@Baxxter

I already have, with you directly.

When a large private entity insists that one deals with an outside agent for a number of years, when that outside agent asks for detailed documentation that is not passed on to that private entity, when that outside agent disappears completely on being asked a pertinent and direct question as to his links with that country’s security, when that private entity washes its hands of all knowledge of having asked one to deal with that person, then something irregular is afoot.

So irregular, that in other countries, this falls under “fraud.”

Especially so (irregular), when this is accompanied by other similar quasi-imperceptible similar moves at that level.

That level only comes under him and matches local “surveillance” moves in direction.

There. For now.

Funny you state the Nazis were not Muslim. Although that is a true statement technically, If you did some research you may be surprised how ironic it is. Start with the memoirs of Albert Speer (Inside the Third Reich). Or use a search engine. But then again you are just toeing the PC line. And please, grow up, don’t embroil Christianity in what’s happening right now- no one is buying into it.

Tobaggi is still a mystery maybe your Italian is not so good but in summary nobody is certain exactly why he was murdered … that kind of defeats purpose if it were a terrorist attack.

Is the muslim fundamentally a violent religion? Here’s a good study about that

http://www.meforum.org/1003/the-religious-foundations-of-suicide-bombings

You in general and plural are missing mine and many of those who like me view these attacks as an attack not just at silencing voices but also a way of life. Our financial and democratic systems, freedom of speech, gender equality. Even defining these as terrorist attacks is wrong since there is no real political aim other than vindicating a perceived insult to a prophet whose not even around to condone or condemn these acts.

How can you even start to compare these idiocies with terrorists fighting for liberation or a political ideal no matter how wrong that may still be?

You are so way off the mark its hilarious. This religion you are defending the way it is constructed advocates that no other law can or may supersede it. So much so that it has its own tranche of punishments covering all aspects of society.

We ditched that King Georges head and even before that it was never an absolutist church over King or Queen

Consider the possibility that your readers may be justified to resent being considered stupid and ignorant simply because they disagree with a blog writer who thinks that the Holy Eucharist is a rice paper wafer.

[Daphne – I don’t think I have made myself clear. As a liberal, I respect people’s religious beliefs and regret the fact that so many people do not understand that freedom of worship is an inalienable human right. Some people believe a round piece of rice paper is the body of Christ and other people believe it is blasphemous to depict living things (for we forget that it is not only the depiction of Mohammed that is proscribed) and neither belief is any of my business. Religious belief only becomes a problem when it begins to interfere with the rights of non-consenting third parties, on the principle that your right to swing your fist ends where another person’s face begins. I absolutely do not care what people believe – it’s their affair and not mine. I have my own beliefs and they are nobody’s business either. I wish people would be more private about religion all round.]

Please do not attribute to religion what should be correctly attributed to rulers and politicians acting against the teaching of the gospel.

Islam is an intolerant religion per se because the Holy Kuran is intolerant of all “infidels” and preaches a jihad binding on all its devotees if healthy adult males. Muslim terrorists actually put into practice what the Kuran teaches. I quoted chapter and verse.

Christianity officially preaches love of neighbour, even an enemy. Those who do not follow that doctrine are personally intolerant and deviating from official Christian doctrine.

Please be fair. Do not put all the religions as practiced today in the same basket. They do not all fit there.

Mrs Daphne Caruana Galizia,

Are you serious when you write that the Islam of today is no more intolerant than the Catholicism of today?

Do you want to be taken seriously when you compare the Christendom of many centuries ago with the Islam we are experiencing today?

Do you see no difference between the separation of Church from State as practiced in Christendom and the identification of Mosque with Islamic states today?

Please excuse me from reading you any more if that is so.

[Daphne – It is not religions which are intolerant, but people. A religion cannot be intolerant. Any forms of intolerance are manifestations of human will.]

Please elaborate.

I withdraw everything I said because I think I might have misunderstood Daphne. I’m not sure whether she was referring to Malta or the entire European continent. I assume it was the former, so her point holds.

http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2015-01-08/local-news/New-Home-Affairs-Minister-urges-media-not-to-undermine-institutions-6736128366