Beauty Pageants Can Be Murder (An Ann Coulter Religion Of Peace Classic)

Inasmuch as liberals are demanding that Americans ritualistically proclaim, "Islam is a religion of peace," Muslims might do their part by not killing people all the time.

Recently, the Religion of Peace suffered a PR setback when Muslims in Nigeria welcomed the Miss World beauty pageant by slaughtering Christians in the street and burning churches to the ground. At last count, more than 200 people were dead, hundreds more were injured and thousands were left without homes. Also, the Nigerian contestant's chances of winning "Miss Congeniality" were dashed.

Leaping at the one chance they had to attract positive press to their country and perhaps begin the process of dragging themselves out of the 13th century, Nigerian Muslims instead chose to hack innocent people to death with machetes in the name of Allah. Pageant officials pulled up stakes and took the show to London. At least the Christian-carving faithful can sleep at night knowing they've secured a place for themselves in heaven alongside Mohamed Atta.

One can assume the director of the Nigerian Department of Tourism isn't too pleased. Winning the pageant site had been an uphill battle from the beginning. Some of the more closed-minded Miss World participants had already begun carping about the upcoming stoning of a Nigerian woman, in accordance with Islamic sharia law.

The president of Nigeria, Olusegun Obasanjo, tried to downplay the Muslims' murderous rampage by cheerfully explaining: "The beauty queens should not feel that they are the cause of the violence. It could happen at any time irresponsible journalism is committed against Islam." Well, that's a relief.

It seems an article in a Nigerian newspaper had mused that the Prophet Muhammad "would probably have chosen a wife" from among the Miss World contestants. This upset the practitioners of the Religion of Peace, whose polygamous prophet preferred his wives a little younger – one was 6 years old.

They expressed their displeasure with the article by bludgeoning, stabbing and burning Christians to death. In one part of Nigeria, enforcers of the Religion of Peace commanded that Muslims kill Isioma Daniel, the authoress of the blasphemy. (Overheard at Miss World contest: "Does this make me look fatwa?")

The New York Times can't bear to think that their little darlings – angry, violent Muslims – could be at fault in this melee. That makes no sense because Islam is a Religion of Peace. So the Times reviewed the facts, processed it through the PC prism, and spat out the headline: "Religious Violence in Nigeria Drives Out Miss World Event." According to the Times, rampaging Muslims pouring out of mosques to kill Christians and torch churches resulted from "the tinderbox of religious passions in the country."

Islam is peaceful, but religion causes violence. Pay no attention to the fact that the most bloodthirsty cult in the 20th century was an atheistic sect known as communism. But that was not "true communism," just as Muslim terrorists are not practicing "true Islam." The ironic thing is, liberals would hate Muslims who practiced only "true Islam." Without the terrorism, Muslims would just be another group of "anti-choice" fanatics.

But these are the good Muslims – the Mumia Muslims, not the Jerry Falwell Muslims. The police step in to try to quell violent Muslims and the Times reports this as "fighting between Christians and Muslims." Ah, the cycle of violence.

It would be as if a conservative newspaper, with no basis in fact, referred to all murderers as "environmentalists." Environmentalists Fly Planes Into World Trade Center; Environmentalists Rape Woman In Central Park.

Winning "Best in Show" was the Times' headline on an article about the Christian missionary shot dead in Lebanon by a Muslim: "Killing Underscores Enmity of Evangelists and Muslims." This is like referring to the enmity between a woman and her rapist. She hates him, he hates her. It's a cycle of violence! Except the funny thing about the Christians is, they still love the Muslims.

The Muslims' main beef with the Christians was that they "destroy the fighting spirit of the children, especially of the Palestinian youth, by teaching them not to fight the Jews, for the Palestinians to forgive the Jews and leave them Jerusalem." No new data are capable of shaking the Times' faith that Islam is a religion of peace and Christians, as a general matter, deserve to be shot.

The Times seemed to agree the Muslims had a point with the evangelical. In a news analysis, the Times said the missionaries claimed they were merely exposing people to Jesus Christ. "But," the Times charged in a "j'accuse" tone, "a somewhat more direct goal emerges amid the Web site postings." They were asking for it. (On the bright side, at least this means the Times is holding the gun innocent in this one instance.) The Christians were caught red-handed committing irresponsible Web postings against Islam.

Fortunately, Christians do not rip out people's entrails in response to irresponsible journalism committed against Christianity.

LOL. Q is my favorite. He's Squire Trelaine from the first series written correctly. Love the character.

Borg - nah. Klingons are more fitting. I'm thinking of the old breed Klingons after first series but prior to all the peace treaties. Think about it. They're highly Dictatorial and advance by wiping each other out. And they scheme to do so - Read Maalouf, you'll see what I mean.. LOL.

As far as the Romulan comparison. Try matching their modern rhetoric to facts and ongoing actions. The comparison is uncanny. A more apt comparison would be highly insulting to them I'm sure; but, nothing fits by comparison more tightly than Soviet Communism. I just happen to enjoy Star Trek and it's full of things to use for comparisons. Either way the Klingons and Romulans absolutely detest one another and the same thing is true between muslims and Catholics. Another reason for my comparison/contrast.

Ok, you may have me on that one. But the Romulans generally have no honor, so that fits perfectly with the historic catholic aggressions. Remember, they Hired people to go out during the crusades rather than going themselves.
And they forced the governments under their control to start putting heretics to death after they felt they'd done enough of it themselves. It fits. People don't realize that some things are still occuring that doesn't get front page headlines here. I've posted a number of articles in the last year here about Catholics chasing people out of southamerican towns at gunpoint because they were Christian or "protestant" as they say - locking them up in Jail and the like for requesting permits to build a church... One face for the public, another for the faithful. That's Romulan.

Well, honor is paramount and I rather gave you that point in one of my responses; but, you seem to forget Lersa and Bator. LOL. No honor. So we'll say Klingons with No honor would be a more proper comparison as a rule.

As far as Catholics attacking in like fashion after being attacked for a period.. How much of the history do you know and where are you reading from. Rome had encroached on Muslim Territory when it all started falling apart. But the history of What happened in the Holy land is a real eye opener for most. When they marched on Jerusalem, they spent a great deal of time sacking Greek churches on the way and removing their original manuscripts and "relics".
They weren't getting paid, so they sacked christian communities on the approach to Jerusalem and took their time doing so before attacking their prime target. The Muslims were quite puzzled while all this was going on because they couldn't understand why the "Franj" were brutalizing and victimizing their own people. When the Crusaders took Jerusalem, they wiped out every mother loving soul in the city that got in their path. Stop and think about that for a moment, then consider they didn't spare Christians, Jews or anyone that was non muslim. They killed the armies and slogged right through the local populace. That is the Muslim history. I could quote you from it almost verbatim; but, boiled down, they slaughtered indescriminently. The jews that had baracaded themselves in their temple were burned alive within. And the few straggling survivors were put to work disposing of the dead until the streets were cleaned, Then they were put to sword. In one day after one of their assaults, they summarily executed I believe the number was in excess of 3000 Christians - specifically, they beheaded every one of them. Not the muslims, the crusaders. To my knowledge, they didn't blame it on the Muslims either. They just never talk about it in the history books.

You won't read these things in the western History books. It was after this that the radicals in the Islamic camp
began whispering about their leader. Later, they
challenged and deposed him and took charge. We're talking about 1096 - 1100 time frame if memory serves. This is about the Time that The Catholic Church had started killing heretics again and was slouching toward the inquisitions.

I know mostly the Catholic side of these things - the documents, councils, time frames.. the frauds invoked in the doing and so on. When you fit in the Muslim history on top of it, it just fits like a glove. The bottom line for the Muslims was that if Rome had left their trade caravans alone and hadn't attacked Jerusalem, they'd have been happy to leave well enough alone. They were happy and fat and had it pretty good. While the "gates of hell couldn't prevail" propaganda was being shouted, Rome crumbled eventually under Muslim attack and the finding out of it's
founding sins - the frauds of Gratian and Isadore. Rome is responsible in no small way for what we are dealing with now. And there is no difference in the evil wrought from both camps.

I'll defend their rights to believe what they do on both sides. But I won't pull punches or carry water for either of them. Islam may be evil in what it teaches in general.
But have you bothered to look at what Catholicism has been raising up for years. Read Revelation, then go read the approved list of official catholic quotations from "Mary" apparitions and tell me the end isn't here. If you can make it through all of it without feeling sick to your stomach, there's something incredibly wrong.

Anyway. I'm off to bed. Got a short shift today. Volunteered to work so my collegues could be with family.
I'll check back in when I get to work.
Happy thanksgiving.

I don't think today's Catholics are like that. I think they've figured out that heresy (according to Catholic doctrine) isn't a capital offense.

Just caught this. No, they haven't figured that out. Vatican II has been quoted to me as having done away with all that; but, if you can read, you find very quickly that is bunk. They've left loophole after loophole and all the laws (frauds from Gratian and otherwise), Papal bulls, Council decisions (Lateran) and official decrees are still binding. And yes you heard me correctly. Not only that; but a large number of Catholics today including the apologists here at FR will tell you that Capitol punishment for heresy is just fine and will defend the notion. I've had that argument numerous times in the last two years. And given the Catholic attacks in south america against protestants and christians in the last several years that have been documented in newspaper articles and the wide murmerings of missionaries in Africa of the same things going on, it is in no way clear that they ever learned anything. They just don't have the authority in most places to practice what they believe. In places like south america where they pretty much have ideological control, they almost have free reign if not outright authority to operate in that fashion. And look what happens.... The lessons haven't been learned. And in my opinion, given the track record and prophecy, when they get power once again, it will be 100 times worse.

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.