We have now included an option to change the language of the site for those that would like to view or type in another language. Men of all nations and all languages are welcome on The Independent Man.
Over 200 dead in a coordinated attack at several churches.
The war on Christians wages on world wide, and few have any interest in reporting it. Over 200 people died in a coordinated attack in Sri Lanka, including six locations simultaneously attacked. The hate that is continually flowing from the Islam extremist is only satisfied when they are killing all others. The irony is what they will do and have done to feminist, while the feminist fight to protect the Islam extremist. I have no sorrow for the feminist, however, as it is the innocent children that suffer most by these females' actions.
"The six nearly simultaneous blasts—followed hours later by two more explosions—marked the bloodshed as among the worst since the South Asian country’s 26-year civil war ended a decade ago, a spokesperson for the Sri Lanka police said."
"Remember, you're fighting for this woman's honor, which is probably more than she ever did."
Groucho Marx: Duck Soup (1933)
Here are a couple of quotes that, when taken together, clearly indicate who we're dealing with here:
"Defense Minister Ruwan Wijewardena described the attacks as a terrorist attack by religious extremists, though no one immediately claimed responsibility. Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe said he feared the violence could trigger instability in the country and its economy."
It says religious extremists? Which groups are extremists? While it doesn't say immediately, the article does reference a group in the last paragraph. But we'll get to that. Here's another quote:
"An official told the Associated Press that at least two of the church blasts were believed to have been coordinated attack carried out by suicide bombers."
So we've got "religious extremists" who, at least in two cases used suicide bombers to blow up churches, are thing becoming more clear now?
2nd to last paragraph reads:
"Sri Lankan security forces in 2009 defeated Tamil Tiger rebels who had fought to create an independent homeland for the country's ethnic minority Tamils. The U.N. initially estimated the death toll from 26 years of fighting to be about 100,000 but a U.N. experts' panel later said some 45,000 ethnic Tamils may have been killed in the last months of the fighting alone."
By the way, if you read the article the above quote is disjointed. There is no explanation as to why it's there. The author doesn't say whether he/she is blaming this on the Tamil's, or even tells us why the Tamil people are relevant to this. Is he/she saying Tamils are terrorists? When did these last months of fighting occur, was it recent? or was it ten years ago when the author says the Sri Lankan civil war ended? It appears that someone is trying to say something without saying it.
A quick web search shows that there are two groups of Tamils in Sri Lanka, Indian (dot Indian not the feather kind) and Sri Lankan Tamils. Guess what thought? There are a significant amount of MUSLIMS in Sri Lanka who speak the Tamil language as their primary means of spoken communication. Guess what? The Sri Lankan civil war had two factions. The main Sri Lankan ethnic group and the Tamil Tigers who were MUSLIMS. These Tamil Muslims fought to have their own independent part of Sri Lanka, why? Because of their religion.
So warp ahead to this article. It places the blame for these attacks squarely on local Muslims. Namely the Tamil Muslims. But it doesn't outright say so, actually it kind of does but you need to know what that 2nd to the last paragraph is talking about and infer what's the message is. So yes, they're saying without saying. THIS WAS A MUSLIM ATTACK ON CHRISTIAN CHURCHES!!!