Wednesday, November 07, 2012
After Benghazi, Muslims attack free speech
It’s unclear if the Obama administration’s purpose in condemning the now-infamous “anti-Islam YouTube video” was to deflect from Obama’s failed Middle East policies, and those of Benghazi in particular, or if it was his intent to “protect Islam from negative stereotypes” as he promised to do in his Cairo speech. Either way, his constant denunciation of the 14-minute, amateurish, anti-Islam YouTube clip signals weakness to the Muslim world and may have given license to Muslims in the West to demand restrictions on freedom of speech.
Meanwhile, on Sunday, Oct. 14, 2012, thousands of angry Muslims marched outside Google headquarters in London. They were protesting the same YouTube trailer scapegoated by the administration. Titled “Innocence of Muslims,” the film portrays the Prophet Mohammad as a pedophile, philanderer and religious fraud. It was originally posted in English, but later was translated into Arabic and went viral on the Internet.
As protestors in London ratcheted up their “Campaign for Global Civility,” police flanked the doors of Google headquarters and placed barricades around the building. Several streets in England’s capital were closed down for hours due to the demonstration.
The stated purpose of the campaign is to ban the video worldwide. Protestors carried signs that read, “[W]e love our Prophet more than our lives” and “[Google executives] support terrorism.”
It’s hard to believe with signs like these, that civility is the goal. According to Sufi cleric Alam Ghulam Rabbini, though, civility means the restriction of free speech if it “hurt[s] the feelings of 1.5 billion Muslims.” According to Sheik Faiz Al-Aqtab Siddiqui, terrorists are not necessarily those who kill people, but those “who kill human feelings as well.” Thus, blasphemy equals terrorism.
At the demonstration, over a dozen Imams made speeches in Arabic, English and Urdu. The speeches were met with shouts of “Allahu Akbar” (Allah is great!”), the same cry echoed by Islamic terrorists around the globe before launching their attacks. The audience was urged to honor the Prophet by refusing to back down until their demands were met. There was no room for alternative viewpoints.
In effect, the crowd demanded that western non-Muslims comply with Islamic blasphemy codes.
Source
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Just more Muslims being good Muslims.
Nothing to see here, move along.
Obama refuses to condem his biggist allies
One typically does not condemn what one supports.
The reason Obama refuses to use the term terrorism, and in fact, why he ordered the word banned in his administration, is simply because he refuses to offend his Muslim brothers. They are the same brothers he has given Egypt, Lybia, and soon Syria, to. They are also the same brothers he has openly welcomed into the US.
He's lucky America has become a nation of weak, gullible, and mindlessly distracted sheep, else DC would have been burned to the ground by now.
@Anonymous 1:42 a.m.
A noble thought but a wasted suggestion. One is an anatomical impossibility; the other they already do.
I can remember back a few years ago they made this movie MUHANNED MESSENGER of GOD created a few incedences
We need to contract with every paint manufacturer, every road paving company, every rug and carpet maker, and every clothing manufacturer to simply add pig's blood as a manufacturing ingredient. Pig's blood: The ultimate Muslim repellant.
Post a Comment