QUAERITUR: If no one is supposed to hurt Muslim feelings, why does the Obama campaign brag about killing OBL?

I was just out running errands and while surfing around on the radio, I heard some of Rush’s show, which I don’t usually hear during the day.

A first time caller to any show, who sounded like an older woman, made an interesting point in regard to the Obama Administration’s apology in the context of the murder of the Ambassador to Libya.

If the Obama Administration is so concerned about not offending the sensibilities of Muslims in the Middle East, then why do the White House and Obama campaign perpetually crow about having killed Osama bin Laden?

Interesting question.

When the extremist murderers, and I suspect it was not a group of radical Copts, attacked US sovereign territory yesterday, one of their chants was that they were all of them OBLs now, that there were a million OBLs now.  They hoisted a black flag that looked a lot like Al Qaeda’s black flag.  Again, I don’t think this was a bunch of radicalized Christians doing this.  The attacks occurred on 11 September.  Coincidence?  Was this night of terror sparked by a film someone made in the USA or was this an prepared anniversary observance.

But the question remains, if we are never to do anything to hurt the sensibilities of anyone in that that region, then why are Pres. Obama and VP Biden constantly spiking the football?  “GM is alive and Osama is dead!”  Isn’t that constantly heard and seen on the campaign trail?

Don’t imagine for a second that the organizers of these mobs don’t get campaign coverage through CNN International and Al Jazera.  Don’t imagine for a moment that the “Obama killed OBL” end-zone dance at the Democrats’ convention wasn’t observed around the world



About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in I'm just askin'..., The Drill and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Dismas says:

    I’m not sure but I suspect something to do with play of Rule 10, and maybe 11 and 12 too?

    RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog.

    RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem.
    RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.

  2. Winfield says:

    The political capital earned domestically from killing OBL outweighs the damage done in Muslim lands by that same killing. Given OBL’s personal involvement in 9/11 and his years of taunts after it, failing to take him out would harm the President domestically. Killing BO, for the liberal establishment here, proves BO’s bona fides as a strong leader, contra his critics on the right. Moreover, BO and the Dem establishment view OBL as an outlier–an atypical Muslim who is an opposed by what they see as the vast majority of moderate Muslims. Of course, the ongoing attacks against our embassies prove once again that appeasement invites aggression, and BO will have a harder time, even with his media allies, of explaining this one away. Shades of 1979.

  3. Supertradmum says:

    Dismas, if you were in my history of ideas class, you would get an A. Yes.

    And the black flag is not merely the flag of Al Qaeda but the black flag of the Prophet. I looked this up on an Islamic flag site. The Muslims, and I say this like a mantra, have long memories.

    “The major flag of the Prophet was known as “Al- Uqaab”, it was pure black with and without symbol or marking. Its name and color was derived from Quraish’s national flag.” Just google Islamic flags. Additional markings were accrued over the centuries by other caliphates. There is a YouTube showing the black flags of the caliphates in a demonstration in India in February of this year. it was a terrifying exhibition of the real faith of Islam. If people want to know things, it is not hard to find out.

    All this was planned to coincide with this holy and great day for Catholics, the Holy Name of Mary whose gracious intercession won the Siege of Vienna in 1683. To know history is to know our Catholic roots and identity.

    There are no accidents in Islam and there are none in Catholicism either.

    These demonstrations had nothing to do with the movie and the apologies of both potus and Clinton, as I said on my blog this European morning, are despicable, grovelling and deceitful.

  4. Winfield says:

    In my third sentence, above, I of course meant, “Killing OBL.”

  5. abasham says:


    Father, please make this correction! With tempers running high it is important that people make judgement based on facts.

    The picture you posted is NOT of attackers carrying him, or “parading him” as someone suggested. Those are average Libyans, who were engaged against. the extremists. Following the attacks it was average Libyans who took him to the hospital. That is what you see in the picture. PLEASE correct this information so that some of your readers do not make rash judgements or entertain false ideas of what occured.

  6. While I generally disagree with attributing current situations to past presidents, fact is that it was the policies and search efforts originated under George Bush that eventually found and dispatched Osama bin Laden, while a reluctant Obama had to be arm-twisted for months to finally let it continue to its successful conclusion. Might one conclude from what we know that, if Obama had been president for long enough, OBL would still be alive today?

  7. robtbrown says:

    By the time the US whacked Osama, he was more valuable alive than dead. He was isolated, out of money, but still in touch via couriers. We could track them going to and from his compound, and they could lead us to the operatives.

    There was, however, a lot of intelligence at the compound. And so the military and intelligence services didn’t want the world to know of his death until they were able to act on it.

  8. Supertradmum says:


    You can buy the caliphate flag if you want one….hey, no accidents.

  9. Sissy says:

    “The picture you posted is NOT of attackers carrying him”

    abasham: how do you know this?

  10. mamajen says:

    This excellent question would go great with the Philosoraptor meme!

  11. Supertradmum says:

    I should have added, but I get interrupted with real life, that the black flag with the markings is the Islamic supremacist flag and it has been seen here in England in demonstrations as well. It just means that those who wave it are working for the Global Islamic State, demanded by Allah. If you want more information on all of this, go to JihadWatch. Spencer is up to date and his team knows most things about Islam. I went to the flag sites because of a comment he or one of his team made in an article. Read, read, read.

  12. wmeyer says:

    Henry I agree completely. And it is worth noting that although I have numerous problems with some actions by our past president, he was diligent in his actions in defense of the country.

  13. Matt R says:

    Father, I would like to point out that Al-Jazeera is the best journalistm outfit there is.
    On offending Muslim sensibilities-sure, there were people who were upset by OBL’s death…Pakistanis were upset by the US action being in Pakistan, al-Qaeda sympathizers were upset…but most Middle Easterners were quite happy and relieved to see him go.

  14. Jonathan says:

    I heard the Rush broadcast too, but I don’t think “spiking the ball” had anything to do with it because the Muslim Brotherhood and others are focusing on the video that’s getting so much attention in order to rally violent support. In their recent “press release“They are calling for the criminalization of insults to Islam, promise continuing hatred for the West until the makers of the video are brought to trial, and say if it’s OK for the West to ban holocaust denial, they we don’t have an excuse to ban insults to Islam also. So while surely the “Obama Obama we are all Osama” chant is meant to taunt the President, it’s an old chant that’s been around for awhile, not something they just thought up since the convention.

    Predictably, the MB is also calling for massive protests after Friday prayers against the “film abuser of the Prophet” so this hasn’t peaked yet either, I don’t think.

  15. Jay E says:

    I do think it’s pretty sick that one of the only things this administration can say they’ve done is kill someone. Even if it was Osama bin Laden. But then Obama doesn’t exactly have much respect for the dignity of human life, so…

  16. Supertradmum says:


    OM goodness, are we all so stupid? Now the administration is saying it was an orchestrated attack. Of course is was orchestrated. No accidents. All planned. Does this admin think we are all so dumb?

  17. Jim says:

    Wow… thank you for that reminder Supertradmum!

    I forgot :-(. Today is indeed the anniversary of the Catholic victory at the Battle of Vienna, one of the greatest in the history of Christendom!

    Jan Sobieski ,Croissants, Bagels, Cappuccino and the awesome sermon I heard last year from Audio Sancto… when I heard about all of this for the first time.


  18. wmeyer says:

    “OM goodness, are we all so stupid?”

    Of course we are. The proof is in the last election! Honestly, after the episode a couple of weeks ago, where “he didn’t say that” but of course, he did, as the recordings showed, how can any claim from the administration be a surprise? The only surprise is the mass of sheeple still believing it.

  19. Supertradmum says:

    Yesterday, I talked to two priests who are a lot younger than I am and a seminarian who did not know about the Siege of Vienna and the universal significance of this feast day. This is the fault of liberal seminary training that our own history is suppressed.

  20. gracie says:

    Where were the Marines?

  21. Cantor says:

    A while back I spoke to several Muslims at our office about the bin Laden raid and if there was general uproar within their community. Their response was noteworthy as one said,

    “Osama bin Laden and his bombers represent Islam just about as much as the Omagh, Ireland, bombers represent Catholicism.”

  22. Jim says:

    In light of the Siege and the final Battle of Vienna in 1683, today’s events in the Libya and Cairo makes so much more sense! It actually gives everything wholly different perspective.

    The one who’s skull was crushed exactly 326 years ago hasn’t for sure forgotten his defeat. It is interesting how Kara Mustafa Pasha, the Ottoman Grand Vizier who commanded the Ottoman army 326 years ago died. After his defeat, on 25 December 1683, he was executed in Belgrade by his own country for his defeat and his head was presented to Sultan Mehmed IV in a velvet bag.

    “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.” Gen 1:15

    Just wow!

  23. Matt R says:

    @Cantor thank you! I’ve been trying to articulate that on this blog for a while.

  24. Supertradmum says:

    Matt R., have you studied the Koran and the hadith? Have you read Spencer? You are listening to falsehoods and believing these lies. Mohammed himself murdered and plundered in order to establish his own religion. This is the stuff of history. Good night.

  25. JKnott says:

    Supertradmum says:
    12 September 2012 at 1:49 pm All this was planned to coincide with this holy and great day for Catholics, the Holy Name of Mary whose gracious intercession won the Siege of Vienna in 1683. To know history is to know our Catholic roots and identity.
    There are no accidents in Islam and there are none in Catholicism either.

    Thanks . Great points all around!
    BTW and off point but I looved your post on Gentlemen. One we don’t hear about anymore!

  26. Supertradmum says:

    Thanks. Bless you. It is late here.

  27. nykash says:

    The St. Benedict Center has a great talk on Islam – it’s only a few dollars and worth listening to (imho): http://store.catholicism.org/islam-101-mp3.html

    Most of the West seems to have forgotten its history.

  28. teomatteo says:

    For a President who was awarded, won, whatever.. a Nobel Peace Prize i found his announcemnet of the killing of OBL to have been a mistake. Poor prudential judgment. should have mentioned it years later in his memoirs or something.

  29. johnmann says:

    Depicting Jesus as an ignorant sexual pervert would offend me more than crowing over the killing of a notorious Crusader. The former is an affront to my god. The latter is fair play in war.

  30. wmeyer says:

    Depicting Jesus as an ignorant sexual pervert would offend me more than crowing over the killing of a notorious Crusader.

    Study the history of Mohammad. That Muslim people get angry does not mean the movie got it wrong.

  31. Matt R says:

    @Supertradmum, I read Spencer. He’s pretty noxious. Even though Islam is wrong, it doesn’t excuse his diatribes.
    Also, I stand by the assertion that in the minds of the Islamists, the date had everything to do with 9/11/2001. Osama bin Laden and co. have a short memory, and tend to blame the US and the European powers (including the former USSR) for the oppression (neo-imperialism, rooted in continuing the old imperialism of the 19th century) of Arabs and Muslims…in fact, OBL understood the symbolism behind the towers, as he viewed it as the destruction of the Philistines from Judges. Also, OBL would not have any knowledge base for Catholic holy days, besides the ones that are well-known like Christmas and Easter.

  32. Sissy says:

    Matt R, OBL wouldn’t care about a Catholic holy day, but he certainly would care about one of the most humiliating defeats in Islamic history. The tide of Islamic invasion was halted on that day; the world-wide caliphate was stymied. You credit him with connecting the attack on the towers with the destruction of the Philistines, yet believe he didn’t know one of the most important dates in Islamic conquest history?

  33. Matt R says:

    @Sissy, I think it’s unlikely that is why 9/11 was chosen. I doubt very few Americans would know the date-or the battle-and very few of his allies would either. His low-level followers are certainly not terribly well-educated, and he was sheltered through Saudi Arabian education (at his own choice…his operations planners were probably better-educated, in Europe and the US, but still, not enough of them would know the significance for it to matter.) And again, he really didn’t care much for events prior to the late 19th and 20th centuries.
    Yes I do, because I am very sure he actually did compare American capitalism and neo-imperialism to the Philistines, and that the fall of the towers was like the fall of the Philistines. Plus, the Bible is so well-known by Americans of all backgrounds that it’s an easy frame of reference.

  34. Sissy says:

    Matt R, it wouldn’t matter what uneducated, low-level followers knew or thought, would it? OBL was a highly educated man. However, we don’t have to speculate. A representative seeking Turkey’s entrance to the EU said in a public statement that it was necessary to redress the terrible humiliation of the Battle of Vienna, citing to the actual date. The Islamists know. This isn’t as far-fetched as you would like to believe.

  35. SKAY says:

    It seems that we have Carter II as President. I imagine that the Mullahs in Iran can’t believe their good fortune and hope for four more years of it.

    It is instructive that the ships shown on video at the DNC convention during the tribute to our military and vets were actually Russian ships. Perhaps the Dems only have a “few” people who know the difference–and they were busy. That reminds me of Hillary with the “reset” button–
    wrong Russian word on it. Brilliant. These are the “smart people”.

    Of course the attack was planned and they used this movie to incite the violence. It seems there are many reasons that 9/11 is significant to them. Blowing up the twin towers and killing Americans is just one of them. We need people in our government who actually know history-we see what happens when we don’t.

  36. Matt R says:

    @Sissy, I can say is that Turkey is a wildly different animal than Arab countries, especially Saudi Arabia. The Turks have always been in search of empire, just like the European powers that coincided with the Ottoman Empire, and Turkey, until recently, has been totally opposed to radical Islam. The country is officially secular, and the wearing of headscarves is limited, so Islam doesn’t play a life in the governing of Turkey, historically. (An Islamic party won elections a few years ago I believe, but primarily in protest to the military’s constant defense of secularism, which invariably resulted in coups and dictatorships.) Now, I’m sure this official did say that, and it could very well be possible that I’m wrong. Actually, I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle of what we’re saying; the date was known for its significance as the eve to the anniversary of the Battle of Vienna, but wasn’t the overwhelming most important factor in planning the attack on 9/11 and subsequent anniversary follow-ups. It doesn’t make for good propaganda if you have to explain the motivation for choosing a date to a majority of both your enemies and your allies. I can certainly see an effective silent message being sent, but honestly, it doesn’t work as well if it’s the eve of the anniversary of the battle. Not saying it doesn’t, just not as well.

  37. Tom says:


    The answer to where the Marines were is this: From what I understand at this time, the assassinations took place at a consulate, not at an embassy. Marines guard embassies but not consulates. Probably the planners of these assassinations knew that.

  38. Matt R says:

    @Tom, the US Marine Security Group definitely does protect other facilities…but, that doesn’t mean there was a detachment in Benghazi (It hinges, in my understanding on whether we are or are not using the Embassy in Tripoli). Now, they are primarily there to protect documents and equipment, and only in extreme emergencies do they defend the exterior and the COM or other senior official. I want to know more about what happened in Cairo, since that was a location that definitely would have had Marines.

  39. Sissy says:

    There are conflicting reports as to whether any Marines were in Benghazi or not. One of the murdered staffers told an online board that the consulate was guarded by locals. It is reported the security arrangement at the consulate consisted of a lock on the front door.

  40. Maria says:

    Dear Matt R,

    I have been reading your responses and the trend is that you are the only one supporting Islam or most probably defending Islam. Are you a Muslim? My aplogies if I am wrong.

    It is nice that the group here is articulating history. The history I know is recent and personal. My uncle is a farmer. Not a farmer like here is US. It is what I call heavy tiring work. Purely physical. After a day’s farm work, he went home and was killed by Muslims for no apparent reason. The family was quiet because aside from no money for lawyer, there was a strong advice not to do this because the Muslims will finish off the entire family. I grew up of anger because there was no justice.

    To my surprised, I taught in a catholic school as a volunteer and Muslims were admitted. I learned that there were good Muslims.

    I was in Uganda in 2003. There was a rumor that the bishop will be sleeping with the entire village because of the rumor of “cleansing”.

    You responded, history says catholics did it in the past. Muslims did it too? Now, the real question is, this is 2012. We have history to learn from? Pope Benedict is preaching prayer and peace. Why can’t Imams do the same? Japanese and Spaniards did a lot of bad stuff to my country but no Filipinos do what Muslims do.

    As a Catholic, I believed that we are in the image and likeness of God. Thus, the outmost respect for human dignity and personhood from conception to death regardless of who you are and what you believe. What does Islam teach on a person’s dignity since you seemed to know the real Islam?

    The point is what is the root of this hatred? Who is teaching/preaching this?

    Actually, based on my experiences, dialogue with Muslims is I think an exercise of futility. I pray and hope that I am wrong because I want peace.

    Mother Mary, queen of heaven and earth, queen of peace … may we say yes to peace just as you said yes to have our Blessed Lord.

    God’s blessings of peace & joy!


  41. Jim says:

    In your opinion, do you think the devil, who was ultimately the one behind September 11-12, 1683, Sept 11, 2001 and Sept 11 2012 (not because he cares about killing people, but because he does care about making people murderers), has forgotten that his head was crushed on September 11-12, 1683 Anno Domini ? Or do you not believe that the devil exists ?

    Do you suppose the Muslims who are building the WTC Mosque did not know their history when they initially named that mosque “Cordoba House” ? Do you know what “Cordoba” is ? Google it.

    Do you know why terrorists refer to Western powers as crusaders ? Do you think they do not know their history ? No my friend.

    “Those who don’t know history are destined to repeat it.”
    Edmund Burke

  42. Sissy says:

    gracie: it appears all 4 of the murdered Americans were embassy staff:

    “Marine Corps spokeswoman Capt. Kendra Motz said that Marines were not posted to the consulate, unlike the embassy in the capital, Tripoli.”

  43. Matt R says:

    Maria…we went through this the other day on another post. I am not a Muslim, I just ask that a broader view of events be heard charitably (But I accept your apology; you didn’t mean anything by your question. Now that is behind us…).
    I feel I am the only one, because of hostility in the past towards other commenters.
    Well, I’m not defending Islam entirely. I defend whatever bits they hold which are in pursuit of Truth. That might be very little. But, if we can peacefully grab onto what they do believe that is correct, then we can fully preach the Gospel and bring them into the Church. I can’t answer why imams don’t preach peace, but I can tell you that in Egypt imams have preached in Coptic churches, and priests in mosques, about peace on several occasions. It’s there. I don’t know why it’s easy to get sucked into violence and evil in Islam. That answer lies in the preternatural influences on Islam. I’m not sure if Muhammad saw a demon, or if demons tempted him and his followers in particular. But, it’s there, certainly with enough sway to keep their followers from pursuing Truth (Ok, that’s hard considering just how much Christian doctrine is rejected. But, the pursuit of peace and love is a start.)
    I’m curious-what do you mean by Filipino? I would say Muslims in the Philippines are Filipino as well, and so are Chinese, and they’ve both done evil things (the rebels on Mindanao, and Ferdinand Marcos fall in these two groups). Evil is evil, and can be committed by all.
    I don’t know what Islam regarding the person and human dignity. (On knowing the real Islam- I don’t claim to know it all about Islam, I’m just articulating what I have learned and come to understand over the years. Others have done the same. I respect that, though I feel each side is bound to believe the other got sucked into the lies.)
    My reference to Charlemagne’s massacre of those who refused to convert was in an attempt to point out that forced conversions under duress are not a part of the Catholic faith, but certain Catholics have still done them. I tried to make the same point about Muslim groups like the Taliban, and how they don’t represent all of Islam.
    On dialogue: Yes well, it may be futile, but I’d much rather be peaceful spiritual fighters than physical soldiers. War takes one over the edge, I think and evil can occur even in just wars. Also, we cannot launch a crusade without the whole of Christendom. Finally, we must be grateful to the Islamic world, for their technology assisted Columbus, and Averroes’ translations of Aristotle into Arabic provided the basis for the Latin versions St Thomas Aquinas used in crafting the Summa Theologica.
    God’s blessings to you as well.

  44. Mamma B says:

    “All this was planned to coincide with this holy and great day for Catholics, the Holy Name of Mary whose gracious intercession won the Siege of Vienna in 1683. ”

    Which is why I always feel apprehensive about what the muslims might try to do on the anniversary of another defeat, the Battle of Lepanto which took place on 7 October 1571 (and which is commemorated by the Feast of the Holy Rosary.)

  45. Matt R says:

    Jim, yes I believe in the devil. Of course Satan knows these things. To deny so would be to deny him in essence (That’s why Friday fasting and prayer is so important, because he really hates that day). But, I don’t think that OBL and others consciously and willfully connect(ed) every last detail about Christianity and its defeats of Islam in the concoction of their plots. That’s where Satan comes in…
    Yes I know Cordoba was the city in Spain that was a major center of the Moorish caliphate. But, I understood the name of the Cordoba House as to be a reflection of the tolerance (relative as that may be) in Cordoba; the city flourished, and all 3 religions (Catholic, Muslim, and Jewish) got along, at least more so than one can say than in Spain after the Reconquista.
    By the way, I don’t appreciate that you phrased your questions and comments so that they are uncharitable in tone and phrasing, making me both a heretic and stupid. The Crusades are a well-known event…the Battle of Vienna, not so much. I would much rather live in Cordoba in AD 1050 than Mecca or Medina anytime, perhaps because one could actually be a Christian there. Also, the Cordoba House two blocks away from the WTC. It’s disingenuous, and well, wrong to call it the WTC Mosque.

    Also, Fatima, Portugal’s name wasn’t changed after it was reclaimed by Christians even though it’s named for Muhammad’s daughter. (Apparently the wearing of head coverings by females in Fatima-outside of church-was a holdover from Islamic rule, as well as being practical. I can’t help but wondering how different the message’s meaning today would be, in regards to its connection to Islam, if the connection to the town’s name wasn’t there.

  46. robtbrown says:

    Matt R says,
    Finally, we must be grateful to the Islamic world, for their technology assisted Columbus, and Averroes’ translations of Aristotle into Arabic provided the basis for the Latin versions St Thomas Aquinas used in crafting the Summa Theologica.

    The translations of Aristotle from Greek to Latin used by St Thomas were provided by William of Moerbeke.

    It is true, however, that St Thomas was exposed to the great Arabic philosophers, not only Averroes but also Avicenna and Al Farabi. This began to happen in his study at the Univ of Naples, before he entered the Dominicans. During his second regency at the Univ of Paris he became very occupied with major questions raised by Averroism .

  47. majuscule says:

    “Apparently the wearing of head coverings by females in Fatima-outside of church-was a holdover from Islamic rule, as well as being practical.”

    Just wondering if you have a citation for this?

    In many cultures women have traditionally worn head coverings outside of church.

  48. Matt R says:

    @robtbrown, thanks for the correction and further info! I should have known that…
    and certainly, if it weren’t for the availability of Averroes’ work, William of Moerbeke would never have been directed to translate from the Greek directly into Latin.
    @majuscule, I read it several years ago, in a book or online…I’m sorry! I’d cite it if I could remember. Oh goodness.
    Of course, it’s not just Muslim cultures with this practice, but I understood that it was particularly unique in that part of Portugal, because it was held onto for so long, and what had been the Muslim requirement became the Christian norm.

  49. majuscule says:

    Matt R,

    One of the reasons I was wondering about the Muslim head covering story is because my ancestors came from northern Portugal, where the influence of Islam was not strong. Today, in the small villages in Portugal you can see old ladies (I can call them that, I am a female senior myself) wearing scarves. They are often modestly dressed in black if they are widows. The villages of Portugal are conservative and Catholic. And today the Muslim population of Portugal is not growing as fast as many European countries.

    For a little humor, readers might like this link I found when I was searching for Muslim head coverings in Portugal. Though I don’t think the person who wrote it meant to be funny. It’s titled “Catholic and Muslim Similarities”:


  50. Supertradmum says:

    We are what we believe. The only true religion is the Catholic religion. Islam is a man-made religion, not one of the two revealed religions which are Judaism and Catholicism. As Catholics it is our duty to spread the Gospel as commanded by Christ. If we give in to deceit and falsehoods in our own thinking, we cannot save souls. That is what we must do. Saving souls means understanding that there is objective truths revealed to us by the Trinity.

    We can objectively criticize a heresy or a false religion and we must. We do not have to use subjective arguments.

    I know many nice and polite, entertaining and gracious atheists. However, I try to win them over to the true Faith for the sake of their souls. Dialogue is not necessarily the meeting of equals. Atheists are wrong about their world view. Moslems are wrong about their views of the Triune God and His plan for salvation. We cannot pretend their views are of God or that we can merely ignore their own plans for world dominance. There is a lot of confusion concerning the politics of Islam. Islam is basically a materialistic religion, (as is liberation theology) which sees the necessity for a kingdom of religion on earth by any means, including violence. To say otherwise is to contradict the writings and history of this false religion. That some Moslems disagree with each other is not the question here. We cannot make comparisons with Christianity, as God is our founder. That the founder of Islam used the Bible and Torah for some of his ideas is known by scholars and obvious to keen readers. That the Moslems deny the Divine establishment of both the Old and the New Testament is a serious problem of their revisionist history. That they deny Christ and want others to deny Christ should be our concern.

    People died in the past two days because of fanaticism which is written into the texts. That Catholics choose to admit this fact or deny it is a question of honesty. Once we lose the ability to critique objectively anything which is not the truth, we lose not only are Catholic identity but our ability to be holy. Holiness is based on objectivity. The Catholic martyrs were objective critics. They knew the truth and refused to compromise. We cannot do less.

  51. Supertradmum says:

    apologies for many typos…in a hurry as usual

  52. Fabrizio says:

    Matt R. wrote : we must be grateful to the Islamic world, for their technology assisted Columbus, and Averroes’ translations of Aristotle into Arabic provided the basis for the Latin versions St Thomas Aquinas used in crafting the Summa Theologica.

    Sorry Matt but:

    1) the “Islamic world” rose to prominence by destroying – unprovoked – over one third of the Christian world and by turning into deserts of misery and slavery what were among the most fertile, civilized and wealthy nations in the Roman-Christian Empire. Their warring for slaves and looting had even a demographic impact on Italy and Spain. It took all of 13 centuries figthing to the last man to kick them out of Europe and to keep them out of it. In such perspective, I see no reason to be grateful to the “Islamic world”. Sure, the III Reich created the technology that was used in what eventually led to the Apollo missions. So what? I am still not grateful to the Third Reich.

    2) Columbus was not assisted by “their techonolgy”. Whatever techonlogy they had for the most part it was coming from the slaves from Greek-Roman world – whose Eastern and North-African parts they had destroyed and subjugated – from pre-Islamic Persia and India, which suffered a similar fate. Columbus was assisted by his being, simply, the best mariner that ever lived, and by the compass and the astrolabe, all Greek-Roman inventions improved by medieval monks and scientists (no space for the names, they are many)

    3) St. Thomas Aquinas fought all his life against the lousy and tendentious Arab translations of Aristotle’s works. Thanks to St. Thomas, they were completely re-translated from the original Greek to combat the errors of many theologians influenced by Averroes (‘the arch-enemy of the Faith’), as recalled also by Benedict XVI not too long ago. So these Arab commentators did nothing we must be grateful for. If anything they caused the Church to deal with certain heresies later and less effectivley than it could have. I am grateful to God for Thomas Aquinas, not to the Caliphs for Averroes who was also a cruel persecutor of Christians as the qadi of Seville and Cordoba.

    of course there have been Islamic contributions to civilization – although much less than the cureent dhimmi mythology would have us believe – but this has nothing to do with what happened in Libya and Egypt on 9/11/2012 . Btw I don’t remember Al Jazzeera and the rest of the collaborationist press making all these distinctions and focussing on the contributions of America to human progress when it takes action in defense of everybody’s freedom. Of course dialogue is better than war, but it still takes two to tango. Of course not all Muslims are the same. The US ambassador is still dead though, and the flag that is carried into battle still lays desecrated and burned, forgotten in some middle-eastern road ditch.

  53. Supertradmum says:

    Faces of the religion of peace this morning from RT


    Fabrizio, ditto on all points.

  54. Supertradmum says:

    Breaking news here. Mobs have attacked the Yemen American Embassy. I wish and pray the Pope would defer his visit to Lebanon.

  55. Sissy says:

    Matt R, I understand your desire to defend the faith of your relatives. But you aren’t a very objective witness as a consequence. You make a lot of sweeping generalizations and, frankly, inaccurate claims that are easily debunked as Islamist propaganda. With our country once again under coordinated attack by Al Quaeda, this might not be the best time to attempt a rousing defense of what you call the “good points” in Islam. I respect your right to your own opinion, but I honestly thinking you are starting to harm your own case. May the Lord bless you in your studies and grant you discernment and wisdom.

  56. wmeyer says:

    I can understand that some may consider Spencer’s writing noxious, but I can also understand that a good deal of the writing emanating from Muslim sources in this country is equally noxious to non-Muslims. One of the claims that I find offensive is that Islam is a religion of peace, since the acts of many, and the writings of the later suras in the Koran are in fundamental conflict with the claim.

    As Sissy says, Matt, your commitment to defense of your relatives’ faith makes you a less than objective witness. Understand that we are not all ignorant of Islam and its teachings, so we are not easily persuaded.

  57. Sissy says:

    wmeyer, I think there is even a case to be made that Islam is nothing more than a political ideology cleverly masquerading as a religion. The religious elements are satan’s transparent attempt to mock Judaism, but the heart of it is a form of imperialistic totalitarianism. In communist double-speak, “peace” = war. Islam’s definition of peace is “the entire world converted to Islam”.

  58. wmeyer says:

    Sissy, I agree, but if you have not read Belloc’s Great Heresies, in which he makes the case for Islam as a Christian heresy, I recommend it highly.

  59. wmeyer says:

    Sissy, I would also point out that in Canada, Ontario has been nearly persuaded–twice now, I think–to permit Sharia law as a second, parallel system of justice. Two sets of laws? Two approaches in the courts? Can you imagine?

  60. cwillia1 says:

    The fact that embassy staff in Cairo would issue any statement to pacify the mob is disturbing. So is the content of the statement as an expression of their attitude toward religious freedom.

    Any assessment of Islam and Muhammad from a Christian point of view – if it is honest and complete – will offend some Muslims. Yet we must make such assessments and express them publicly. We do this not to hurt anyone’s feelings but in the service of the truth.

    While we might find the particular videos that offended the mobs offensive, it does not follow that this or that video should be criticized because a Muslim mob finds it offensive. There is probably no way to regulate speech that protects both our right to speak the truth and the feelings of Muslims. Our Constitution rejects any attempt to do so.

    The embassy staff presumes to judge the motives of those who produced the videos and implies that because Muslims are offended freedom of speech has been abused. Their job is to defend the rights of Americans, not to pass judgments on the exercise of those rights.

  61. Sissy says:

    cwillia1 said: “Any assessment of Islam and Muhammad from a Christian point of view – if it is honest and complete – will offend some Muslims. Yet we must make such assessments and express them publicly.”

    Exactly right. Regarding the “controversy” that followed the Holy Father’s brilliant Regebsburg speech, Cardinal Jean-Marie Lustiger said “We are faced with a media-driven phenomenon bordering on the absurd… If the game consists in unleashing the crowd’s vindictiveness on words that it has not understood, then the conditions for dialogue with Islam are no longer met.”

    wmeyer: the imposition of Sharia is the game plan. If they succeed, there will very soon be no parallel systems of law….there will soon enough be only Sharia. It amazes me that there are still people in the West who do not see the danger we face.

  62. wmeyer says:

    Sissy, I agree completely, it is the frog in the pan again. We are reasonable, so we allow the incursion of Sharia as a part of the cultural package, out of some twisted sense of fairness.

    The question never answered is: If these people left their home countries because they saw America as better, why do they work so hard to make America into the same hell they left?

  63. Sissy says:

    wmeyer: another question is, why don’t we see Christians carrying on like this when we are insulted? Of course, you’ll remember the Catholic mobs attacking embassies after the Da Vinci Code come out. Oh wait.

    The fact is, these riots and murderous attacks use cartoons and films as a mere pretext for violence which is meant to cow and intimidate us into submission. There is now good evidence that the film they are protesting this time was actually made by an Egyptian. All of the original information about the producer has been shown to be faked. It was released three months ago to no comment. I wonder why it suddenly became so offense on September 11?

  64. wmeyer says:

    Sissy, we are the one most insultable group on the planet. We simply apologize and carry on, having actually given no offense. When yet another televangelist falls into sin, we are supposed to be silent. When a word is spoken against abortion, or against Obama, we are racist. When anything is said to suggest that Muslim violence is anything other than retaliation for our infidel existence, we are guilty.

    Truly, the lunatics are running the asylum.

  65. Jim says:

    Matt R,
    you told Maria on one hand: “I’m curious-what do you mean by Filipino? I would say Muslims in the Philippines are Filipino as well”

    and a few lines later : “Finally, we must be grateful to the Islamic world, for their technology assisted Columbus, and Averroes’ translations of Aristotle into Arabic”

    Now why is that so ? On one hand you admonish Maria for referring to a country by the Catholic faith of the majority of its people while on the other hand you seem to be very comfortable assuming that every one in the Arab world is a Moslem…

    Further, while the Arabs did translate books from the ancient world, why should you and I be thankful to Islam for that ? Gratitude to the Arab people.. maybe.. but to Islam ? What about the Arab Catholics who lived there and some of who still live there ? Would they not count as Arabs because they dod not bow to Sharia ? Dont we have to be grateful to them as well ? Or is it such that, since the faith of the translators was Islam, that we should be grateful to the translator’s faith somehow ? If that is so I’d like to know those Islamic teachings or traditions which fostered their actions.

    If there is someone who I am grateful to on Sep 11 and Sep 12th apart from God, that would be the Blessed Mother of God, to Jan Sobieski and to Blessed Pope Innocent XI.

    you further said “I can’t help but wondering how different the message’s meaning today would be, in regards to its connection to Islam, if the connection to the town’s name wasn’t there.”

    Well I can. God doesn’t depend either on the free will of the people who either choose to name the village ‘Fatima’ or the free will of the people who choose to retain that name, to send His mother. If God decided to send our Lady, He certainly knows how He should do that the way He wills.

  66. Imrahil says:

    Dear @Sissy, because we – as Christians – have chosen voluntary weekness. Or so it must seem to the Muslim. We can argue that their actions defy natural law (for we can always argue with natural law, even though to them this will seem just another part of the Church doctrine); we cannot argue from the assumption that religion qua religion is supposed to be peaceful. That is by no means an quality of religion as such. It is (with further distinction to be made) a quality of Christianity; it seems to in some senses a quality of at least the Western-popular varieties of Buddhism. We can argue, similarly, that freedom of opinion belongs to anyone at all time at all costs. But there is no grounds at all that a dictator will feel himself be bound to this freedom just because in the past he had enjoyed it himself. Goebbels thus derided the Weimar democrats for what he saw as their stupidity.

    The headscarf, which has been mentioned, has nothing to do with Islam as such, only perhaps in its application to unmarried women outside prayer. But the headscarf for married women has long been the nearly unanimous tradition of married Christian women also – to the point that entering marriage is known as “coming under the hood” to this day. In Portugal I’d rather suggest that they were following their own traditions.

    I thank dear @Matt R very much for his perspective. As it were, you may talk about a Muslim as your enemy as much as you like, and not without reason; but if you accompany the Muslim with a traditional Confucian Chineseman, a Buddhist, a Manichaean, and an pagan in the narrow sense of the word (i. e. a Hindoo, a Shintoite, an “Animist”, or the follower of one of the religions called nature-religions), you will find that among them the Muslim is your brother, if perhaps a brother in a fraternal strife. When Islam conquered Asia it did so as a Western power (as Chesterton once remarked), and indeed in the curriculum of American High Schools, Islam should be included under Western Civ. (Though I bet it is included under Eastern Civ. I don’t know that myself.)

    However, to say that “we also have had atrocities” serves no purpose at all, save to hinder the discussion. We must know that Charlemagne 1. perhaps meant to pardon the defeated if they converted rather than kill them if they didn’t, 2. did so against a tribe whose own religion, as he knew well, thought the defeated god ipso facto a disproven god, 3. was condemned by the Pope for doing so in the immediate aftermath. We must know that Pizarro, or who it was, earned an excommunication for what he did.

    And then, we cannot just gather our philosophy from the gallup polls who may or may not ask what Muslims think. I myself would trust a Muslim (without further reasons for suspicion) not to break a word towards me even if he is allowed some taqiya, for the call of natural law and suchlike reasons, but that is not saying that Islam as such allows no taqiya. But Islam is what the Koran and the hadithes say (and so on). And it is true that the Koran says that “idolworshippers” are to be put to death, or was it slavery, if they do not convert, that war is declared on the Christians (the latter is Sura 9), etc. According to Islam’s own beliefs, he who rejects this rejects Islam. (The Koran also says that the Meccans anxiously asked Mohammed to prove why he should be a Divine messenger; in this, I believe this did take place, and it was a very just question. Mohammed retorts by a diatribe how bad the Meccans are…) It may very well be that Muslims are generally nice people, but then, I hate to say it, many Catholics fornicate before marriage. Only that our Catholic belief which some Catholics do not act according to is the right one, and some of the doctrines many Muslims, I think, do in fact reject because of the call of the natural law and other reasons, are very wrong and dangerous teachings.

  67. Sissy says:

    Imrahil, I don’t think anyone would argue that all religion must be peaceful in order to be called a religion. Humans are not peaceful by nature, so any man-made religion is going to fail that test. I believe Islam’s past is much more about conquest than it is about seeking the One, True God. People of good will may disagree.

    But the real question is whether we Christians, being “weak by choice” as you describe it are, therefore, required to conform to the demands of those who are not peaceful? I think any such suggestion is absurd and dangerous, and we should not be cowed into accepting their terms. This is a matter of submitting to cultural/political demands that Christians must always be mindful of “hurting the feelings” of people whose acts are satanic. It is no different than the Democrat party trying to convince us that child murder is “choice” or that unnatural relations between same-sex partners is “marriage”. Adopting the language and behavioral norms of violent non-Christian groups with the goal of placating their rage is a bad idea, in my opinion.

  68. wmeyer says:

    Christians are not “weak by choice.” Meek is not equal to weak. To the contrary, in the face of substantial provocation, to turn the other cheek requires great strength–the easy thing is to become angry.

  69. Sissy says:

    wmeyer: “To the contrary, in the face of substantial provocation, to turn the other cheek requires great strength–the easy thing is to become angry.”

    I agree with you. I think these continual explosions of rage over imagined (or even real) slights further demonstrates that it is the Christian faith that is the true religion. “By their fruits will you know them”.

  70. wmeyer says:

    Sissy, there is also CCC 2309, on legitimate defense by military force.

    Not weak, but just and measured.

  71. robtbrown says:

    Matt R says:

    @robtbrown, thanks for the correction and further info! I should have known that…
    and certainly, if it weren’t for the availability of Averroes’ work, William of Moerbeke would never have been directed to translate from the Greek directly into Latin.

    What did Averroes have to do with Moerbeke’s translation?

    BTW, if you’re interested in this topic, I recommend a book by one of my professors. Edward Booth: Aristotloan Aporetic Ontology in Islamic and Christian Thinkers

  72. Imrahil says:

    For clarification: This is why I wrote “Or so it must seem to the Muslim”.

    However, there does exist among Christians – not the ones that would likely visit this combox, if you know what I mean – the feeling that Christians have to be peaceful and submissive… accompanied, may I say it, by a silent and probably unconscious plaintiveness that others are allowed to fight for what they love. (Though a closer look would indicate that they do not properly fight, but maraud – and here’s the problem.) Of course, this is entirely due to the fact that the Christian doctrine both about “turning the other one” (which a Bavarian popularly religious movie once applied to the fist…) and about peacemaking etc. have not really been communicated. It is true that the hard thing to do is turning the other cheek (“come on, it’s the left cheek one punches in punching*… the left… not the right, you know? want to practice? as you need the practice, go ahead!”). However, getting angry is hard as well, though not so hard. It is continually forgotten that after turning the other cheek, getting some honest anger is the second best (even though perhaps sinful because not best) Christian thing to do. The worst thing to do, and the one I’m most prone to do myself, is slinking out of the place like a beaten dog, without saying a word.

    [*The original, I think, says: If someone punches you on the right cheek – that is with the back of the hand, an especially dehonoring variant – turn him the left.]

    It was not really helpful as well that around here the place where Otto Normalconsumer could most put his religion to practical use was the Draft Committee, where he needed a conscientious, read: religious reason for his conscientious objection. To the extent that when I did not a day more than fulfil my official duty as a drafted soldier, that aroused astonishment how a practising Christian could possibly to this. But I disgress… Maybe that’ll arrange itself in time with the conscription now being suspended.

  73. robtbrown says:

    St Thomas’ interest in Aristotle was triggered by Peter the Hibernian at the Univ of Naples and later by St Albert–that there is truth to be found in Aristotle’s thought. The concern with the errors of Averroes was a secondary matter.

  74. Supertradmum says:

    The truth comes out. The attacks were planned before the movie. And, because of the victory of the Catholics in 1683. Here is an article on the news that the attacks were planned before news of the movie came out. Long memories, long hatred for the Catholics.


  75. Sissy says:

    Supertradmum, you’re right, of course. Further evidence is that the “film” wasn’t even made by an “Israeli Jew with funding from 100s of Jews” as the NY Times dutifully parroted. Numerous reporters have searched and found that the entire back story on the film is all fraud. Reporters who have looked into this say the best guess now is that an Egyptian national made the film. Early on, there was suspicion that the film was a “false flag” incident cooked up by Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood (who have been in talks recently). That is the best explanation for the film, in my opinion. It was concocted by jihadis to serve as a pretext for a 9/11 revenge attack. In other words, there is no “film” except for a very low quality piece of video intended as cover for a crime.

    This is another reason why the West needs to stop tippy-toeing around jihadis touchy feelings. What we are seeing is false rage played out for TV in an effort to intimidate us into submission. And it’s working. Have you noticed the news presenters on TV are all careful to say “The Prophet Muhammad” and “The Holy Koran”. When was the last time you heard anyone on the news say “The Messiah, Lord Jesus Christ” or “The Holy Bible”. They are all frightened to death, and that was a second reason for the story of the fake film.

  76. Supertradmum says:

    Sissy, your comment is very good. Look at my blog as well. I have come to the sad conclusion that because there are so many single men out there without wives and children and no idea of defence as a real Catholic option, that Americans do not have the guts to face the reality of the situation. I would like to be proven wrong.

  77. Sissy says:

    wmeyer said: “Sissy, there is also CCC 2309, on legitimate defense by military force.”

    It would seem the Church gives us more latitude to defend ourselves than the Obama administration. Marine Corp blogs (and the Washington Beacon) are reporting that the American Ambassador to Egypt would not allow them to use live ammo in their weapons. When the attack on our embassy in Cairo began, they were required to call for Egyptian government security officers, who showed up 5 hours later. It’s just a miracle there wasn’t any bloodshed in Egypt, as well. Let’s hope our Marines get some ammo before the end of Friday prayers.

  78. Sissy says:

    Supertradmum, thanks for that link and your helpful blog post. The Libyan interior minister just confirmed what you’ve been saying:


  79. wmeyer says:

    … Americans do not have the guts to face the reality of the situation.

    Conditioned out of them in government schools. And after leaving school, by the media.

  80. AvantiBev says:

    Here is an example of what @MattR would call “Spencer’s diatribes”. To the contrary, I applaud Melkite Catholics such as Mr. Spencer, Maronite’s such as Brigitte Gabriel and Christian converts from Islam such as Nonie Darwish for their thoughtful critiques of our suicidal cultural and moral equivalency. And “support our bishops”???? Not when they want to toss my free speech rights over the cliff crying as in Jeremiah “peace, peace” to the evildoers. See last paragraph below. – AvantiBev

    Vatican spokesman calls for end to offenses against Islam, does not condemn jihad murders; bishop in Libya calls for blasphemy laws in the West

    Sometimes it seems as if the world has lost its collective moral compass. Lombardi’s statement keeps going on about “respect” — that is, the respect that we all must have for Islam. But about the lack of respect that the Muslim murderers showed to Ambassador Stevens and the others he says nothing.

    These prelates are playing a dangerous game. Perhaps they are unaware of the history of dhimmitude, and the reality that the dhimmi laws are still part of Sharia. Perhaps they think life for Christians in the Middle East will go better if they toe the Islamic supremacist line. But they will eventually discover that the Qur’anic mandate to make war against and subjugate unbelievers extends even to those who readily give Islamic supremacists whatever they want.

    It is also doubtful that they realize that the imposition of blasphemy laws upon the West would allow the Islamic jihad an unfettered hand to expand its activities in Western countries, and no one would be allowed to speak out in opposition or resistance.

    Nor do they realize that calling for censorship in the wake of violence and murder will only get them more violence and murder — because the murderers see that their tactics work.

    “Vatican spokesman, responding to Libyan violence, decries provocations against Islam,” from CWN, September 12:

    Responding to mob violence against US embassies in Libya and Egypt, which led to the deaths of four American diplomats, the director of the Vatican press office released a statement condemning “provocations against the sensibilities of Muslim believers.”
    The statement by Father Federico Lombardi did not include a condemnation of the killings in Benghazi, Libya, or the burning of American flags in Cairo. Instead he focused on offenses against Islam. The Muslim mobs were reportedly outraged by reports of a film, produced by an obscure American, that criticized Islam.

    With Pope Benedict XVI preparing to travel to the Middle East this weekend amid mounting tensions in the region, the papal spokesman stressed that the Pope would bring a “message of dialogue and respect for all believers of different religions.” The statement from Father Lombardi, in its entirety, read:

    Profound respect for the beliefs, texts, outstanding figures and symbols of the various religions is an essential precondition for the peaceful coexistence of peoples. The serious consequences of unjustified offence and provocations against the sensibilities of Muslim believers are once again evident in these days, as we see the reactions they arouse, sometimes with tragic results, which in their turn nourish tension and hatred, unleashing unacceptable violence.
    The message of dialogue and respect for all believers of different religions, which the Holy Father is preparing to carry with him on his forthcoming trip to Lebanon, indicate the path that everyone should follow in order to construct shared and peaceful coexistence among religions and peoples.

    From Libya, Bishop Giovanni Martinelli, the apostolic vicar of Tripoli, told Vatican Insider that Western countries should have the “courage” to ban “all blasphemous projects” and establish “a policy that is respectful of religion.”

    Posted by Robert on September 13, 2012 2:58 AM

  81. SKAY says:

    “Marine Corp blogs (and the Washington Beacon) are reporting that the American Ambassador to Egypt would not allow them to use live ammo in their weapons. When the attack on our embassy in Cairo began, they were required to call for Egyptian government security officers, who showed up 5 hours later.”

    Why am I surprised? Wonder if this was a muslim brotherhood idea since they have taken over?
    This is outrageous under the current circumstances. No wonder they were climbing the walls and burning the flag.

  82. wmeyer says:

    … the American Ambassador to Egypt would not allow them to use live ammo in their weapons.

    This is outrageous in itself. The Marines on site are expected to protect the Ambassador, and American property and citizens. It should not be in the purview of the Ambassador to limit the means with which they can do their duty in so foolish a way.

  83. SKAY says:


    Obama has taken back the Catholic vote according to this poll. They are voting for a man who
    is trying to destroy the Church. Very sad indeed.

  84. nykash says:

    Hmm, no live ammo? You’re right wmeyer, that is outrageous.

    I’m sure that someone could make the claim that a small (?) detachment of Marines aren’t equipped to counter agression from hundreds of foreign nationals. Perhaps we should arm them with pillows and gift boxes instead?

  85. Matt R says:

    @robtbrown, the translations from Arabic were sloppy for a number of reasons-the translations into Arabic were not from Greek, Averroes’ influence could be discerned, and Averroes had never gotten around to translating Aristotle’s entire body of work. So, St Thomas asked if the works could be translated from Greek.
    @Sissy @wmeyer, You aren’t terribly objective either. Everyone has biases and prejudices. Note them and move on.
    But I can’t take Spencer seriously, even though he is right that Islam’s theology is wrong, because I find his writings along with many others to be uncharitable, and extremely so.

    It’s been shown that the video wasn’t made by either Jews or the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran. It was Egyptian Christians in Los Angeles, who made up the Jewish story to cover themselves.
    “The serious consequences of unjustified offence and provocations against the sensibilities of Muslim believers are once again evident in these days, as we see the reactions they arouse, sometimes with tragic results, which in their turn nourish tension and hatred, unleashing unacceptable violence.” Bingo.
    @Fabrizio, we’re just going to disagree on the compass and astrolabe.
    @Imrahil, I liked what you had to say. I wish I could articulate what I had to say like you did.
    By the way, I would like to point out that by challenging me, my understanding of things has certainly been affected. I’m still just a kid, forever a learner…

  86. irishgirl says:

    This whole thing is despicable, all because of some stupid online ‘movie’!
    And it’s ironic that BO says nice things about Islam, while he is persecuting Catholics who don’t like his policies (re: HHS mandate).
    I was really furious when he quoted ‘No greater love’ during the ceremony at Andrews Air Base.
    One more reason to vote this guy out of office come November….
    So, the Islamic fanatics have a black flag, huh? A bug spray has that name, ‘Black Flag’. I sure wish our military would have its hands untied and ‘swat’ these terrorists dead!

  87. Supertradmum says:

    It is not the movie which caused the riots. These were planned before hand and the FBI is finally admitting it. On several sites online. Long memories, long hatred

Comments are closed.