How the hell did this snippet of misinformation travel all the way down to the Islamic Republic of Bradford?
In any case, this should give the Islamists of Bradford and beyond more fuel for the jihad. That is, Muslims simply can’t survive without the latest ‘offence’ or ‘insult’ against Islam. It’s called victimhood. It is ever-present and ubiquitous. It is what unites most Muslims (along with anti-Semitism). More than that, defence against insult or offence is the best form of attack for many Muslims. When Muslims are insulted or offended, very soon after there are riots, killings and bombings. Not only that, governments tend to bend over backwards, legally and in other ways, to guarantee to their Muslim voters that such things will never happen again. Think here about the widespread bits of legislation which were brought into being after the Bradford Muslim riots. And the Muslim Council of Britain was formed by the Government and Islamists largely in response to the Satanic Verses riots and other overreactions to ‘insult and ‘offence’.
Are these offended or insulted Muslims psychotic or something? No? Then why are they so easily offended and insulted? Why are they always so angry? It is because Islam is an eggshell? An eggshell religion needs to be protected in every which way. Protected by jihad or by government legislation against ‘hate speech’.
Islam has lasted for so long because of these overreactions to all and every criticism – or ‘offence’ or ‘insult’. Criticism of Islam was never allowed within the Islamic world. That’s why it survived. Death for ‘apostasy’ also helped it survive and spread. Even train spotting would survive and prosper if all criticism - or ‘insults’ - were declared illegal. Train spotting would also survive if becoming an ex-train spotter resulted in one’s head being chopped off.
And why shouldn’t the army replicate mosques? These are the places in which many Taliban hide. They also sometimes use mosques as bases for military action and bombings. In fact the Taliban does the same as Hamas. In Hamas’s case, it too hides in - and fires from - mosques, as well as from schools and other civilian areas. And judging by what the Turkish PM said recently, it is no surprise that mosques are used for such things. Indeed we already know that many, many mosques encourage jihad. The PM of Turkey recently said that ‘mosques are our weapons’. Perhaps he meant this literally as well as metaphorically.
In any case, if the British army wants to replicate the reality of Afghanistan it should also have women walking around with horribly disfigured faces - the victims of acid attacks for not wearing the burka or for looking at ‘non-Islamic books’ (most Afghan women can’t read). Actually, such scares will usually be covered by the burka.
The reality is that Muslims do far worse than replicate churches. Forget about replica mosques, Muslims in Afghanistan and Iraq blow mosques up. They blow Sunni mosques up if they are Shia. And they blow Shia mosques up if they are Sunni. So let’s get things in perspective here. Let’s us hear just one example of British Muslim anger at Muslim-on-Muslim mosque bombings or Taliban acid throwing instead. But of course we won’t. Muslim-on-infidel violence is OK. Even Muslim-on-Muslim violence is OK. However, infidel-on-Muslim violence is most certainly not OK. Isn’t Islamic logic painfully simple?