An arsonist threw a Molotov cocktail at a Shi’a mosque in Anderlecht, Belgium today, causing a fire that destroyed the building. The imam of the mosque was killed, and another person was injured. The police have arrested a suspect, who is rumored to be a Sunni Muslim.In other news, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has overturned the sentence of Ahmed Ressam, the would-be bomber of Los Angeles Airport. Mr. Ressam, who was first arrested in 1999, had originally been sentenced to 22 years in prison. The court felt that sentence was too lenient (sentencing guidelines recommend 65 years to life for the crime), and sent the case back to the lower court for re-sentencing.
Meanwhile, the Dean of a university in Tunisia was cornered in his office and beaten by Salafist students, who objected to his refusal to allow students wearing the niqab to attend classes.
To see the headlines and the articles, open the full news post.
Thanks to C. Cantoni, Fjordman, Insubria, TV, Vlad Tepes, and all the other tipsters who sent these in.
Notice to tipsters: Please don’t submit extensive excerpts from articles that have been posted behind a subscription firewall, or are otherwise under copyright protection.
Commenters are advised to leave their comments at this post (rather than with the news articles) so that they are more easily accessible.
Caveat: Articles in the news feed are posted “as is”. Gates of Vienna cannot vouch for the authenticity or accuracy of the contents of any individual item posted here. We check each entry to make sure it is relatively interesting, not patently offensive, and at least superficially plausible. The link to the original is included with each item’s title. Further research and verification are left to the reader.
7 comments:
Baron - I think it was the 9th circuit which is all the more surprising.
Thanks, Babs -- a slip of the keyboard there. I fixed it.
Yes, it was the fact that the 9th reversed it that made me sit up and take notice. Unheard of!
Not sure how to submit articles to your site, but this one is interesting: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/british-government-christians-have-no-right-wear-visible-cross-or-crucifix
I know you lot don't seem to care much for the EU or the court system, but they do serve a purpose. Witness the victory we (the Italians) had over the atheist Finn who sought to remove all crucifixes from our classrooms. I fully expect the HR court will rule appropriately in this case as well.
I certainly hope the "EU Court" rules favorably in this instance.
The larger question is why should they have to???
Quite a few years ago the Baron posted a rather naive essay by me wondering why crosses were even an issue in Europe. At the time "Celtic" crosses were deemed by non-believers to be agressive...
So, here we are again, more than four years later, and someone, somewhere in the bureaucracy has decided that a 50+ year old nurse should give up her necklace because of our modern 2000 PC.
Hey, you in the UK, wake up.
Babs, you're preaching to the choir there. I was living in London when the first "cross-crisis" came about. It was the culmination of a war on Christianity wherein one could not even say "Merry Christmas" or have the words in any windows of public buildings (even charities receiving govt funds). But, let's be clear - the UK has always repressed religion, namely Catholicism. By and large, Catholics and Orthodox are the only ones in the UK who wear crosses and other Christian displays of religion (both the nurse and flight attendant in the dispute are Catholic, FYI). Whereas the CofE has rolled-over and become the good bitch to the establishment it has always been, the Catholic church remains the last bastion against the atheist/secular agenda of the UK's govt, and they know it, hence the hostility.
It is funny but, after the flight attendant incident I asked my son to give me a crucifix necklace for Christmas. Nothing fancy and believe me I am not overly religious. I just realized that it was us against them and I wanted everyone to know which side I was on...
It is my advice that even if you are not a practicing Christian (as I am not) you should wear a crucifix. It seems that the deck is now stacked against Christian-Judeo heritage and wearing a crucifix is a way of fighting back.
"The imam of the mosque was killed, and another person was injured. The police have arrested a suspect, who is rumored to be a Sunni Muslim". Am awaiting mass demos by both Shia and Sunni Muslims complete with the usual violence to punctuate their protest against the Korans the mosque contained being burned to ashes, surely disrespectful. Maybe the razing of the mosque itself might warrant some additional outrage? The imam killed...well, what's that compared to the destruction of the Korans Muslims fetishize? The protests will begin around the world any minute now....Hmmm. Apparently the destruction of Korans, mosques and imams is OK if done by a Muslim, even a Muslim of a rival sect? Have I got that right?
Post a Comment