna only to prepare for the next assault – because there can be no permanent peace between Islam and Infidels? A permanent peace simply cannot be permitted.
12) Has the Vatican’s appeasement of Islam made things easier, in the end, for Christians worldwide? Has its defense of Arafat made, for example, the position of Christians – who in the last few years have fled from the P.A. so that where once 20% of “Palestinian” Arabs were Christian, that number is now down to 2% (fleeing not only to the West, but to Israel as well: an Israeli residence card is the most sought-after document by “Palestinian” Christians) – any easier?
13) How does the Vatican regard the refusal, led by France and Belgium, to recognize the “Christian” or “Judeo-Christian” roots of Europe? As a temporary aberration? As something that required worried inquiry? And what does the Vatican think of attempts by the likes of Tariq Ramadan, aided by such Western “scholars” of Islam, to exaggerate beyond parody the “contribution” of Islam to Western civilization? What does the Vatican think of Romano Prodi’s address at the Library of Alexandria, offering Europe’s “services” to the Arabs, and specifically to a regime that permits and even encourages the continued persecution of the Copts (with the Egyptian legal code expressly taking the Shari’a as its model)?
14) Now that 1 out of every 3 babies born in France is Muslim, how does the Vatican see its continued influence in Europe? Does it think that constant appeasement of the Arabs has, as a strategy – leaving aside the moral idiocy of it all – has worked? How is Europe, formerly Christian Europe, doing in the little task of protecting its own legacy, created over centuries, by those who would no doubt be aghast at the cravenness of their descendants? Is Europe doing fine, so-so, or not fine at all? Check one.
15) How, with all the appeasement that the Vatican has offered over the years, are the Christians of the Middle East doing? Where are they safest, and best protected? Could it be that the answer is “Israel,” a country which the Vatican has in many ways, in its promotion of the Jihad that is disguised as “Palestinian” nationalism, done so much to harm? And if Israel were to be pushed back still further (or, in its own demoralized and confused state, voluntarily retreat to the pre-1967 lines, which were not borders, but simply the armistice lines recognized in 1949), would this make things better, calm things down, make the Muslims give up their Jihad against Israel as an Infidel sovereignty? Or would it, after the passage of a year or three, simply start all over again, a relentless assault with a now-strategically hopeless position for the hapless Israelis?
16) And leaving aside the little matter of morality, that thing called by some the Holocaust, the centuries of persecution and forced conversion and murder of Jews in Western Christendom, which are not erased by an apology or two, what will happen when Muslims again control the Holy Land? What do you envision, in the Vatican, will be the situation of free Christian access to these sites? What was it like before Israel, in the centuries before the Western world could impose its will on a decrepit Ottoman Empire?
17) And what will happen, in the end, to those who within the Vatican have counseled appeasement and tried to inveigle others, Catholics and other Christians, into parroting that appeasement? At what point will the folly of these willful misunderstandings and misstatements become clear – just as clear as they are now to all the far-sighted who come to this website? Will there be any consequences for those who have been so damagingly interested in pretending that appeasement has worked, just as those outside the Vatican (Solana, Chirac, Patten) wish us to believe – credunt quia absurdum – in their policies, and their own power and significance, as long as they can?
18) If the “war on terror” is the cause of Muslim hatred of Christians (“Christianphobia”) then one wishes to understand whether Archbishop Lajolo, or the Vatican itself for which he is naturally assumed to be speaking, believes this “war on terror” should end? Does it think, for example, that it was wrong to destroy the Al-Qaeda safe haven in Afghanistan? Is it wrong to disarm Iraq – or would it be wrong to disarm any Muslim polity, for none one can be trusted with major arms? That might increase some local danger to local Christians – but so what? Is Western policy, helping to determine whether or not Western societies and peoples survive, to be permanently inhibited -- so that the condition of those Christians held hostage in Muslim societies remains permanently insecure?
Surely it is more important to draw the right lesson: that we do not approve or accept the slightest extension in size of that Muslim world, or the slightest increase in Muslim power. For wherever that Muslim power goes, non-Muslims within dar al-Islam live in permanent thrall to the threats of Muslims – and surely no one knows this better than Archbishop Lajolo and all those who, in their appeasement, reveal just how keenly aware they are that Muslims are quick to scapegoat, to threaten, and to carry out threats against Christians (or any and all non-Muslims) when they feel their wars on behalf of Islam are being responded to, not in kind (for no non-Muslim power has ever stooped to the methods now routinely being used, and applauded, by Muslims) but at least with a certain steadiness.
It is too bad that the Israelis for so many decades allowed themselves to be so inhibited in their responses. Had they allowed themselves – or been allowed by a tsk-tsking world – the Arabs and Muslims might have been taught a lesson, and claiming “darura,” (the doctrine of necessity), withdrawn at least temporarily to a more peaceful kind of behavior.
The Arabs and Muslims have never suffered the kind of injury that the American armed forces inflicted on Germany and Japan to hasten the end of World War II, including the reduction of Berlin and Tokyo to rubble. They therefore have a very unrealistic sense (based on the mild measures of tiny Israel, so concerned with its “purity of arms,”) of what can be done. Nothing like what could be done: Falluja, Baghdad, all of Iraq, indeed all of the Muslim Middle East, could be taken care of overnight. This has to be made clear, and understood. And in the same way, the Muslims within Europe have to understand that they should not be fooled by the sufferance of the long-suffering Infidels. At a certain point, when “civilized” behavior becomes suicidal and is widely recognized as such, it can be, quite properly, jettisoned.
19) If Muslims take out on local Christians their own fury at the Infidels daring – daring! –to act to defend themselves, that is regrettable. But Western policy cannot be held hostage to Arab Christians. As for the Christians – Arabic-speaking but not Arab – such as the Copts and the Maronites – well, they have been singularly unimpressed by the indifference of the Vatican to their permanent plight. France was once the protector of the Maronites; it abandoned that role, which was then assumed by Israel, and would still be Israel’s role if it were not constantly under assault by that “Christian” Europe which will, in the end, suffer whatever Israel suffers, and will, psychologically, be far more likely to undertake certain measures of civilizational self-defense if it had not, a decade or two before, so noisily condemned such measures if undertaken by Israel – such as some transfer of Arab populations from one side of the Jordan to the other, for reasons even more comprehensible than those which led the Czechs after World War II to expel 3 million ethnic Germans, and many other countries – Poland, Hungary, and so on – to undertake similar measures on a smaller scale.
20) Who in the Vatican has carefully read the Qur’an, the hadith, and sira? Who in the Vatican has read that indispensable history, “The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam” by Bat Ye’or? Who will read her forthcoming “Eurabia”? Who will understand that it is not Archbishop Lajolo, but Bat Ye'or and a few of her Vatican admirers, who have a better sense of what Islam is all about? Who will realize that it is not merely a “war on terror” but a war of self-defense against the Jihad, and that two of the most formidable instruments of Jihad are Da’wa (the Call to Islam) and demography (in this case, the overbreeding of Muslims wherever they are, and especially in Europe, where the Muslim birth-rate in some countries is five times the non-Muslim rate: 7 ―% versus 1 ―%. Do the math. Draw some lines. Figure it out.
Anyone making plans to ship the statuary in St. Peter’s across the ocean? Or all those paintings with Madonnnas? The Pieta alone would be quite a headache, to get it over to American shores, and safely in Kansas.
Who is in charge of long-range emergency planning at the Vatican? Time to get cracking. The mixture as before just won’t do.
Posted by Robert at December 6, 2004 3:27 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Game, set and match, Hugh.
Islam declared war on the rest of the world, monotheist, polytheist and anamist, at its advent and has never made peace with the "other" other than the peace of dhimmitude.
Posted by: waterdragon52![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at December 6, 2004 3:32 PM
Surely unintended, but this magnificient, probing series of arguments, questions, commentary, analysis, and revelations, which, in its entirety, constitutes a monumental warning, comes the day before the anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor.
Well, there have already been several Pearl Harbors, but the symbolism for me remains. There is still time, but perhaps not much.
Posted by: JTF at December 6, 2004 3:46 PM
Can we all get together and email this to our local churches? Also to the Vatican.
They must read this (Thank you Mr. Fitzgerald) to gain perspective on what is at stake here.
Europe now, more than ever in recent history NEEDS the church's guidance and leadership.
If they appease, that gigantic mosque in the Popes very own diocese as well as the one being now built in the Netherlands (along with the thousands throughout the continent),near the stadium, will be an ominous harbinger of things to come.
Email it to the vatican and local churches.
at December 6, 2004 3:58 PM
Vatican emails:
http://www.tldm.org/email/vatican_emails.htm
Posted by: Andrew at December 6, 2004 3:59 PM
High posted:Anyone making plans to ship the statuary in St. Peters across the ocean? Or all those paintings with Madonnnas? The Pieta alone would be quite a headache, to get it over to American shores, and safely in Kansas.
Breaking statues is a 'statutory' duty of every muslim. How dare Hugh suggest, that an allah sanctioned pleasure-cum-jihad duty be taken from the muslim.
at December 6, 2004 5:57 PM
Its great that the Vatican has become a dhimmi, they know that their religion is false, their priest's molests children, and their pope is about to die, what else can they do but become dhimmis to a better religion.
Posted by: u r all retards at December 6, 2004 7:04 PM
Retard
The Catholic faith has introspected on the issue of pederasty. Would that your faith undertook a similar examination, and confessed that Mohammed was a paedophile, who, as a fifty year old man, had sexual intecourse with a nine year old girl, and were he alive today, and living in America or Britain, would be sitting in a jail cell in the sexual offenders unit of his local penitentiary, alongside other rapists and pederasts, where he might be able to swap stories with other perverts, and would have to watch in the shower to make sure he did not drop the soap ;-)
Jokes aside, the widespread sexual abuse that takes place in the Islamic world by perverted Mullahs is an open secret. It would be interesting to do a study of how the 'perfection' of Mohammed, exemplified in the sunnat, the path of Mohammed, the perfect life to follow is his example, whether this includes pederasty, and to what extent it is sanctioned in Islamic society by his example of marriage to Ayesha the six year old.
For example, following the conduct of the Prophet, would you assent to the marriage of your six year old daughter to a fifty year old man? If not, why not? Mohammed (Peace Be Upon Him, Of Course, Of Course, Of Course) made it clear through his marriage and consummation with Ayesha, that he considered a man having sex with a girl to be a legitimate thing to do.
So, Retard, what do you say? Enlighten us on this issue.
Posted by: Kaffir Boy at December 6, 2004 7:49 PM
Hugh
It is clear that the struggle against Jihad is worldwide, featuring every religion that has come into the slightest contact with Islam, and now today, the belief system of secularism, free democracy, the Enlightenment project itself, is being spat on by the ideology of Jihad. This is why I love your posts, they display an holistic scholarship, a pan-historical vision that places the issues in a worldwide framework, that situates the contemporary clash we are facing in modern Europe and America in the truest context, the expansionism and aggressiveness of Islam against every other creed and culture and faith that does not bow down to it, since the dawn on Islam itself.
What a motley but beautiful alliance this is; Christian, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, Jain, Zoroastrian, Shinto, Confucian, Atheist, Agnostic, Animist, Pagan, Lunatic and None Of The Above. All with a tale to tell of their clash with the thuggish cult, all with a history that amounts to a comprehensive picture of the global, unrefined, unceasing, universal culture of aggression, Imperialism, contempt and hatred for all that opposed to it. The more we point out the commonality of experience around the world, the more the vileness of the "Oppressive America-Zionist Conspiracy" screed is exposed for what it is: The pathetic yelps of a frustrated hegemon, hate ridden, impotent, jealous, raging against its falure to dominate and destroy from the Buddhists to the Jews.
This holistic approach is what all of us need to be aware of to counteract the taqiyya and lies of the Jihadis and their apologists. You make reference to India, East Asian, Africa, Easten Christianity, and in so doing, you make a path for us to follow, explore and understand. I thank you for each of your posts. They bring light into a cramped, propagandised, darkened room.
I urge all readers of Jihad Watch and Dhimmi Watch to study Hughs posts carefully, to follow up on the writers he references, to take this holistic approach to understand fully the global nature of the struggle against Jihad, and the unity of the Kaffirs.
Posted by: Kaffir Boy at December 6, 2004 8:04 PM
Hugh:
Why should any of this appeasement from the Vatican be surprising? They espouse an altruistic creed, which in competition with Islam, is just suicidal. All altruistic creeds, like multiculturalism, are suicidal, but that's beside the point.
I don't think that appealing to Christian roots or religious pride or nationalism is going to help Europe defend itself.
If Europe is going to have any hope of keeping itself safe from Islam, it's going to require ridding Europe of Muslims through forced resettlement back to Muzzi-land.
Muslims could be resettled in Muslim countries and their Christians can come to the West. An exchange of populations unwanted by the majority. They should just stop pretending that Muslims can live peacefully as a minority group in any non-Muslim country, and that Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus and others are likely to have normal lifespans in Muslim countries.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
A comment on the Muzzie on the list, "u r all retards". Notice how his chosen name on this site is nothing but an ad hominem. [In the Muslim world, this passes for a complete argument, if you don't have a gun or knife handy (which is always a better argument in that part of the world. Most Islamic theological arguments are settled by the use of steel.).] In fact, I would venture that his screen name was the only thing that he was free to choose for himself. His religion was chosen for him at birth, his parents probably chose his wif(v)e(s) for him, and his course of study in junior college was probably selected by his father.
Islam is a good religion for the jungle since it's the "law of the jungle" that it implicitly recognizes.
Posted by: MetalMuncher at December 6, 2004 9:25 PM
Slightly off topic, but one must remind oneself of the brutality and the utter dehumanizing attitudes, beliefs in Islam, that naturally arise from the texts, the Qur'an, hadiths, and sira.
Here, from the Sunnah:
Volume 8, Book 82, Number 794:
Narrated Anas:
"Some people from the tribe of 'Ukl came to the Prophet and embraced Islam. The climate of Medina did not suit them, so the Prophet ordered them to go to the (herd of milch) camels of charity and to drink, their milk and urine (as a medicine). They did so, and after they had recovered from their ailment (became healthy) they turned renegades (reverted from Islam) and killed the shepherd of the camels and took the camels away. The Prophet sent (some people) in their pursuit and so they were (caught and) brought, and the Prophets ordered that their hands and legs should be cut off and that their eyes should be branded with heated pieces of iron, and that their cut hands and legs should not be cauterized, till they die."
And in the West we debate the morality of the death penalty, the cruel and unusual punishment clause in the US Constitution, the coherence and applicability of lex talionis, the deterrent value of the death penalty.
And consider the common Catholic position that stresses the sanctity of life even of those convicted of murder.
And the Sunnah is heralded by even 'moderate' Muslims as authoritative accounts of the 'sayings and deeds' of Muhammad, the perfect man, the perfect judge.
How can we be silent? Read, see the brutality in the Islamic tradition, and then read the papers as the Qur'an and hadiths are played out before your eyes in blood, death and suffering.
at December 6, 2004 9:44 PM
Kaffir Boy - Trying to have a sane & intellectual conversation with a Muslim are we? You should rename yourself "Optimist"! As if he would or could answer!!!!!!!
"U R all retards"... hmmm, an interesting insult from a group of people that have contributed nothing to science in 500 years. If we're retards, what does that make you? Islam is like the emperor's new clothes. We are all supposed to praise it, when in fact there's nothing there.
Anyway, Retard, don't you have anything better to do than visiting websites with lots of big words and freethinking concepts. Surely you should be out doing an honour killing, making a bomb or gang raping somebody.
at December 6, 2004 10:10 PM
Its great that the Vatican has become a dhimmi, they know that their religion is false, their priest's molests children, and their pope is about to die, what else can they do but become dhimmis to a better religion.
Posted by: u r all retard
Don't get your hopes up Wonderboy; the pope is very old and either does not fully comprehend the intrinsic evil of Islam, or prefers not to acknowledge it. I'm sure he knows there is little he can do at this stage of his life to alter history. He will leave that job for his successor.
There are some very savvy Catholics in the Vatican who are cognizant of the scourge of Islam and when the current reign is over, a new breed of Catholic leadership will emerge. If you recall, the Catholics kicked Islamic ass a few centuries ago and saved the West from barbarian muslims and the kiss of Islamic death. This time they will have the help and support of the entire world and its vast array of weaponry and technology.
Islam is no match for people of intellect, although this is one battle that will not be won with wits. Millions of muslims will perish before Islam is firmly and irrevocably reduced to an innocuous heap of smoldering detritus. There may be a "billion point five" muslims, but you're still vastly outnumbered by infidels who loathe and despise Islam and all it stands for. Don't call it a "religion"; Islam is an abomination from Hell.
at December 6, 2004 11:15 PM
Hugh: A fine, insightful piece.
The Pope has set himself up in the unenviable position of Dhimmi-in-chief. Of course, Christians have lived as "Dhimmi" for two centuries under "secular" systems of greater or lesser intensity. It's funny how the "secularists" (worshippers of science, the state, money, or a pantheon of such things)love to crow about how their science routed "religious obscurantism", only to turn around and blame Christianity whenever things go wrong.
As for kissing the Qu'ran, did the Poope really do that? If so, he is truly the anti-Christ, as the Reformers dubbed him. How anyone who calls himself a Christian can honor that foolish collection of ravings, which misrepresents the Trinity as God, Jesus, and Mary and holds that Moses was the maternal uncle of Jesus rather than merely a distant kinsman (after all, there were about 1400 or so years intervening between them) is beyond me.
Perhaps the Pope is trying to be charitable--and this, of course, is a fundamental of the Christian faith. But wouldn't it be more charitable to a billion souls who daily show the world they need a better way to stand up for the truths of the Gospel? I mean, isn't that supposed to be in the Pope's job description?
However, Hugh, Bamiyan is in Afghanistan, not southern Thailand. Also, the Buddhas of Bamiyan have not been used a meaningful foci of Buddhist worship by a permanent Buddhist presence for probably close to a millennium. They escaped more than defacement simply because the Shi'ite Muslim Hazaras in the neighborhood didn't have either enough explosive, or the money to buy it, handy.
These correx aside, it is worth noting that there are very real and deep reasons for Christian and other Western "Islamophobia". Christians have proven time and time again that they can be charitable towatds Muslims, Crusades notwithstanding; and the much-maligned Western imperialism is probably why so many Muslims grew to maturity and reproduced to the point where there are now a billion Muslims rather than died young of preventable, water-borne disease. The pressing problem of the present is whether the Islamic world can muster evidence to show that it can be trusted.
I'm aware that there are Muslims out there tearing their hair over terrorism, too. As for me, I'm not going to try to reform Islam from the outside, or pretend that it's a "religion of peace" (like Namaan the Syrian of olf, Pres. Bush has to bow down to the idols of his master, the American people). I merely encourage other Christians to keep the door open for those who will soon deeply feel the need for another religion (may such feelings prove to be the gracious promptings of the Holy Spirit of God, who is the true Third person of the Trinity. Amen.)
Posted by: Kepha1 at December 7, 2004 2:40 AM
I'll add as well that the Pope has probably succumned to the Western hubris that the rest of the world is clay in the hands of the West, and everything that happens is somehow ultimately the Western world's fault. It's ironic that I, a Calvinist, would like to remind the Poope that people--even non-Westerners and non-Christians--can and do exercise their wills and make choices.
Posted by: Kepha1 at December 7, 2004 2:43 AM
Oh well, pederasty, dhirmi, pope bla bla bla only anti-catholicism are so typical, Calvin and Luther said nothing about Islam, only catholic countries in the first siege of Vienna, saved by spanish and the second, saved by polish were all polish, the protestants hadnīt so difficulties, the "false religion catholic" saved his body of difficulties.
Well respect pederasty, well I hope ours, donīt go to teachers and schools because there are cases of pederasty and kindergarten, in USA there was less than 1% and so always in cases of homosexuality.
Respect the Pope, i donīt know what he wants to say, if itīs hard is intolerant, if itīs soft, itīs weak, in my opinion the Pope has made a lot of against communism and respect islam, the catholicism in Africa have convert many muslims to the catholicism, that is the best manner to fight against islam, respect Europe, I ask, is in Sweden, Denmark, The Netherlands or the UK, are catholic countries, and the protestants say something simmilar than the Biffi Cardinal or others, I donīt think so, what are doing the fracmasons in France and other countries respect islam, unions, we have to be euarabia, none atheist civilisation has future, and Europe hasnīt.
Respect USA, his friendship with Saudi Arabia and other countries like Egypt and Morocco countries where the christianism is forgotten and there arenīt freedom religions, notes than USA isnīt clean wheat like Russia, Spain, France and all countries, only the union against islam and against all countries not exportating weapons and not importing petroleum for muslim countries can reduce the menace of the muslimhood, greetings
at December 7, 2004 5:36 AM
I am sorry that anyone might have been given the misimpression, given the number of times I have posted about it, that I might think the Bamiyan Buddhas lay somewhere outside the formerly Greco-Buddhist land of Afghanistan. I was simply yoking two kinds of anti-Buddhist activity: that directed at the Buddhists in southern Thailand, and that directed at Buddhist artifacts, in the most recent case, the Bamiyan Buddhas that were destroyed, with some phony crocodile tears shed by various Muslims -- for the fleeting attention of our ephemeral press.
Posted by: Hugh at December 7, 2004 10:09 AM
Very well written, Hugh. Plenty of food for thought, but the Vatican, unfortunately, is satiated and obese!
Therefore, instead of asking serious questions of various Catholic clergymen, why not, instead, round 'em up and give 'em free airfare to Istanbul......for a little tour of Hagia Sophia.
Once finished, ask 'em if St-Peter's has similar "potential".
Probleme is they'd probably respond by saying something like: "ya know, Hugh, you may be onto something there!"
Sheesh!
Posted by: John Palubiski at December 7, 2004 10:50 AM
The following link is provided to "retard" as a service from a charitable Christian. Don't be afraid, retard, be VERY AFRAID. After all, they're gleaned from an islamo/fascist website called "Islamonline". Check it out, and have a peek into your future! If you need more, I can provide 'em.....with honour AND enthusiasm !
Don't be nervous, dumplin'!
http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2004-06/26/article04.shtml
http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2003-11/13/article04.shtml
http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2001-07/01/article5.shtml
http://www.islamonline.net/iol-english/dowalia/news-6-12/topnews1.asp
http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2004-06/23/article04.shtml
Posted by: John Palubiski at December 7, 2004 11:08 AM
Jewcard the following links are from 'Islamonline', a islamist website. There are the beginnings of a mass movement towards Christianity in traditional Mulsim lands. If your faith is so rock-solid you shouldn,t have any aprehensions about reading the articles linked below. So you think Islam is growing fast?
Oh my ! Are you a loser!
http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2004-06/23/article04.shtml
http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2004-06/26/article04.shtml
http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2003-11/13/article04.shtml
Posted by: John Palubiski at December 7, 2004 11:26 AM
Very interesting John Palubski, thanks
Posted by: Franze at December 7, 2004 1:44 PM
Now here's a thought...
I visited an Islamic site the other day, and they were saying that Muslims should not visit anti-Islamic websites because the more hits they get the better they come up in search engines.
And yet here we are freely giving out Islamist website details - which is simply great, and is a clear indication of how we differ.
at December 7, 2004 10:50 PM
(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 Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)