Phil Jiminez thinks religion should not be given deference
2 Comments Published by Avi Green on Monday, January 12, 2015 at 11:20 AM.
Artist Jiminez posted the following:
While the Salon article he linked to has at least one potentially biased part, the author does acknowledge the key themes in the Koran which the jihadists in Paris went by:
Unlike another specific person whose screenshot of a retweet I'll post here, that being Alan Kistler, a comics historian and onetime CBR contributor, who upholds BBC propaganda, and taqqiya (deception):
Now it's terrible the officer in question was murdered. But as the Salon article's citation confirms, the whole notion the jihadists weren't acting upon the teachings of Islam is untrue, and the man shouldn't be living in denial. So Kistler's giving signs he takes everything told by the Beeb at face value. Umm, Mr. Kistler, for somebody who says he's a LGBT advocate on his Twitter intro, you sure aren't doing a favor for gays and lesbians who've been persecuted under sharia. Point: the policeman may have been a moderate Muslim. But the religion itself? It's been said before, even by Recep Erdogan, that there's no moderate Islam. So if I were you, Mr. Kistler, I'd think twice before pushing the phony narrative Islam isn't a problem, when Salon, of all places, was willing to acknowledge there's evidence to indicate it is. And I'd advise not to act as though there's no such thing as a bad religion.
Many friends believe religion is the root of much evil; one author thinks we should stop giving religion a free pass: http://t.co/3pzs4543dD
— Phil Jimenez (@Philjimeneznyc) January 8, 2015
While the Salon article he linked to has at least one potentially biased part, the author does acknowledge the key themes in the Koran which the jihadists in Paris went by:
[...] The attackers left no doubt about what drove them, and they can cite scriptural sanction for their savagery: the Quran (33:61) warns that those who insult Islam – and, as riots in the Middle East over Danish cartoons in 2006 showed, satire, in the eyes of too many Muslims, equals insult — “shall be seized and slain (without mercy).” Salman Rushdie, despite a fatwa ordaining his murder (for his 1988 novel “Satanic Verses”), has so far escaped this fate; the Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh (for his film “Submission,” documenting violence against women in the Muslim world) was not so lucky.So Jiminez, while he may be a leftist, seems willing to take note of what drives the Islamofascists, unlike Dan Slott, Ron Marz, Gail Simone and other narrow nuts in the comics industry. Guess we'll have to give him credit for that.
There are many other well-known examples. The point is, Islam is implicated in all. The “holy” texts of Islam, regardless of interpretation, offer literal justification to those who wish to commit violence in the name of the faith; and religious extremism, by far mostly Islamist, has been, since 2001, the main cause of terrorism across the world.
Unlike another specific person whose screenshot of a retweet I'll post here, that being Alan Kistler, a comics historian and onetime CBR contributor, who upholds BBC propaganda, and taqqiya (deception):
Labels: Europe and Asia, islam and jihad, misogyny and racism, msm propaganda, politics, terrorism, violence
Phil Jiminez deserves some credit, but he still is careful to criticize religion in general (and in abstract), without singling out Islam.
Charlie Hebdo previously published cartoons that were offensive to Jews and/or Christians. The worst responses they received were threats of boycotts or lawsuits.
Jews and Christians waged wars in the name of their religions, and committed acts of horrific violence. But that was in the distant past; both religions eventually outgrew the concept of holy war. Islam hasn't. At least, not yet.
And some extremists, who consider themselves Christians, have committed hate crimes, but they are violating the basic tenets of their own religion. Unlike Muslims, who can cite specific passages in the Koran to justify terrorism.
It's a politically correct fiction that all religions are equally violent. Some gave up violence long ago, and some were never violent in the first place. And then there is at least one (guess which?) that is still violent.
There's a passage in the Bible that says "Do not suffer a witch to live." If in the 21st century we suddenly saw a rash of self-proclaimed Christians going around killing Wiccans, then surely the entirety of the liberal press would have no problem citing the passage in question, and then many of them would use this as "proof" that the entire book was backwards and evil.
Yet today so many are deathly afraid of pointing to the passages of the Koran that promote violence. Ironically, on some level this is because these same cowardly liberals know full well that if they cite these sources and call the Koran into question, then they might well be targeted for violence. How ironic indeed.