Never mind - here they are -
.
Posted on 12/01/2007 12:13:05 PM PST by mojito
Maybe to you, but if CAIR was to say that they condemned this action, most here at FR would point to the fact that they lie as part of their religion. They can’t be trusted, because they are supposed to lie to infidels. Rightly or wrongly, there is nothing that CAIR can do to convince most here that they are truly moderates.
I wonder what these bastards will do with me? I name a turd “mohammed” every morning. Right before I flush...
________________
That’s an insult to turds everywhere.
Also, from the looks of it, contrary to what the IBD editors wrote (or maybe they wrote it before CAIR’s response), CAIR’s website does, in fact, feature an article condemning the Sudanese court’s treatment of Ms. Gibbons, and calling for her release.
http://www.cair.com/ArticleDetails.aspx?mid1=777&&ArticleID=23869&&name=n&&currPage=1
Whether they really ‘mean’ it is, of course, a wholly separate question....
Not really. Islam's well-deserved reputation for inhumanity and savagery would be hardpressed to get much worse. This latest incident is just one of countless similar ones.
I’d like to hear from Rick Warren and his slew of evangelical “leaders” who have been cozying up to the Muslims. Surely, this incident with this poor teacher is worthy of comment and condemnation.
Muslim denial thrives in the absence of reformation.
That is, violent, evil Islam can get away with this nonsense because no one has ever created a written reformist doctrine to contrast with violent, evil Islam.
If someone, anyone were to create a reform version of Islam, then the debate would change. It would make being Muslim an either/or proposition.
When a Muslim would scream that “Islam is the religion of peace!”, they would immediately be accused by non-Muslims of being a “reform Muslim”. Which they would then deny.
But then, the non-Muslims would say, only reform Muslims embrace peace. So either you are lying, or you are a reform Muslim. Orthodox Muslims are violent and evil. So are you violent and evil, or are you a reform Muslim?
This would help to create an inherent schism in Islam. Unless Muslims embraced the doctrines of reform Islam, then they could be condemned as violent and evil, precisely *because* they were not reform Muslims.
In turn, this would kill much of the lying and hypocrisy, because they would be afraid to lie, lest they be accused of being a reformist.
As far as the reformist doctrines themselves, they would turn existing doctrines on their ear. Mohammed would be said to have NEVER embraced or endorsed war or violence, because he was a pacifist. And women have equal rights in all ways with men, and can dress any way they want. And pork is fine to eat as well. Dogs make good pets, and should be treated kindly. Non-Muslims are just as good as Muslims, and should never be treated unfairly. Jews are the friends of Muslims.
Even worse than what you say - the bear was named after the prophet, not the god. When they do it to defend their god, I find it amusing that they think so little of the god that it needs humans (I use the term "humans" loosely) to defend it.
These are the "moderate" Muslims.
The radical Muslims are out there killing not chanting about it.
Why would they want to harm their bad reputation?
Who’s still calling this crap a “religion”?
The “Moderate Muslims” are already beheaded!
That could be the problem. If we don't stop this $hit, they'll try it over here.
Our President, among others.
It would mean the CAIR is not the “mainstream” equivalent of the Black Muslims.
Ha, it would mean that CAIR is lying!
Never mind - here they are -
.
Well, it might mean that their funding does not come directly from Saudi Arabia.
Even though she wants to appear unequivocal, the childish pun in the title shows her skittishness about taking sides. She gives an ambiguous exoneration of the victim with, "I'm almost positive Gibbons meant no harm when she approved calling the teddy bear Muhammad." and later refers to her "poor choice" in the matter.
She never repudiates the official decision, but only questions their priorities, and uses the rhetorical question, "Why aren't they taking the prophet's advice?" ( a putative declaration of equality among the races ) as a segue to change the subject.
Needless to say, I didn't find any of it reassuring.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.