Benedict the Bombthrower:Why the pope's speech really was outrageous (Liberal view alert)

American Prospect ^ | 09/25/2006 | Adele Stan

[Former Dodger]

Good post, Sir Linksalot, more power to you for not only finding this dreck, but having the fortitude to read it (I'm sur you had several laugh-out-loud breaks).

PRoP Apologist PING!

It's writers like this that make my tagline valid.

[massgopguy]

I Googled; "Adele M. Stan lesbian" and got an article by her on the hardship of finding Same-Sex Wedding Cake Toppers. She says; "we Gay people". So there's your answer.

[massgopguy]

I Googled; "Adele M. Stan lesbian" and got an article by her on the hardship of finding Same-Sex Wedding Cake Toppers. She says; "we Gay people". So there's your answer.

[RexBeach]

People like Ms. Stan fail to see that the pope was making a reasonable point: That Islam seems to have difficulty in looking at God in a reasonable, logical fashion. Heaven knows, the Islamic reaction to the pope's words proved his point!

Of course, Ms. Stan is, most likely, a nihilist. Betcha.

[ArrogantBustard]

the hardship of finding Same-Sex Wedding Cake Toppers.

ROFL!!!! No! Who'd ever have thought?

She says; "we Gay people".

The books are closed on that one ...

[an amused spectator]

The Terrorist Media! ping

Golden Burkha Award nominee for 2006 bump

[Clifford The Big Red Dog]

I say we all show up for the opening night of her gig, whaddaya say? We'd just have to figure out who's bringing the tomatoes......

[kenth]

They are delusional and immature. They fantasize about being the rule makers in a world of equals, without for a moment realizing the disparity. They don't believe in being subject to their own rules.

[The Old Hoosier]

But to throw a rhetorical bomb such as that the pope tossed into the teeming cities of the Muslim world is to commit an act tantamount to violence.

Oh, I see -- so intellectual freedom, debate, and dialogue are not valued by liberals any longer.

At least, not when it's the Pope.

[OK]

This article is a prime example of muddled thought. You can get a headache trying to follow it logically.

[You Dirty Rats]

But to throw a rhetorical bomb such as that the pope tossed into the teeming cities of the Muslim world is to commit an act tantamount to violence.

In other words, if the Muslim world reacts with violence it's the Pope's fault for saying mean things that hurt their poor wittle feelings.

I guess the Left's commitment to free speech is less important than their commitment to hate Western Civilization.

[MEGoody]

The pope's quote from an earlier church father may have been 'unfortunate' as this author calls it, but it was spot on.

How did the Muzzies respond to the comments? By committing violence.

[Cicero]

If I understand this obscure rant correctly, she seems to be saying that the Pope was guilty of provoking the Muslims by telling him that God opposes violence in the name of religion.

I'm not sure how that can be construed as offensive, unless it violates the Muslim understanding that Allah does, in fact, call for religious violence, as does Muhammed his prophet.

The whole article is simply incoherent.

[Charles Martel]

Benedict the Bombthrower

"Brother Maynard, consult the Book of Armaments..."

[tigtog]

If we riot and kill based on her words, does that make her words violent? Did this chick not take logic?

[elcid1970]

Adele Stan as Tiny Tim? At least he was straight. But he used his ukulele as a cricket bat when the audience began firing tomatoes.

[NCSteve]

Yet another humanist leftie nihilist devises convoluted moral equivalences with which to condemn Western religious culture and Christianity while slipping in some tasty victimhood for those poor, put-upon Muslims.

I guess if one rhetorically amplifies a speech to academics in a college into a "bomb throwing" episode, the throwing of actual bombs doesn't look so extreme. Or at least that's probably be the fractured logic wheezing its way through the overtaxed grey matter of this particular twit.

[SirLinksalot]

What this deluded author fails to understand is that NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO, YOU CANNOT ESCAPE THE BASIC TEACHINGS OF MOHAMMAD.

Saudi Arabia's most senior cleric also explained that war was never Islam's ancient founder, the prophet Mohammed's, first choice: "He gave three options: either accept Islam, or surrender and pay tax, and they will be allowed to remain in their land, observing their religion under the protection of Muslims."

So folks, according to the Grand Mufti, the third option of violence against non-Muslims was only a last resort, if they refused to convert or surrender peacefully to the armies of Islam.

Yep...Three choices folks, take your pick :

1) Convert,
2) Pay us tax and be subject to Sharia Law, or
3) Die.

You want Islam to be peaceful ? SIMPLE --- Islam will be peaceful as long as we are stronger. It will try and use our own systems to get Sharia law introduced in smaller areas first, and then larger ones. It will continue to work with the secular humanists and marxists to weaken our society. The battle is on. We just need people to realise it and understand it. Whether it remains a war of ideas, or devolves into a full scare physical war depends on how many people realise it. In this, it is where secularists and cowards ( like this lesbian author, who would not even survive if Islam took over ) who embolden Islam and end up staying silent and trying to shut everyone else up.

Reagan's principle still applies today : "PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH".

[redgolum]

Funny, in that a passing reference to one of the last rulers of the Eastern Empire is now a reason to be killed.

That wasn't even what the speech was about.

[Leftism is Mentally Deranged]

As always, the left blames the Pope for this! They use words like "set off", "triggered", "caused". In their perverted world-view, WORDS are infinitely worse than shooting a nun in the back, rioting and death threats.