November 13, 2005
2,000 Raging Muslims
Crossposted from Stop The ACLU
Comments are disabled.
Post is locked.
Via WND we learn the latest from the religion of peace.
They came in buses to the small village of Sangla Hill in the Nankana district of Punjab in India.Some 2,000 organized Muslims first vandalized three churches, a nuns' convent, two Catholic schools, the houses of a Protestant pastor and a Catholic priest, a girls' hostel and some Christian homes, according to Asia News.
Then they burned them to the ground, while about 450 Christian families fled yesterday. They have not returned.
The Justice and Peace Commission accuses the police of "criminal negligence" because they did not intervene.
Lawrence John Saldanha, archbishop of Lahore Archdiocese and chairman of the National Commission for Justice and Peace, said "the attack seems to have been planned and organized as the attackers were brought to the site in buses and instigated to commit violence and arson. It gave our people a lot of fear and anxiety but we hope the government will do something."
The violence began 10 a.m. Saturday and was apparently motivated by the latest blasphemy case. On Friday, a Christian, Yousaf Masih, allegedly burned some copies of the Koran and disappeared. One of his brothers, Salim Masih was arrested the day before. The Commission of Justice and Peace in Lahore ruled that the blasphemy accusations were false and stemmed from the accusers having a financial dispute with the families they accused.
Just a little note to the liberal apologists, ACLU, etc. Don't straddle the fence. Choose your sides, because this war is only about to get worse. I pray for you all to get on the side of good. This is a spiritual war for sure. The extremists of Islam will do their evil, and you can either keep trying your multi-culturism, politically correct crap, or not. It doesn't matter to the raged murderers of Islam either way. You can keep feeding the aligators, but don't think that means they will eat you last.
Remember on 9/11 when we all realized that Muslims were at war with us? Do we need to go through that again to realize they're still at war with us?
Posted by: Chris Short at
06:46 PM
| Comments (50)
| Add Comment
Post contains 365 words, total size 2 kb.
1
This was easy to predict. For some unknown reason the Left has given the Muslim a pass when it comes to barbarity. No critism of headchopping, throat cutting, burning, murdering, assualting, looting, etc. ever comes from the Left when referring to Muslim atrocities. They can behead little Christian girls in Indonesia, which has nothing to do with Palestine, and what does the Left say? The silence is deafening!
Someone can burn a Bible and the Left says freedom of expression, but you had better not burn a Koran, or you can expect any type of violence with nothing but silence from the Left.
Posted by: jesusland joe at November 13, 2005 08:03 PM (rUyw4)
2
"Just a little note to the liberal apologists, ACLU, etc. Don't straddle the fence. Choose your sides, because this war is only about to get worse."
Lets hear it for Secular Humanism. Whos with me?
Posted by: actus at November 13, 2005 08:54 PM (Zi15r)
3
Their inaction is called fear - this type of muslim activity terrifies and intimidates the crap out of them.
If you notice - when the lib/left embraces a "cause" they like to personalize the relationship - hang out with, show solidarity by dressing like them, idolizing their heros, have journalists interview and praise them ...
who can forget Jane on that AA gun, Che posters and peasant shirts or the Left and Euro journalists seeking them out, etc. etc.
But with Radical Islam THEY CAN'T DO IT! or they end up like that reporter in Pakistan.
Radical Islam hates the lib/left West with as much passion plus disgust as they do say .. us. And they act on their hatreds. Weird huh.
Unlike us, the lib/left is for lack of a better word "ball-less". They save their rage and righteous anger for blogs, safe venues for gathering like the parks and streets of free western countries, acadamic sanctuaries etc. all guaranteed and defended by .... us. We are their "fantasy enemy" - thru us they can create in their minds the "fantasy confrontation of good(left)/evil(right) with them "fighting heroic battles" like the last scene in "Les Miserables" - struggling to the top of the barricade, waving the red banner.
And its all safe and secure! Go home, turn on the stereo, have a cup of herbal tea and "fantasize about tomarrows Battles".
look past the crap they spew - its meaningless. The real struggle is the unspoken cultural divide and social/psychological schism between us. If we say tomato - they shout tomatoe. Its all about domestic stuff in the end. Everything else to them is just props on the stage.
Posted by: hondo at November 13, 2005 09:00 PM (Jvmry)
4
"Just a little note to the liberal apologists, ACLU, etc. Don't straddle the fence."
Oh don't worry, they aren't going to.
"Choose your sides, because this war is only about to get worse."
They already have, long ago, and they want it to get worse. They want to see the White House in flames and evil white conservatives murdered in the streets.
"I pray for you all to get on the side of good."
Pray to hit the lottery intstead, your chances are better.
This is a spiritual war for sure. The extremists of Islam will do their evil, and you can either keep trying your multi-culturism, politically correct crap, or not.
I'm betting door number one.
"It doesn't matter to the raged murderers of Islam either way. You can keep feeding the aligators, but don't think that means they will eat you last."
Like I've tried to explain to rectus, if they get their way and the 'slamotards win, it won't go well for libtards at all. If we win, at least they can scrape off those idiotic bumper stickers and pretend to be loyal citizens.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 13, 2005 09:59 PM (0yYS2)
5
"Like I've tried to explain to rectus, if they get their way and the 'slamotards win, it won't go well for libtards at all. If we win, at least they can scrape off those idiotic bumper stickers and pretend to be loyal citizens."
Do we really have to wait this long? I mean, this war on terror is going to last a long time. We want the apolypse now dammit!
Posted by: actus at November 13, 2005 10:09 PM (Zi15r)
6
maxie
You gotta cut down on the caffeine! Get a lil' mellower - it improves the sight-picture.
Posted by: hondo at November 13, 2005 10:26 PM (Jvmry)
7
Hondo, what are you talking about?
And rectus, you can have your "apolypse" whenever you want it.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 13, 2005 10:49 PM (0yYS2)
8
Maxie
You let the dickless geeks get to you too easily. Bad for blood pressure - plus to them their blogs are equivalent to auto-erotism. Its the only real sexual stimulation they get while using both hands.
Posted by: hondo at November 13, 2005 11:30 PM (Jvmry)
9
Clarifying. There is no district called Nankana in Punjab in India. It is very likely it is in Punjab in Pakistan The reporter has not bothered to check facts and gone ahead to report "news".
Posted by: arun puri at November 14, 2005 12:29 AM (XQQrX)
10
hondoparanoiawilldestroyyanohackingfromri
Posted by: Route Irish at November 14, 2005 02:15 AM (Eh9tH)
11
http://www.informationclearinghouse .info/article10985.htm
Posted by: Route Irish at November 14, 2005 03:19 AM (Eh9tH)
12
arun puri: it's right on the border of India and Pakistan. Probably an honest mistake, but close. It still doesn't prove or disprove the story.
Posted by: Oyster at November 14, 2005 08:00 AM (YudAC)
13
Route,
Please change your name, you are a disgrace to the Irish.
Posted by: Charlie at November 14, 2005 08:24 AM (2ZhL/)
14
"And rectus, you can have your "apolypse" whenever you want it."
Thanks for catching my apocalypse typo. How about now?
"Secular Humanism isn't the problem."
I know its not the problem. Its the side that I picked!
Posted by: actus at November 14, 2005 08:24 AM (Zi15r)
15
Hondo, I assure you that everything I say comes from a cool head. Yes, I really am a cold, methodical bastard when the situation calls for it, and I will gladly slip the noose over the head of anyone who threatens my country or aids its enemies. I do not speak words in anger that I do not think at any other time, and I do not speak them lightly; I mean what I say, because that's how I am. I possess the clarity to see, the resolve to act, and the means to do what is necessary.
War is coming, and only the prepared will fare well. The unprepared, the enemy, and those who give aid and comfort to the enemy will not. Liberals have chosen their side, and they stand with the enemies of America, no matter who they are. And they will die with them. If anyone thinks that this country can be taken down by a bunch of backward savages and limp-wristed cowards, then I welcome them to try, because I'm ready.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 14, 2005 09:39 AM (0yYS2)
16
Actus,
Secular Humanism isn't a side. What the author wants you to decide is to either be with the people who fight for a modern world, or you will be with the people who wish to return the world to the Dark Ages. It's a very easy decision for me. I will fight.
Posted by: jesusland joe at November 14, 2005 10:11 AM (rUyw4)
17
I would have thought by now, given the alledged "scientic and mathematical genius" of the islamic world that the Nomex Koran would have been invented by now. But I guess it pays to keep your holy book flammable because there's no telling when you may have to use deception to rally a mob against the infidel.
Posted by: Graeme at November 14, 2005 10:16 AM (I1uKf)
18
So rectus, how does being a secular humanist make you anti-American and pro-islamofascist? Or do you just harbor those latent tendencies and use your philosophical differences with the majority of American society as a conduit for them? You strike me as being a typical liberal; elitist, closed-minded, pseudo-intellectual, and not quite as smart as you tell yourself you are, which you know, but refuse to deal with, all of which tends to foster bitterness and resentment toward society at large.
You probably have a comfortable middle-class background, went to a mostly white school, lived in an all white suburb, and went to an acceptably middle class college where you were a liberal arts major and belonged to various groups where you learned to hate yourself, your fellow Evil Whities™, and your country. And you love nothing better than to protest against people who are doing something beneficial and productive, and would love to punish the wealthy, though your parents are probably professional or semi-professional.
In short, you are the typical guilt-wracked white liberal who didn't earn your comfortable place in society, but aren't willing to give it up, so you lash out at everyone who isn't wracked with guilt. Chances are that you never served in the military, or even briefly considered it, because you consider yourself too good and too smart to waste your time serving your country. Your kind always talks about others contributing, but never seems to find the time yourselves. Go figure.
I'm an atheist libertarian, and can think of about a dozen issues on which I disagree with the Republicans, but I have the magical ability to see where the priority lies, and the priority of issue at the moment is the fact that a death cult of backward savages who haven't even worked out indoor plumbing yet want to enslave or kill us. Sure, I see lots of problems with our nation and our society, and especially with our government, but I don't think supporting the enemies of my country is going to make things better, but then, I'm grounded in reality; I didn't have that comfy middle class upbringing, and have no guilt whatsoever over my position in society, comfortable now, though modest, because I have earned everything I have by my own talent and effort, and I have served my country with pride, honor, and dignity. I contribute to the betterment of society by standing with my fellow loyal citizens, not against them, and by supporting those who serve our country, not its enemies. You'd better get your shit together and figure out whose side you're on, and double quick, because when the shooting starts, sitting on the fence will only make you a good target for both sides.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 14, 2005 10:16 AM (0yYS2)
19
"So rectus, how does being a secular humanist make you anti-American and pro-islamofascist?"
Its really not my fault that you're wrong. But nice try playing the blame game.
"And you love nothing better than to protest against people who are doing something beneficial and productive, and would love to punish the wealthy, though your parents are probably professional or semi-professional."
Its getting to be more and more that being professional is no guarantee of wealth. Welcome to unrestrained business rule!
"I'm an atheist libertarian, and can think of about a dozen issues on which I disagree with the Republicans, but I have the magical ability to see where the priority lies, and the priority of issue at the moment is the fact that a death cult of backward savages who haven't even worked out indoor plumbing yet want to enslave or kill us."
I fear nothing from people who 'haven't worked out indoor plumbing.'
Posted by: actus at November 14, 2005 10:27 AM (CqheE)
20
Actus,
"I fear nothing from people who 'haven't worked out indoor plumbing'".
But you should, my friend, you should!
Posted by: jesusland joe at November 14, 2005 10:48 AM (rUyw4)
21
"But you should, my friend, you should!"
I'll save my fear for those who can build explosives and WMD's. If we ever find any.
Posted by: actus at November 14, 2005 10:58 AM (CqheE)
22
Methinks you will learn to fear them, if you live very much longer. Who knows, you might be 80. But me, I'm fairly young and I have three children, so I would prefer they grow up to live in a modern world with modern conveniences.
But, in the alternative, we do live on a ranch where there is abundant game, we have a generator to produce electricity, we are not close to any major cities, and we have laid in a supply of food. If you live in a city I feel sorry for you, because the loss of electricity alone will cause a nightmare scenario in about 2 days. Look at NO after a hurricane and you get my drift. You will learn to fear, Actus, I have no doubt about that.
Posted by: jesusland joe at November 14, 2005 11:32 AM (rUyw4)
23
"If you live in a city I feel sorry for you, because the loss of electricity alone will cause a nightmare scenario in about 2 days."
And whats worse if you live in a city: you probably are being protected by your second choice of a candidate. Thanks country -folk!
Posted by: actus at November 14, 2005 11:39 AM (CqheE)
24
You may not realize it, actus, but you should thank us for not voting for the guy who would socialize and federalize our medicine and have to raise federal taxes to 50% to cover it because he has such an affinity for the French way of things. The guy who would without a thought raise the retirement age a couple of years and bump up the SS and medicare portions of our taxes to take care of a problem just long enough for him to leave office. I could go on.
You're welcome.
Posted by: Oyster at November 14, 2005 12:44 PM (fl6E1)
25
Ah, blissful ignorance! And when reality pokes its ugly snout through the etheral mists into your dream world, why, a good dose of denial will do the trick! Eh, rectus?
Just to remind you dumbass, it was those without indoor plumbing who flew two airplanes into the WTC, unless of course you think it was the JOOOOOOOOOOOS that did it.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 14, 2005 12:55 PM (0yYS2)
26
"You may not realize it, actus, but you should thank us for not voting for the guy who would socialize and federalize our medicine and have to raise federal taxes to 50% to cover it because he has such an affinity for the French way of things"
yes yes. Thats how we show how elitist we are. By thanking people for saving us from ourselves -- and our gay friends.
"Just to remind you dumbass, it was those without indoor plumbing who flew two airplanes into the WTC"
Actually I thought they were mostly middle class educated types with engineering degrees -- not to mention flight school. Thats the type to worry about. Not some bushman in africa, a tribesman in afghanistan, or inbred in West VA.
Posted by: actus at November 14, 2005 01:34 PM (CqheE)
27
I really don't worry much about the muslims reference the big longterm picture. Sure, they are big into mindless savagery and rage but lack the cool methodical head to be be truly professional and effective. If they come to dominance in the muslim world they will probably turn their attentions to a mindless internal bloodbath (ala Pol Pot) within their own ranks. They will slaughter other muslims over purification issues like whose a holier muslim, true believer, who doesn't assume the correct position when praying towards Mecca, the wrong colored socks ... and on and on.
And they piss off everybody they come in contact with - India, SE Asia, the Chinese - and let's not forget those "other" Europeans - the Slavs (all of them).
The entire situation with Muslims would be commical if it wasn't so tragic. The Rad muslims in their mindset literally claim all the land north of Antartica as some divine right!
As far as the Europeans - lived there - screw them! Lets not forget our ancesters not only came from there - they ran away from there!
The Euros pass themselves off as progressive enlightened socialist orientated peaceful peoples - but this is all a shallow facade courtesy of the Post WII era (just 60 years!). The whole secret thing about their EU dream is their goal to restore European domination over the US, those pesky Slavs and the world. (wouldn't work of course).
I'm more concerned about the domestic strife caused by the growing cultural divide. Its bad for my pension fund, and I'm a grandfather now - weird huh - one day your out bikin' to "Born To Be wild" then the next your shopping for Fixedent and Silver formula vitamins.
Posted by: hondo at November 14, 2005 02:23 PM (Jvmry)
28
Actus,
You should not depend on anyone for your personal safety. The only person you can rely on to protect you is yourself. That's my philosophy, for whatever it's worth.
Posted by: jesusland joe at November 14, 2005 02:59 PM (rUyw4)
29
For anyone who is wondering, Route Irish, aka IED Alley, is an infamous stretch of road in Iraq that has claimed many of our servicemen. The fact that this asshole uses that as a screen name makes me see red. We should trace his IP and go even out the karmic debt.
Posted by: Jack's Smirking Revenge at November 14, 2005 03:36 PM (CtVG6)
30
"You should not depend on anyone for your personal safety. The only person you can rely on to protect you is yourself. That's my philosophy, for whatever it's worth."
Well then I'm sure that you don't need to debate what presidential candidate can best protect us from terrorism, and in voting you didn't consider that at all. You've got everything figured out for yourself there in jeebus land.
Posted by: actus at November 14, 2005 03:43 PM (CqheE)
31
Bill Clinton protected us from terrorism, and John Kerry would do the same, is that your theory, Actus?
Posted by: jesusland joe at November 14, 2005 04:05 PM (rUyw4)
32
Sure rectus, sure. You're so stupid the government should wring you out, bottle your stupidity, and spray it in aerosol form over our enemies. You're Weapons-Grade Stupid™.
By the way, I just made that up, so if anyone else uses it, I expect full attribution.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 14, 2005 04:07 PM (0yYS2)
33
"yes yes. Thats how we show how elitist we are. By thanking people for saving us from ourselves -- and our gay friends."
That response was, well, non-sequitur.
Posted by: Oyster at November 14, 2005 04:13 PM (fl6E1)
34
jack
RIs handle is interesting in a Freudian way - a road paved with traps and bombs.
Only reinforced my believe that he may be a (non-political???) hacker troll cruising open blogs instead of emails. Be leary of opening up anything from him.
Posted by: hondo at November 14, 2005 04:30 PM (Jvmry)
35
"Bill Clinton protected us from terrorism, and John Kerry would do the same, is that your theory, Actus?"
I'd think that Kerry was better. Your theory is that it doesn't matter.
Posted by: actus at November 14, 2005 05:33 PM (CqheE)
36
No, that's not my theory, Actus. Personally, I don't think anyone can fully protect us from terrorism. Those days are gone, hence, I'm prepared to protect myself.
That meant moving out of a large city, living on less money, being satisfied with fewer things, etc. I just wish I had done it years before, because I am oh so much happier.
Posted by: jesusland joe at November 14, 2005 07:23 PM (rUyw4)
37
"No, that's not my theory, Actus."
Ok. well when you said that no-one can protect me in a discussion about who to elect, it was the assumption. But I can let you change your mind away from that silly theory.
Posted by: actus at November 14, 2005 09:11 PM (Zi15r)
38
You all missed something. The "liberals" are heavily influenced by Marxism or one of it's derivatives.
Marxism is a millenarian religion (forget the stupidity that a religion is defined as 'worship of a god'). The Workers' Apocalypse requires that the entire world dissolve into warfare and killing before the Workers' Epiphany and all the down trodden turn on the "oppressors", murder them all, throw down their weapons, and have a group hug.
And, forever after, the workers will sit in the shade, singing Kumbaya while the factories work themselves and food will magically appear on their plates whenever the workers are hungry, etc, etc, etc.
Part of the miracle the Marxists believe in is that Islam, being an opiate of the masses, will vanish in the Workers' Apocalypse. Therefore, there is no need to be concerned that Islam is gaining strength.
Posted by: Phillep at November 15, 2005 08:57 AM (hGT/F)
39
Phillep
An excellent point! I overlooked that. Yes! The lib/left does expect muslims to eventually reform their religion into oblivion (like the mainstream protestant churches in the US and religion in general in Europe) and join them at the table of secure humanism.
Posted by: hondo at November 15, 2005 11:52 AM (Jvmry)
40
Damn Phillep, you concisively and decisively nailed it. I've been trying to explain that same concept all along, but have never been quite able to condense it so nicely.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 15, 2005 12:32 PM (0yYS2)
41
"Part of the miracle the Marxists believe in is that Islam, being an opiate of the masses, will vanish in the Workers' Apocalypse. Therefore, there is no need to be concerned that Islam is gaining strength. "
This is something I've never understood about some ideas of Marxism. If everything will go in the final hour, why do Marxists worry about anything? Why do they worry about Christianity if that too will go? Why worry about capitalism even? The problem with your explanation is that it doesn't single out islam.
If we look at history, it is the west that used radical Islam against communism -- in afghanistan, for example. Look at the remnants of afghan communism, like RAWA, and you'll see them being strongly anti-islam.
Posted by: actus at November 15, 2005 03:11 PM (CqheE)
42
Actus,
But you make the assumption that Afghan communists exist in a vacumn and were not affected by the war in Afghanistan. I don't know either, just guessing, as I have never studied Communist doctrine or the Worker's Apocalypse.
Posted by: jesusland joe at November 15, 2005 05:00 PM (rUyw4)
43
"I don't know either, just guessing, as I have never studied Communist doctrine or the Worker's Apocalypse."
Me neither. I mean, it seems like a basic contradiction -- if everything will go away in the inevitable apocalypse, why do you need to fight for anything?
Posted by: actus at November 15, 2005 05:42 PM (CqheE)
44
Hmmm....methinks you have a point, Actus. I will study this contradiction if I can find anything on it. I shall visit Google.
Posted by: jesusland joe at November 15, 2005 05:57 PM (rUyw4)
45
Late to response due to work load.
I think the Marxist influenced people do not see any important difference between Christianity and Islam. They just want a "let's you and him fight".
They will support anyone who upsets the status quo, no matter what they preach or do, so long as someone else disagrees enough to fight about it. They would support Zionism in the face of Islam, if the global powers supported Zionism.
"The worse things are, the better they are." Remember that one from the 60's?
Arctus: "Workers' Apocalypse" is the Revolution the Marxists, Leninists, and Maoists gas on and on about.
Posted by: Phillep at November 16, 2005 10:06 AM (7Dsiu)
46
"They will support anyone who upsets the status quo, no matter what they preach or do, so long as someone else disagrees enough to fight about it"
Then why did the communists attempt to shore up the status quo in afghanistan, and why did the US use islamic fundamentalists against hte secular government there?
Posted by: actus at November 16, 2005 12:54 PM (CqheE)
47
Actus: Didn't you just answer your own question?
Posted by: Phillep at November 16, 2005 05:46 PM (Xg00m)
48
"Then why did the communists attempt to shore up the status quo in afghanistan..."
Uh, because the government was a commie puppet? Duh.
"...and why did the US use islamic fundamentalists against hte secular government there?"
They weren't "islamic fundamentalists" at the time, they were native tribesmen initially, patriots fighting for their country, and only later was it arabs like bin Laden. Also, you mean against the communist instead of secular government, don't you? Remember that Marxism is a religion, and being an avowed atheist and ex-religioso, I know a religion when I smell one; i.e., messianic leaders, false prophets, hollow promises, unrealistic expectations, and ruthless repression of dissent. Yep, smells like a religion to me.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at November 16, 2005 07:50 PM (0yYS2)
49
I'm always late, but here goes...
"...if everything will go away in the inevitable apocalypse, why do you need to fight for anything?"
Let's assume that this will indeed occur for argument's sake. As long as there are people like us who keep them from realizing their "idyllic dream" sooner rather than later, they do what ever it takes to facillitate the "inevitable".
If you really want something to happen, even knowing (or just believing) it's eventually going to occur anyway, you would push to make it a reality as soon as possible, right?
Posted by: Oyster at November 17, 2005 08:22 AM (YudAC)
50
"it seems like a basic contradiction -- if everything will go away in the inevitable apocalypse, why do you need to fight for anything?"
Well, if that "you" should have been "they" (Marxists), because there will not be an Apocalypse if no one is fighting.
If the "you" means I think the Apocalypse would work out as expected, I don't.
If "you" means "why fight the inevitable?" Because I'm a stubborn and contrary old cuss.
Oh, the "status quo" the Soviets supported in Ashcanistan, was no such thing. The Soviets wanted many changes in how that country was run, and they were making them.
Posted by: Phillep at November 18, 2005 10:16 AM (TN/ft)
49kb generated in CPU 0.019, elapsed 0.126 seconds.
119 queries taking 0.114 seconds, 299 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
119 queries taking 0.114 seconds, 299 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
