| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Where are the pious anti-anti-jihadists and anti-"Islamophobia" types protesting the lack of tolerance in Saudi Arabia? Why is tolerance a virtue only for Western non-Muslim countries? Of course The Myth of Islamic Tolerance posits that Muslim countries are already tolerant in a way the West has never been, but stories like this one keep showing that to be false. "Men were part of house-church group in Muslim kingdom," from WND, with thanks to EPG:
Saudi Arabia's religious police arrested eight Christians, including one who was beaten in front of his 5-year-old son, according to a Washington, D.C.-based human rights group.International Christian Concern says Chittirical John Thomas, an Indian national, was pulled from work in Riyadh by Saudi Muttawa authorities, dragged to his home and beaten.
In addition, seven other Indian nationals were arrested in similar fashion while they slept Saturday night. ICC identified them as Valiakalail Samuel Daniel, Koil Pillai Vijaykumar, Mutham Plackal Mathai Thomas, Pathivadathil James George, George Matthew, Biju Thomas and Saji Varghese.
The Muttawa confiscated Thomas' Bible and other religious items and took him to the Shemaissy Detention Center in the capital. His wife has not heard from him since.
Posted by Robert at June 2, 2005 7:49 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Again, king tolerance, the point is: The religion Is the government. And they have said so themselves: 'islam is political.'
http://www.jamaat.org/islam/HumanRightsPolitical.html
http://www.medusa2000.com/islammiddle.htm
Posted by: Gary![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at June 2, 2005 8:02 AM
This Bangladeshi Hindu was caught in the street. He was brought to the mosque and was beaten to death. His pleads for mercy had no effect on the stone-hard hearts of the Muslim Satan worshippers. They chanted, "kill the kafir, kill the kafir" and shouted Allah u Akbar while Vimal Patak met his agonizing death.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Testimonials/AhmedShalakamy50521.htm
Posted by: hutchrun at June 2, 2005 8:02 AM
If the MSM ran stories like these en masse, it may help the plight of these workers in muslim lands.
The muslims are sensitive to public spotlight. They crave showing themselves as victims. It is time we put the spotlight on their murderous bullying. Get the truth out in the open.
Posted by: skidd at June 2, 2005 9:07 AM
My apologies, I meant to add this also:
And that government is present in every single muslim-run country.
So again, how does one criticize without being critical (or, in left-speak, islamophobic) of ALL of islam?
Posted by: Gary at June 2, 2005 9:10 AM
Reading back, I find I am still not articulate enough of the point. But as I've always said, the better minds here (95%) can phrase it better.
Posted by: Gary at June 2, 2005 9:12 AM
From the article,
"...an Indian national, was pulled from work in Riyadh by Saudi Muttawa authorities, dragged to his home and beaten."
I wonder what profane "vice" the Indian national was engaged in which prompted his being drug off and beaten?
I wonder what divine "virtue" he learned from his transgression?
Ask the Saudi Muttawa -- they'll know.
at June 2, 2005 9:42 AM
Since there was no written-collected "Koran" until 100 years after Mohammad's death, it is likely that everything in it was re-scripted to fit the political needs of the dawning dictatorship of the Caliphate.
Saudi Arabia is the perfect revelation of this impulse.
And still Bush hugs these intolerant weasels.
Oil on troubled waters, my ass.
Posted by: BigSleep at June 2, 2005 11:05 AM
BigSleep,
"...it is likely that everything in it was re-scripted to fit the political needs of the dawning dictatorship of the Caliphate."
Do you believe Muhammad was any less intolerant or dictatorial than the Caliphate?
at June 2, 2005 11:25 AM
this persecution of christians is appalling. that is why we need india and china to help us put the entire middle east under martial law, until the practice of islam can be stamped out completely. middle eastern oil revenue could help pay for this policing and babysitting that must be done in order to ban islam. let's criminalize islam as the satanism it is, so islam's adherents will start leaving islam in droves.
to truly replace the islamic governments of the middle east, we must first ban the religion of the middle east, islam, which includes all the various muslim sects. anything less than banning islam amounts to foolish compromise and leads to the unavoidable reinvigoration of militant islam. islam is a macho religion that thrives on conquest and domination. can the free world really afford to allow islam to continue to exist?
banning islam would also eliminate all of the muslim sectarian infighting which resembles immature children while irresponsibly endangering the world.
i believe islam is a religion primarily motivated by jealousy and envy, especially against israel.
to motivate a terrorist to commit such cruel acts, islam must inspire "superhatred" in it's terrorists. such superhatred can only be inspired by satan. how else can we explain the ruthless and unfeeling crimes of terrorists? islam is not prejudiced or biased, islam hates everyone equally!
because most modern day terrorists arise out of islam, the banning of islam would eliminate terrorism. terrorism is an activity which resembles teenage vandalism on a grand scale. i do not believe that muslim males are allowed to develp properly or fully, so they remain easily controlled or formed into terrorists when needed by the cult of islam.
banning islam would also simply protect freedom of religion, press, speech and all of the bill of rights.
the practice of satanism, and other brutal religions like santa ria are banned in the usa. why not ban islam worldwide? just because islam has a long history behind it does not mean that islam is going to become reasonable or civilized anytime soon.
islam is a very powerful cult that will not willingly give up it's power, so i have no qualms about using our military to ban islam. however, it may take the return of jesus christ to properly deal with islam.
at June 2, 2005 11:52 AM
Where is Condi Rice?
She should be concerned about the treatment of all Holy books.
She should be in contact with the Saudi's and ask for the return of that Bible and the other religious items.
Posted by: alaskan1000 at June 2, 2005 1:19 PM
Another indicator that Saudi Arabia is a den of evil, the abode of Satan, and the habitat of imps, pimps, and wimps. Anything/anyone coming out of this vile country must be treated with suspicion when you have these types of residents. I hope you can hear the contempt I have for this country because it is complete.
Posted by: William The Crusader at June 2, 2005 1:28 PM
Once again, king tolerance visits... and has nothing to say on topics like this. If you believed / acted upon what you claim, you'd be protesting this right along with us. But what happens to Christians is not your concern, is it? Only that muslims be treated 'fairly.'
And you haven't answered my question.
Sorry, kt, you can't have your cake and eat it. The only intolerant one here is You.
Posted by: Gary at June 2, 2005 2:57 PM
Hypocrisy. That says it all.
Posted by: epg at June 2, 2005 3:01 PM
EPG~ hypocrisy is correct. He can't be bothered to answer on this subject, because it can't make it out to be racist or bigoted.
Posted by: Gary at June 2, 2005 5:09 PM
While I pray that these arrested people will be protected and soon released, I can't help but note the bright side: Christians are popping out of the woodwork (adobe?) right and left in Saudi Arabia. Why, pretty soon, if God is going to be merciful to that dry land, we'll be hearing about it taking root among the indigenous folks of the Najd, Hejaz, Hasa, and elswhere.
Posted by: Kepha at June 2, 2005 8:19 PM
It might be useful to draw Pres. Bush's attention to the plight of Christians in Saudi Arabia. This article may draw hios attention.
Posted by: DP111 at June 2, 2005 8:42 PM
skeet street-
"Do you believe Mohammad was any less intolerant or dictatorial than the Caliphate?"
Perish the thought.
Mohammad may have been a thousand times worse than the final Koran and Hadiths reveal. The later compilers may have 'cleaned him up' -from an epilelptic gibbering psychopathic monster- into an acceptable run-of-the-mill cruel and dictatorial Arabian warlord, with a few of these other curious mental quirks still slipping through.
How much they left in of Mohammad's bizarre nature, tastes, thought processes, and anal sadistic hatreds is quite revealing.
As Nietzsche said of another prophet, 'you wish there were a Doestoevsky living in the same town' -as Mohammad- 'to write a real history of his nature'.
You know a tree by its fruits.
In this case, it's all nuts.
Posted by: BigSleep at June 2, 2005 8:51 PM
Where is King Tolerance? Not on this thread, huh? Just Christians that are being persecuted.
Posted by: Carolyn2 at June 3, 2005 12:23 AM
Heya Carolyn2 n' m' homies,
I believe I have deduced KT's little ploy: the reason he seems uninterested in these threads is because he is, in fact, muslim, and a bit self-interested:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/006473.php
Now again; not all muslims are only interested in islam, but humans in general are fairly tribalistic. (KT, that means they like others like themselves, but not others unlike themselves. I think you capiche.) KT's a muslim - fine, whatever. It would be difficult for me to care less. But seriously, don't come on here pretending to be something that you're not. It's punkass. Just own up and don't deny.
King Geoff
Posted by: Geoff at June 3, 2005 5:57 PM
KT stands for "Kitman & Takkiyya"!
Posted by: Terminator at June 4, 2005 9:20 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.)