As Christians in Sri Lanka celebrated the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ,
jihadis in Sri Lanka celebrated their prophet’s words “I have been made victorious with terror”
by blowing up Christians in the name of Allah.
Or, as Congresswoman Ilhan Omar might put it,
“Some people did something to someone in Sri Lanka.”
Sri Lanka is an island country near the southern tip of India.
Buddhists make up about 70 percent of the population; Hindus around 13 percent;
Muslims around 10 percent; and Christians around seven percent.
So Muslims and Christians are religious minorities in Sri Lanka.
But this didn’t stop one religious minority from trying to wipe out another religious minority.
In the Quran, Allah orders Muslims to fight those who don’t believe in him,
to fight the unbelievers who are near them, to show mercy only to fellow Muslims,
to strike terror into the hearts of Allah’s enemies, and to kill until they get killed.
Muhammad declared that he had been ordered, by Allah, to fight unbelievers until they
acknowledge that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is his messenger.
Oddly enough, these clear commands to violently attack non-Muslims keep leading Muslims
to violently attack non-Muslims.
St. Anthony’s Shrine in Colombo, St. Sebastian’s Church in Negombo, and Zion Church in Batticaloa
were targeted by suicide bombers from the Islamic terrorist group National Thowheeth Jama’ath.
At least 290 people have been killed, and another 500 have been wounded.
If you’re in Sri Lanka, please donate blood.
There are people who really, really need it.
The New York Times reports:
The clock hands on the steeple of St. Anthony’s Shrine were stuck at 8:45 a.m.,
the exact moment when the first suicide bomber’s explosion ripped through the wooden pews
as Easter Sunday worshipers were praying.
Minutes later a second suicide blast shattered the Sunday brunch tranquility
at the Shangri-La Hotel’s Table One Restaurant, a favorite of foreign tourists.
Within a few hours on Sunday, suicide bombings hit three Catholic churches and three upscale
hotels in the Indian Ocean island nation of Sri Lanka, still recovering from a quarter-century
civil war in which the suicide bomb was pioneered.
The death toll in the attacks rose to 290, with about 500 people wounded, a police spokesman,
Ruwan Gunasekera, said, although he would not give a breakdown of where the fatalities occurred.
The finance minister, Mangala Samaraweera, called the attacks “a well-coordinated attempt
to create murder, mayhem and anarchy.”
By day’s end, the police said at least 13 people had been arrested in connection with
the attacks in the capital, Colombo, and the cities of Negombo and Batticaloa.
Seven of them were seized at a hide-out after one suspect blew himself up, killing three officers.
In a follow-up this morning, the New York Times adds:
Sri Lankan officials said on Monday that the coordinated bombings of churches and hotels
across the country on Easter Sunday had been carried out by National Thowheeth Jama’ath,
a little-known radical Islamist group, with help from international militants.
Rajitha Senaratne, the Sri Lankan health minister, blamed the group at a news conference in Colombo,
the capital, adding: “There was an international network without which
these attacks could not have succeeded.”
It’s interesting that when a group of devout Muslims in Sri Lanka had to decide
how they should interact with Christians, they came to the exact same conclusion
that many other Muslim groups have come to.
This past January, Muslims killed 20 Christians in church bombings in the Philippines.
Last year, in May, Muslim suicide bombers killed 12 Christians
when they bombed three churches in Indonesia.
In 2017, devout Muslim suicide bombers killed 49 Christians who had gathered for worship
in two churches on Palm Sunday in Egypt.
In 2016, a devout Muslim suicide bomber in Pakistan targeted a Christian Easter celebration
in a park, killing 75 people and wounding 340 more.
We could trace this pattern of church and holiday attacks back nearly fourteen centuries,
but we have to keep in mind that only racists notice patterns like this.
At least, that’s what we were told up until the mosque attacks in New Zealand.
Prior to the Christchurch mosque shootings, we were told that we should never examine
the ideology of a terrorist—that would be racist.
We should never associate terrorist attacks with the ideology that calls for them—
that would be racist.
We should always treat terrorists as loners with mental health problems who should never
be lumped together with their more peaceful counterparts.
Then a white nationalist attacked two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand,
and the rules suddenly changed.
Since the rules have changed, we have to apply the new rules to the Easter Sunday bombings
in Sri Lanka.
Here are four applications of the new rules.
First, after the Christchurch mosque shootings, many Muslims, and many leftists, blamed everyone
who has ever criticized Islam and everyone who has ever criticized anything any Muslim
has ever said or done for the attack.
There were Muslims who blamed Chelsea Clinton for the Christchurch shootings because she
once condemned the anti-Semitic comments of a Muslim.
I was blamed for the Christchurch shootings, even though I condemn violence.
Robert Spencer was blamed for the Christchurch shootings.
The Apostate Prophet was blamed for the Christchurch shootings.
Journalists were blamed for the Christchurch shootings.
Politicians were blamed for the Christchurch shootings.
Who actually carried out the Christchurch shootings?
A white nationalist and self-proclaimed eco-fascist.
But many Muslims and many leftists used the attack to smear anyone they disagree with.
So, to be consistent, we can now blame anyone who has ever criticized Christianity and anyone
who has ever criticized anything any Christian has ever said or done for the church bombings
in Sri Lanka.
Muslims, you’re responsible for the bombings, because you’ve criticized Christianity.
Atheists, you basically built the bombs that were used in the attacks,
because you’ve criticized Christianity.
You journalists who wrote articles about abuse scandals in the Catholic Church, you are the
real terrorists here, because you drew attention to abuse in the Catholic Church.
Now, if this sounds absolutely insane to you, if it sounds completely crazy to blame everyone
who has ever criticized Christianity for the terrorist attacks of a group of Muslims,
keep in mind, I don’t make the rules, I simply enforce them once other people have made them.
So, you are now free to blame anyone you don’t like for the Easter attacks in Sri Lanka.
Second, after the Christchurch shootings, countless women, including the Prime Minister
of New Zealand, wore hijabs to show their solidarity with Muslims.
To be consistent, in order to show their solidary with Christians, Muslims around the world
should now dress like Christians.
The easiest way to do this is to wear a cross.
I expect to see millions of peaceful Muslims wearing crosses now, since Muslims around
the world praised non-Muslim women for wearing the hijab following the Christchurch attack.
Third, after the Christchurch shootings, social media platforms renewed their efforts to ban
anyone who criticizes Islam—especially people who criticize Islam peacefully.
I was blocked from Twitter and Facebook, as were many others.
For the sake of consistency, Twitter and Facebook must now ban anyone who criticizes Christianity—
even if they do so peacefully.
If they don’t start banning anyone who criticizes Christianity, they’re a bunch of hypocrites.
And we know that the righteous geniuses on the Trust and Safety teams of Facebook and
Twitter couldn’t possibly be hypocrites, right?
Fourth, the Christchurch shooter is a white nationalist.
No one hesitated to condemn white nationalism following the attacks.
So his ideology was criticized and condemned, even though there are plenty
of peaceful white nationalists.
The takeaway is that when someone slaughters people in the name of his ideology,
it’s perfectly acceptable to criticize and condemn his ideology,
even if there are many peaceful adherents of his ideology.
This means that, following the church bombings in Sri Lanka, which were carried out by Muslims
in the name of Allah, we can criticize and condemn Islam, even though there are plenty
of peaceful Muslims in the world.
Again, I don’t make the rules here; I just enforce them.
So, in order to honor the rules laid down by Muslims and leftists following the Christchurch
mosque shootings, we must now blame everyone who has ever criticized Christianity and everyone
we disagree with on any issue for the church bombings in Sri Lanka.
We have to insist that Muslims wear crosses for a week or two.
Facebook and Twitter have to ban anyone who criticizes Christianity.
And we absolutely must criticize and condemn Islam, the ideology of the bombers.
Despite my passion for consistency, I don’t think I’ll make much of an effort to enforce
the first three rules.
But that fourth rule—criticizing and condemning the ideology that led to the attack—I like it.
I want to make a slight modification, however.
I’ll say that, if a terrorist carries out a terrorist attack in the name of an ideology
that explicitly calls for violence against non-adherents, the ideology must be examined,
exposed, criticized, and condemned.
I’d go so far as to say that if we ignore or, even worse, defend the ideology that calls
for violence, we dishonor and insult the memory of the victims.
Since I don’t want to dishonor and insult the memory of the victims of the Islamic terrorist
attacks in Sri Lanka, I have no choice but to examine, expose, criticize, and condemn
the ideology that explicitly calls for violence against unbelievers.
To all my Muslim friends who are watching, no take-backs when I criticize and condemn
that child-molesting, wife-beating, slave-trading, pagan rock-kissing, misogynistic, racist terrorist
you call your prophet.
Talk to you again soon.