This is a good thing they are doing, but are they doing it because of their religion or in spite of it?

I'll decide on the 26th whether or not this was a good thing.
Call me a pessimist.
Go ahead.

Definitely getting an ominous "foxes watching the hen houses" vibe from this...

My first instinct is to crumble toward gleeful hope for the planet, and gratitude for good people in the world.

Yes, I'm a retard.

But even a blind retard can find a nice jar of paste to eat once in a while.

It's is a good thing if Muslims are trying to prevent a church from being bombed, but is it also part of Dhimmitude? The idea that Christians can only pray or use a church when permitted to do so by Muslims is somewhat disturbing. All over the planet, when ever there is violence, Islam is at the bottom of it.
Lets not forget that just yet.

So I'm to understand that they don't mean 2,000 bombings on Christmas Eve, but rather some bombings that took place in the year 2000?

The idea that Christians can only pray or use a church when permitted to do so by Muslims is somewhat disturbing.

You're a world-class nutjob, ain'tcha?

Some real nice, predictable comments on this thread.

Sounds like good news. I'm honestly curious as to what reasoning went into the decision to undertake this. Goodwill towards one's fellow man, taking a stand against murderous extremists, maybe something a bit more secularly oriented?

If it is based on a

...scripture I'd be even more interested to hear it.

Stupid effing mispost.

Predictable yet accurate, Bill.

I credit these Muslims for attempting to protect churches against vandalism and firebombings, but you can't escape the point that it's rather odd that Christian churches need such protection at all.

And it can't help but be noticed that this is what we have been reduced to taking as progress. It is progress, of course, but then, it would be rather nice if there weren't such a threat to non-Muslim places of worship in Muslim lands at all.

Of course, you're able to carefully keep such thoughts out of your head, because you're an independent and a bona fide Citizen Journalist.

Speaking of predictable: Bill from InDC.

Seriously, Bill, don't you have a blog or something you can post your opinions on? I'm sure I heard something like that from some guy.

I have no idea where you get the energy or inclination to spend your time trolling on my site. I really, really don't.

Ever count the number of times I've commented on your site? It wouldn't take you very long to add it all up.

We've been asking where the ROP has been hiding.

Now that some are stepping forward, to imply that their motives are less than honorable, supposes that all Muslims are radical, and not to be trusted.

I'm a Christian, but would certainly stand with another religion to protect their safety as they worshipped.

I suspect that many from each religious faith would do the same.

Let's not get into the 'damned if they do, damned if they don't' rhetoric.

I did some quick, half-assed research on Nahdlatul Ulama. Seem like a good bunch from what I read. Here is a link to some background on them that squares with what Wikipedia and the BBC say about them. Incidentally, Ace, you know that linking to the BBC is questionable content on your comments?

And fuck you too Bill. Geez.

Yeah I've got mixed feelings about this. I don't know if they're trying to placate the Christians because of the rampant beheadings and if the churches get bombed the Christians will figure "fuck-all what've we got to lose" and pull and East Timor. Or if its a dhimitude thing, or if sanity has broken out.
Oh well, hope for the best, expect the worst.

I have no idea where you get the energy or inclination to spend your time trolling on my site. I really, really don't.

Well, have you seen his site lately?

Perhaps, Bill, the thing to do is spend a little more time at home. Fix up the place. Have some people over. Make it a home ... not a house. Build a pond in the backyard. Jump in.

This will bug the liberals especialy the ACLU and the atheists fools WHERE SOMEONE TO GUARD BETHEHEM WHERE IT ALL BEGUN?

My first instinct is to crumble toward gleeful hope for the planet, and gratitude for good people in the world.

Yes, I'm a retard.

But even a blind retard can find a nice jar of paste to eat once in a while.

Don't bogart that jar. I had the same feelings when I read Ace's post.

Ace -

First of all, piss off with the hostility. I really could give two shits about you commenting on my site, though you do have the energy to read it every day and repeatedly lift links without hat tips. (yes, I monitor the visit logs, and yes, I've noticed.)

Does blogger Dave from Garfield Ridge get a slap for commenting too much? Or is it only because he agrees with you all the time?

And what's ironic is ...

I wasn't criticizing your post, which I found very good, I was criticizing the comments that find the most negative possible "muslims suck" angle out of a group of muslims taking the pluralistic step of defending another religion from the whack-jobs in their midst. Real encouragement, there.

Yes, there are points to be made about the fact that there is violence against other religions in muslim countries that have been made a ZILLION TIMES, but suggesting that it's secretly a part of "Dhimmitude," and that the "foxes are guarding the henhouse" in respond to such an oddly positive development, well that's fucking bullshit, and indicates that certain predictable commenters have predictable motivations to box Islam in as an enemy.

You know, because it gives 'em a boner or something.

Big difference between tempered response and "it's an evil plot."

And if you have a problem with me swiping your commenters Ace, then ban me. Otherwise, stuff your mangina back in your pants and allow me to say my peace.

Yes, there are points to be made about the fact that there is violence against other religions in muslim countries that have been made a ZILLION TIMES, but suggesting that it's secretly a part of "Dhimmitude," and that the "foxes are guarding the henhouse" in respond to such an oddly positive development, well that's fucking bullshit, and indicates that certain predictable commenters have predictable motivations to box Islam in as an enemy.

So calling them a "world class nutjob" is your idea of a response?

For the record, though, I do agree this is an odd, but positive, development. However, given the history of the relationship between Muslims and Christians, I don't think some skepticism is unwarranted.

And it can't help but be noticed that this is what we have been reduced to taking as progress. It is progress, of course, but then, it would be rather nice if there weren't such a threat to non-Muslim places of worship in Muslim lands at all.

Right, like in Australia?

Oops. reverse that.

The ironic thing is, I don't disagree with your point, the way you've made it. But whatever, I'D BETTER GO POST SOMETHING ON MY BLOG!

Because, I CARE. About being the BEST BLOGGER I CAN BE.

So calling them a "world class nutjob" is your idea of a response?

Perhaps my choice of words was too strong.

But the commenter said:

All over the planet, when ever there is violence, Islam is at the bottom of it.

Well. Now that's a rather unqualified, sweeping, almost odd statement, isn't it? One might almost smell a wee whiff of culturally triumphant absolutism. Racism? (I know that's a term that we don't like to abuse around here, but what's the right term?)

But then, I'm just being a predictable "INDEPENDENT THINKER," a "Dhimmi" who refuses to see the TRUTH, finding the statement that Islam as a religion is responsible for ALL VIOLENCE in the world just a little bit "nutty."

Hmmm, Slu?

My extended thoughts on this subject are here.

First of all, piss off with the hostility.

I am still wrapping my mind around that one. But I am impressed.

I'll agree, the comment was wrong. In fact, it was more than wrong - it was ridiculous. To be completely honest, though, I didn't read the whole comment and didn't really catch the bit about Islam being responsible for 'all violence' in the world.

I wouldn't call it racism, since the disagreement many people have with Islam is more cultural than racial in nature.

Should someone inform Bill that it is a bit paranoid to check every single visit to one's site and then assume that someone lifted a news item from you instead of realizing that they probably got it FROM A NEWS SOURCE LIKE YOU DID.

Or does Bill also carefully check the exact time of the visit to his site and the exact time of the posting here? Calculating the time it would take to type the post? And how many sites does he troll? All who visit his?

What a freak.

And I mean that in the nicest way.

Interesting and very long discussion on that thread.

You won't find me defending comments by LaShawn Barber. I have some hope that Islamic countries will be able to adopt democratic forms of government, even if that democracy looks different from our own.

Should someone inform Bill that it is a bit paranoid to check every single visit to one's site and then assume that someone lifted a news item from you instead of realizing that they probably got it FROM A NEWS SOURCE LIKE YOU DID.

Which is why I passively observed it and didn't say anything - until I mentioned it lightly to Ace on a fairly rare link, and he admitted it. And I'm not talking about common links that everyone posts - some relatively uncommon. Passive observation does not equal paranoia.

So should someone inform you that you're a douche-bag?

I guess as long as it promises at least some hope for "ultra-violence", muslim groups will support it...

Bill,

Sometimes I wonder if it isn't an imposter using your name to comment.

Not too long ago, you were the very first, and very last blog I read each day.

Somewhere along the way I began to feel preached at and condescended to, and drifted away.

I miss the irreverent, self-deprecating, intuitive Bill of days past.

And, while I recognize the potential for a response of, "Don't read my site. That's your loss."

Let me head you off and say... I concur.