"The Pope Should Face Execution"

A notorious Muslim extremist told a demonstration in London yesterday that the Pope should face execution. Anjem Choudary said those who insulted Islam would be 'subject to capital punishment' here.

Demonstrators held placards saying: 'Pope, Go to Hell, Trinity of Evil: Western Crusade against Islam.'

Choudary said, "Whoever insults the message of Mohammed is going to be subject to capital punishment. I am here to have a peaceful demonstration. But there may be people in Italy or other parts of the world who will carry that out. I think that warning needs to be understood by all people who want to insult Islam and the Prophet."  Article here

Constitutional rights for terrorists? These well meaning schmucks are going to be the end of us all (I don't think radical extremists give a rat's ass about Geneva when they capture Americans, I mean really. Did the Viet Cong adhere to Geneva when McCain was captured. I don't consider Red Hot Chili Peppers to be torture anyway ow water boarding or sleep deprivation.)  When Bernard Lewis said;

And looking around I can't help thinking that if Churchill had to face the obstruction and opposition that Bush now faces, that we probably wouldn't have won the war. Bernard Lewis, 9/11/06 Hudson Institute 

We lost already lost our freedom to speak out. Speak and risk death, in that way Islam has won.

RELATED:  Boy killed as Islamists raid cinema

 

Comments

[Richard Davis]

Where is the condemnation from the Left?

Why aren't the Democrats (Clintons, Pelosi, Reid, Murtha, Kennedy, Jackson, and on and on) defending the Pope?

The silence from the Liberal Politicians is deafening.

Thank you TROOPS - you're the only ones who kill these animals for us. I only wish you could fight without PC and use your superior firepower to show them that WE WILL NOT SUBMIT!

Troops - the Left will undermine you, but remember that the silent majority of us SUPPORT YOU AND ARE WITH YOU! KILL THE JIHADISTS!

[DoctorDentons]

From the Left ???? Hell where is the outrage from all people of peace either on the left or right????
We don't have enough politicians on both sides of the aisle combined with enough balls to call these murdering scum bags to account...Turns my stomach !

[Cheap Cynicism]

McCain wasn't calling for "constitutional" rights, he was calling for the U.S. abiding to the Genevan Convention. Why do we need to abandon our principles of human rights? Because our *enemies* don't practice them?

Pam, you might as well say that killing innocent civilians is justified if it helps kill our enemies, because that's what Osama bin Laden thinks. But, of course, you DID say that during the Israel-Lebanon conflict.

[Harry]

Sending them back home would be too good for them - they would then be free to spill their bile and probably murder a nun. I was reading somewhere about some brit, drunk, probably not that bright, rambling something in front of a mosque saying "Go home!". He was tried and put in jail for one month. And islamonazis get away with far worse. Un.freaking.believable.

[Richard Davis]

We've HEARD outrage from "people of peace", on both sides.

Their outrage is not helping us defeat worldwide Jihadism.

Sorry to say it Man, but we are at the point were we need to hear outrage from the people who want to FIGHT BACK at these people and not worry about their fucking sensitivities - the Jihadists (and their numbers are limitless) don't intend to kill us, THEY ARE KILLING US!

They need to reform their fucking religion of peace.

They will keep killing us until we decide to do what needs to be done.

Unfortunately for all of us, the Muslims are not policing themselves, the Jihadists are untouchable. We must actively stop them, interogate them, discover everything about them before they get the nuclear or biological bomb and use it on us.

Who wants to wait for that?

[Ripper]

Tonight on Real Time with Bill Maher on HBO, we will be "treated" to Maher doing a figurative Lewinsky on neo-Falangist Pat Buchanan as they both denounce neo cons (however Maher to his credit is pro Israel). I would like to see how Buchanan parses defending the Pope with criticzing Islamophobia.

[Thomas Carney]

I urge all of you to study the history of Islam through the centuries... the ONLY time Islam has been "peaceful" was when it got its collective arse kicked and kicked thoroughly.

Do a search on Amazon.com for "Islam's Bloody Borders" and see how many books you will find.

[Cheap Cynicism]

You have got to be kidding me, Carney. Christians spread their religion throughout Europe with brutal force, then sent armies into the Middle East for hundred of years, then spend another two centuries colonizing the world and massacring millions of natives in the name of Christ. Through it all they had civil war after civil war over the proper way to be Christians.

You people need to understand that violence is not some unique feature of Islam. Every religion has been used to justify violence, and every religion has been the catalyst for beauty and human progress. Once you can divorce the violence plaguing the Islamic world from the religion of Islam, you can actually start to explore and understand the reasons behind our world's problems.

Otherwise you're just going to end up like Pam here, bemoaning Islamic violence against innocents while cheering on Western violence against innocents.

[scooternyc]

Cheap, I find it hilarious that you are trying to equate what is happening NOW with something that happened HUNDREDS of years ago with the crusades.

We need to wipe these people out much like we did in WWII. Surrender without compromise. That's how war works, sometimes innocent people do get killed, that's the way it goes. What planet are you living on? Do you even have an understanding of war and the history of the U.S.? It's just shocking.

There are plenty of quotes from varied sources who have said from the beginning that Islamicfascists only understand "might", if you think you're going to fight these people with your words, well, you better register as a democrap for the upcoming elections and then kiss your ass goodbye.

On another note:
I find it funny how these "protesters" have all their signs printed with a similar font and all in English! LOL! The propaganda machine is running just fine in that part of the world - good for them.

For a group that "claims" they are not the "violent types" that the Pope has characterized them as, they sure are behaving that way.

"WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS SO LOUD I CAN'T HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING".

[scooternyc]

Hey Pam, any chance we can get a "countdown" clock for the day that Kofi Bin Laden Anan leaves the U.N. on the site?

LOL!

[Thomas Carney]

Cheap Cynicism: give ME a break. The Crusades were a defensive response to the Saracens taking Christian lands in the Middle East.

Secondly, show me with historical documentation that Christianity was spread BY FORCE throughout Europe.

Thirdly, ONLY Islam's founder espouses taking lands by the sword. You won't find it in the four canonical Gospels in the Bible, you won't find it in the sayings of Buddha or Confucius, but you will find it in the words of Mohammed himself.

Have Christians taken lands by force? Yes, in the Crusades, recovering lands conquered by Muslims and the Spanish Reconquista taking Spain BACK from the Moors. Have people been forced to convert to Christianity?? Unfortunately, yes. However, the Catholic and Orthodox Churches have BOTH repudiated forced conversions. Islam has not, nor has it ever done so.

Have the Jews taken land by force? Yes, on the orders of G-d Himself, when the Israelites came upon the land given to them by G-d. Do Jews go conquering lands today and make people convert to Judaism by force? No. Do Christians take land by force and force people to convert to Christianity? No. Do Muslims take lands and force people to convert to Islam?? Yes, they do.

OK, so if you want to take the crazy lefty liberal route, which is the Islamo-fascist route, go ahead. I would also appreciated if you had the balls to put your real name on there like I do. I am not afraid of what I say here. You certainly are.

[Peter VE]

Scooter,

Which people should we wipe out? The Saudis? After all, 15 of the 9/11 hijackers and Osama Bin Laden are Saudi. The Pakistanis? Khalid Sheik Mohammed is Pakistani. The Egyptians? Ayman al-Zawahir is Egyptian.

Or maybe we should just wipe out all Muslims? The last guy who tried to eradicate all followers of one religion ended up in a bunker swallowing cyanide.

Radical muslims have no monopoly on terrorism NOW. Or have you forgotten April 19,1995?

[scooternyc]

"Which people should we wipe out?"

RADICAL TERRORISTS.

Does the simplicity of that help?

[Cheap Cynicism]

Carney, first off, the Crusades were a series of repeated attempts by various popes to assert authority over Europe and to use tribal warriors to expand Christian power to the Middle East.

Secondly, how do you think Christianity spread in Europe? The Christianization of Europe was a series of forced conversions of tribes and then using those tribes to war against other tribes for conversion. This is just how religions spread in those times. Christianity and Islam were both pressed into the service of very aggressive, very militant civilizations and used to justify their expansions. That's just how it went back then.

Third, for someone who urges other to read the history of Islam, you sure don't know anything about it. The verses in the Quran which espouse "taking lands" need to be taken in the context of Muhammad coming under repeated assaults by the Arab tribes of his day, who would not listen to his entreaties for peace. If you seriously want to actually learn more about Muhammad, instead of find new justifications for your prejudices, read Karen Armstrong's biography of him.

Fourth, "Islam" isn't some monolithic entity. The vast majority of Islamic leaders do NOT support conversion by force. That is only the position of a few extremists, who make the papers and get you guys all riled up.

Fifth, and this is for scooter, did you ever attend a history class? Western domination of the world in the name of Jesus has occurred up until the 1950s, when the British finally left India. We can go tour Africa and the Middle East and see the many graves of British, French, Dutch, Spanish, and Portuguese soldiers who have died "Christianizing" the natives throughout the 17th, 18th, 19, and 20th centuries.

On the other hand, when was the last time Muslim nations invaded other lands? Islamic nations have been subservient to the West ever since the 17th century. Are you actually trying to equate the douchebags running around the mountains of Afghanistan with Saladin's armies?

[Balou8900]

Okay, here's a far easier way to sort out the good apple religious fanatics from the bad apple religious fanatics without needing to take cyanide. Granted, this will simply thin the flock a bit, but in a big way.

We simply put our military to use in a target rich environment. Next media event with thousands of screaming idiots calling for the Pope's head, we just drop a little shock and awe on their backsides and dedicate the crater to Mohammad so the next round of screaming fanatics can make a pilgrimage and we can make twin craters. (and repeat if necessary) Far faster way to get through these idiots than the present route.

I shake my head as I watch these people on the news talk shows defending the "kill the Pope" proclamations and protests. And how they try to say that these are the radical few who do this, but still refuse to absolutely condemn it. They come out of the woodwork to defend their taking offense to what the Pope said, but have never come even close to coming out and making a stand to tell the hijackers of their faith to knock it off. Bush really was right when he said it, you know, you're either with us or you're against us. There can't be an inbetween.

[DoctorDentons]

Cheap Cynisism: You really like to throw that "you people" around don't you. What kind of "people" are you ?

[Cheap Cynicism]

I'm the kind of "people" who don't think the entire religion of Islam is our enemy.

[Thomas Carney]

Cheap Cynicism: As for the forced conversions in Europe, I see you have presented no historical references. What is documented is that in the first three centuries of Christianity, it was spread by preaching and voluntary baptism and chrismation, because the Church was underground until the Edict of Milan in 313 AD by St. Constantine the Great. So there you have no force.

Preaching spread all the way to Britain and the Celtic lands and still no forced conversions.

Going on to the time of Inquisition in the 1400s, yes, there were forced conversions once the Spanish lands were taken back from the Moors, and the Church has always proclaimed that forced conversions are invalid and illicit, even BEFORE the Spanish clergy forced the conversions.

I ask you AGAIN, other than the forced conversions of Spain during and after the Inquisition, to provide historical references to forced conversions in the Church, Catholic or Orthodox.

You asked when is the last time that Muslims invaded Christian lands?? Cyprus, 1974. Churches were burned and pilaged all in the Name of Islam. How about northern Nigeria, where forced conversions have been going on since the 1960s and Sharia was declared without consent of the governmetn in 1990? How about the persecution and forced conversions of Christians to Islam in Pakistan since the 1960s?? Let's go further: Filipina women who go to work in Muslim countries can be raped by their bosses and they can't report it unless there are FOUR MALE WITNESSES. If the women report it without the requisite witnesses, the woman will be jailed for adultery or fornication.

So it's all the Christians' fault?? Get real.

[Cheap Cynicism]

Jesus, Carney.

Starting from the conversion of the Roman Empire to Christianity, the faith spread throughout Europe through force, whether through the converted tribal warriors, through Charlemagne and the Holy Roman Empire, and through the conquest of upper Europe and eastern Europe. Heresy was illegal and heretics executed. This continued straight through the Inquisition, the Crusades, all the way up to to the Renaissance. Even then, it continued in fits and spurts, especially against the Jews. After that, it was colonialism and its Christian backers who raped, murdered, and forcibly converted entire continents, all in the name of Christ.

What you were citing with "Islam taking over lands" are just examples of Muslims committing violence against non-believers, which is not the systemic attack and destruction of nations that Christian Europe unleashed upon the world.

Again, my point is NOT that Christianity is evil, it's that BOTH religions can be misused to justify horrific acts. You can't equate a religion with what its most extremist believers.

[Richard Davis]

In today's world there's NO EQUIVALENCY between Christianity anger and Islamic anger - none.

[Cheap Cynicism]

MAN, you guys are thick. One more time, there is NO SUCH THING as "Christian anger" or "Islamic anger." It is individuals who get angry, and it is individuals who should be blamed for their reactions.

You guys just look at what a small group of extremists do, and then equate their actions with an entire, complex, nuanced religion. Not only is that frankly stupid, it's never going to solve the problem of terrorism or Islamic extremism.

[Thomas Carney]

Cheap Cynicism, good night, troll. I can see it's impossible to have a reasonable discussion with you.

The Church itself has always abrogated forced conversions. Islam, however, does not. Even though there is one verse in the Koran against forced conversions, that verse was abrogated by a later verse in Medina.