You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Religion’ category.

Something caught my eye in the Reuters story Jason commented on:

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) – U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Friday condemned as “offensively anti-Islamic” a Dutch lawmaker’s film that accuses the Koran of inciting violence.

Interestingly, Ban’s condemnation of Dutch politician Geert Wilders’ film on fundamentalist Muslim violence as “offensively anti-Islamic”may tacitly admit Wilders’ point.

Imagine a Mississippi filmmaker were to produce a movie linking the violence of abortion bombers and the Bible verses they use to justify their actions. Being an extremely devout evangelical, I would hardly call that work anti-Christian. It would condemn those twisting Scripture for their own fatal machinations; and it would condemn those executing violence, a proportion of Christians so small as to make laughable any conflation of them or their ideas with the faith itself. A film such as this would be anti-abortion-bomber not anti-Christian.

But Ban didn’t say Wilders’ film attacks those taking the Qur’an out of context or that it condemns those tiny numbers of Muslims embracing v iolence. He didn’t say it was anti-violence as its hypothetical, Christian analog might be categorized. Instead he labeled it anti-Islamic, accidentally acknowledging that perhaps the only circumstance under which this film could be anti-Islamic is if it accurately portrays some sect whose size and interpretation of the Qur’an makes conflation with the whole anything but laughable.

This is precisely why both fundamentalist and moderate Muslims have denounced the film: They’ve been left no choice but to conclude, much like Secretary-General Ban, that Wilders’ attack on Islamists specifically is also an attack on broader Islam; and if that is their conclusion, then perhaps such an attack is not without reason.

Advertisements

Directly below are both parts of Geert Wilders’ long-anticipated, short film, Fitna which links Qur’anic passages to Wahabistic violence (original video here–be patient, they are getting a lot of traffic). The film has caused no shortage of controversy and buzz, culminating so far in a crisis meeting of Holland’s cabinet and the formation of a police cordon around the Dutch Parliament building. According to the Hollywood Reporter,

Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende said Thursday night that the Department of Justice will investigate whether Wilders has broken Dutch law with his attack on the Quran. Balkenende condemned the film as “out to hurt” the Dutch people.

Welcome, dear friends, to life in paradisaical, post-Kantian Europe, where politicians and the enlightened excoriate those documenting murderous fanatics’ religiously motivated atrocities. That such documentation should result in muzzling the masses both viscerally and intellectually offends our undeniable desire for liberty.

We have already seen moral equivalence arguments being used as defenses for Islamist actions. But many a documentary and history has been made concerning the Crusades and the Inquisition. Vatican inspired violence doesn’t pour into the streets to greet these publications, though the Church may express its dismay or disagreement over the subject’s treatment. But when Dutch Cartoonists published works of satire; Islamists lauded murder, burned buildings, and stormed embassies. And now we see another reactionary storm on the horizon as Geert Wilders, a member of Holland’s House of Representatives, releases a film publicizing Islamist racism and violence along with some Qur’anic verses (or ayats) extolling murder and death. Intrinsically dishonest as moral equivalence arguments are, situations such as this demonstrate their utter uselessness and the complete intellectual dishonesty of those who deploy them.

Also bearing mention is the fact that Network Solutions refused to host the film online. This is certainly acceptable given Network Solutions’ status as a private firm. What disgusts is the fact that Network Solutions, while refusing to host what is actually a documentary exploration of those who would just as soon kill NS’ CEO as change turbans, contentedly hosts vile pornography (articles here and here). Somehow in the world of Network Solutions, objectifying and degrading women equates to protected speech while exploring Wahabism’s link to the Qur’an may violate the company’s own “guidelines on hate language.” The world is truly turned on its head.


A post in which yours truly gets to continue his treasured pastime of poking fun at his favorite unindicted co-conspirator and the media.

It’s just too easy.

Today’s email newsletter from the terrorist financiers spotlighted efforts to free Sami Al-Arian, who is currently sitting in a US prison for his connections to terrorist-supporting organizations, some of which he founded. In an action item a few days ago, CAIR called for American Muslims and “people of conscious” to write letters on his behalf to members of Congress, Judge Gerald Lee of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, and to Attorney General Michael Mukasey.

In a showcase of its utter contempt for any sense of consistency or reason, in the same email, CAIR blasted Walid Shoebat again, quoting Dawud Walid in a second article specifically targeting the ex-terrorist.

“Either he’s a fraud or he should be detained by the Justice Department if he really was involved with a supposed terrorism attack in Israel,” said Dawud Walid, executive director of the Michigan chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

So if you are CAIR, real terrorist supporters should run free while those who have reformed and speak out against radicalism should be prosecuted. That makes sense.

What is even more funny is a portion of the article that also quoted Dawud Walid. The article was written by Kathleen Lavey, a reporter for the Lansing (Michigan) State Journal. FEC records show she is a contributor to the DNC.

[Walid Shoebat] will visit Michigan State University on Tuesday.

The MSU chapter of Young Americans for Freedom – classified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center– has brought other controversial speakers to MSU, including Minutemen co-founder Chris Simcox and British Nationalist Nick Griffin. . .

Yup, Young Americans for Freedom is a hate group all right! That’s what William F. Buckley Jr. and Ronald Reagan were into, right?

SPLC was founded by Morris Dees and Joe Levin, two lawyers in Alabama. Dees has contributed over $15,000 to various Democrats since 1979 (plus Ralph Nader in 2000 and no Republicans ever), including Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Gary Hart (that Gary Hart), Kerry, Edwards, and even Ted Kennedy’s presidential campaign. Ick.

Joe Levin worked for the Carter Administration and contributed only to Democrats as well.

The first President of the SPLC was none other than Julian Bond. You may know him as President of the Democrat support group known as the NAACP.

Basically, noting that the SPLC designates YAF as a hate group is akin to noting that Jews are labeled by Iran as an illegitimate part of humanity in need of a serious whoopin’–it’s not news and it’s expected. In others words, to a liberal feminist like Kathleen Lavey, it should be mentioned as much as possible.

Especially if you have a symbiotic relationship with CAIR in Michigan, as Lavey seems to.

At the sunrise Easter service I attended yesterday, my pastor threatened people opposed to our church with a quote from rapper Ice Cube: “You picked the wrong folk to mess with.”

The title of my pastor’s sermon was “How to Handle a Public Lynching.” Appropriately, then, he coupled his Ice Cube quote with a little touch of blasphemy, saying that a fellow church member of mine who had …

… likened the U.S. to the Ku Klux Klan and declared it damned for its “state-sponsored terrorism,” is facing the same challenges Jesus did. “No one should start a ministry with lynching, no one should end their ministry with lynching,”

I don’t really attend Trinity United Church of Christ, where Barack Obama is a member and where these comments constituted the main points in the Easter morning message on the resurrection of Christ.

But if this sermon sounds a little off to you, you must be a “typical white person.” You see, as Barack has also said, “if you go there on Easter on this Easter Sunday and you sat down there in the pew you would think this is just like any other church.”

For some reason, I had thought that Easter Sunday was about Christ’s death and miraculous resurrection, providing salvation to all of humanity, blacks and whites, through God’s amazing saving grace.

My mistake, Messiah. My mistake.

Quote of the Week

"To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it." -- Thomas Jefferson