You know how it is?... when you read a sentence that's supposed to make you think "oh, my goodness, how horrible", but instead makes you think "yes, that's exactly right!"?
That's what I mean by scoring an own goal. And there's a lot of it in the writing of apologists for Islam. They'll write something like "so-and-so, says that Islam is a violent religion" and you're supposed to think that so-and-so is a terrible bigot, an Islamophobe. Whereas, of course, if you know anything about Islam, then you would have studied its core documents, the Koran, the Hadith, the Sira (life of Muhammad) and you'll know that it is indeed a religion, not of peace but of violent supremacism.
It's really a measure of how deeply buried such apologists are in the obfuscations of Islam that they will write like this, oblivious to the fact that they've scored an own goal, that their writing is self-indicting. They make it clear just how ignorant or blind they are to the dark aspects of Islam, that in reporting alleged "Islamophobic" comments they are merely highlighting those very same dark aspects of Islam.
The website Islamophobia-watch.com does this all the time, one own goal after another.
Take this post, which reports on a Mr Barrish's contention that Islam is a "totalitarian theocracy" and that it is "littered with human rights violations". Again, we're meant to think "how horrid of Mr Barrish, he's clearly ignorant, for Islam is a Religion of Peace, not a totalitarian theocracy". But, of course, that is a very correct description of Islam. It is totalitarian and it does make a theocracy when it is the state religion (Iran, Saudi Arabia). Moreover, it is indeed littered with "human rights violations", in how it treats women, minorities and the repression of the right to freedom of speech and freedom of conscience.
Keep reporting on that "Islamophobia", you folks at "Islamophobia-watch. com!, you only make it easier for sane and clear thinking folk to better understand the egregiousness of Islam.
That's what I mean by scoring an own goal. And there's a lot of it in the writing of apologists for Islam. They'll write something like "so-and-so, says that Islam is a violent religion" and you're supposed to think that so-and-so is a terrible bigot, an Islamophobe. Whereas, of course, if you know anything about Islam, then you would have studied its core documents, the Koran, the Hadith, the Sira (life of Muhammad) and you'll know that it is indeed a religion, not of peace but of violent supremacism.
It's really a measure of how deeply buried such apologists are in the obfuscations of Islam that they will write like this, oblivious to the fact that they've scored an own goal, that their writing is self-indicting. They make it clear just how ignorant or blind they are to the dark aspects of Islam, that in reporting alleged "Islamophobic" comments they are merely highlighting those very same dark aspects of Islam.
The website Islamophobia-watch.com does this all the time, one own goal after another.
Take this post, which reports on a Mr Barrish's contention that Islam is a "totalitarian theocracy" and that it is "littered with human rights violations". Again, we're meant to think "how horrid of Mr Barrish, he's clearly ignorant, for Islam is a Religion of Peace, not a totalitarian theocracy". But, of course, that is a very correct description of Islam. It is totalitarian and it does make a theocracy when it is the state religion (Iran, Saudi Arabia). Moreover, it is indeed littered with "human rights violations", in how it treats women, minorities and the repression of the right to freedom of speech and freedom of conscience.
Keep reporting on that "Islamophobia", you folks at "Islamophobia-watch. com!, you only make it easier for sane and clear thinking folk to better understand the egregiousness of Islam.
