This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Please Don’t Kill Everyone Who “Looks Muslim” Just Because the Boston Terrorists Were Allegedly Muslim
Without going down any rabbit holes about who carried out the Boston bombings (you can go down some here if you'd like) - or bringing up previous Chechen terrorist frame-ups (by the Russians) - I'd like to take one contrarian view ...
Maybe we shouldn't "kill all Muslims" just because the Boston terrorists appear to be Chechen Muslims.
Specifically - after 9/11 - Americans murdered a number of people because they “looked Muslim” … even though they were actually from a completely different religion.
Yesterday, a Muslim woman with an infant was attacked by someone blaming Muslims for the Boston terrorist attacks.
There is also a remote possibility that rogue fundamentalist Christian military personnel could start a nuclear war against Muslim nations.
Many are writing that the Boston bombers – Chechen brothers Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev – were devout Muslims.
If they were - in fact - the Boston bombers, then we are all for taking them out by any means necessary. And we have no hesitation in giving them the death penalty if they are convicted in a court of law.
However, we congratulate the FBI for taking terrorist # 2 alive (here's an actual photo of his capture).
After all, we can gain much more valuable intelligence from a terrorist in custody than a dead terrorist.
I am not Muslim. But – in an attempt to minimize the wave of anti-Muslim violence which may unleashed, people might want to note that Tamerlan looked more like a Westernized hustler than a devout Muslim:
(that’s his Mercedes in the background).
And Dzhokhar looks somewhat Westernized as well:
He is allegedly a pothead. 2 days after the Boston terrorist attack, he worked out in the gym and went to a college party.
Similarly, the 9/11 hijackers used cocaine and drank alcohol, slept with prostitutes and attended strip clubs … but they did not worship at any mosque. See this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, and this. Hardly the acts of devout Muslims.
More importantly, Muslim scholars tell me that Islam prohibits the killing of innocent civilians. So terrorists are not true Muslims. Those claiming they are committing terrorist acts as Muslims are as credible as the Norwegian murderer or Timothy McVeigh trying to say they were following Christians values.
As we’ve previously noted:
If we ban mosques because some Muslims are murderers, we should also ban churches because Timothy McVeigh was a Christian.
Indeed, we should also ban synagogues because some Jews commit terrorism (see second bulleted paragraph).
Of course, anyone who sees their religion as the “good guys” and the other guy’s religion as “evil” is living in a cartoon.
As Christian writer and psychiatrist M. Scott Peck explained, there are different stages of spiritual maturity. Fundamentalism – whether it be Muslim, Christian, Jewish or Hindu fundamentalism – is an immature stage of development.
[Remember that Adolph Hitler professed to be a Christian, and churches in Nazi Germany mainly supported Adolph Hitler's unjust fascist policies. And Christian, Jewish and Muslim governments all carry out terror against their own people ... and then try to blame it on the other guy.
There are peaceful, contemplative Muslim sects - think the poet Rumi the poet and Sufis - and violent sects, just as there are contemplative Christian orders and violent Christian sects. ]
Indeed, a Christian fundamentalist who kills others in the name of religion is much more similar to a Muslim fundamentalist who kills other in the name of his religion than to a Christian who peacefully fights for justice and truth, helps the poor, or serves to bring hope to the downtrodden.
***
The war on terror is largely a religious war. [Just today, a new report shows that the Air Force uses Christian and Old Testament teachings to justify the launch of nuclear weapons.]
As I pointed out in January:
ABC News is reporting that U.S. military weapons are inscribed with secret ‘Jesus’ Bible codes [the military subsequently endorsed this practice]
Conservative Christians were the biggest backers of the Iraq war …
One of the top Pentagon officials involved in the Iraq war – General William Boykin – literally:
Sees the “war on terror” as a religious war between Judeo-Christian civilization and Satan, with Islam of course cast in the latter role.
Jeremy Scahill describes Boykin as:
A Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence under Bush. Boykin was part of Donald Rumsfeld’s inner circle at the Pentagon where he was placed in charge of hunting “high-value targets.” Boykin was one of the key U.S. officials in establishing what critics alleged was death-squad-type activity in Iraq.
Boykin’s crusade is also important because one of his assigned jobs was:
Speeding up the flow of intelligence on terrorist leaders to combat teams in the field so that they can attack top-ranking terrorist leaders. It can easily be speculated that it is this urgency to obtain intelligence, and an uncompromising religious outlook backed by a [crusader] mentality, that has led to the lower echelons in the US military to adopt Saddam Hussein-like brutalities.
Moreover, the U.S. military has just been busted trying to convert Afghanis to Christianity (the same thing happened in Iraq).
As Scahill notes:
What’s more, the center of this evangelical operation is at the huge US base at Bagram, one of the main sites used by the US military to torture and indefinitely detain prisoners.
The bottom line is that – while torture was ordered by the highest level Bush administration officials in order to create a false link between 9/11 and Iraq – it seems like many of those who enthusiastically rallied around torture looked at it, literally, as a religious crusade.
As I wrote in 2009:
According to French President Chirac, Bush told him that the Iraq war was needed to bring on the apocalypse:
In Genesis and Ezekiel Gog and Magog are forces of the Apocalypse who are prophesied to come out of the north and destroy Israel unless stopped. The Book of Revelation took up the Old Testament prophesy:
“And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.”
Bush believed the time had now come for that battle, telling Chirac:
“This confrontation is willed by God, who wants to use this conflict to erase his people’s enemies before a New Age begins”…
There can be little doubt now that President Bush’s reason for launching the war in Iraq was, for him, fundamentally religious. He was driven by his belief that the attack on Saddam’s Iraq was the fulfilment of a Biblical prophesy in which he had been chosen to serve as the instrument of the Lord.
And British Prime Minister Tony Blair long-time mentor, advisor and confidante said:
“Tony’s Christian faith is part of him, down to his cotton socks. He believed strongly at the time, that intervention in Kosovo, Sierra Leone – Iraq too – was all part of the Christian battle; good should triumph over evil, making lives better.”
Mr Burton, who was often described as Mr Blair’s mentor, says that his religion gave him a “total belief in what’s right and what’s wrong”, leading him to see the so-called War on Terror as “a moral cause”…
Anti-war campaigners criticised remarks Mr Blair made in 2006, suggesting that the decision to go to war in Iraq would ultimately be judged by God.
Given that the Iraq war really was a crusade, the fact that the Pentagon is now saying that it may have to leave troops in Iraq for another decade shows that the crusade is still ongoing under Obama.
Indeed, churchgoers are more likely to back torture of suspected terrorists than atheists (and see this), and torture is apparently still continuing under the Obama administration.
As we noted in 2010, Arab terrorists are not actually motivated by religion at all:
University of Chicago professor Robert A. Pape – who specializes in international security affairs – points out:
Extensive research into the causes of suicide terrorism proves Islam isn’t to blame — the root of the problem is foreign military occupations.
Wait, what? That can’t be right!
But as Pape explains:
Each month, there are more suicide terrorists trying to kill Americans and their allies in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other Muslim countries than in all the years before 2001 combined.***
New research provides strong evidence that suicide terrorism such as that of 9/11 is particularly sensitive to foreign military occupation, and not Islamic fundamentalism or any ideology independent of this crucial circumstance. Although this pattern began to emerge in the 1980s and 1990s, a wealth of new data presents a powerful picture.
More than 95 percent of all suicide attacks are in response to foreign occupation, according to extensive research [co-authored by James K. Feldman - former professor of decision analysis and economics at the Air Force Institute of Technology and the School of Advanced Airpower Studies] that we conducted at the University of Chicago’s Project on Security and Terrorism, where we examined every one of the over 2,200 suicide attacks across the world from 1980 to the present day. As the United States has occupied Afghanistan and Iraq, which have a combined population of about 60 million, total suicide attacks worldwide have risen dramatically — from about 300 from 1980 to 2003, to 1,800 from 2004 to 2009. Further, over 90 percent of suicide attacks worldwide are now anti-American. The vast majority of suicide terrorists hail from the local region threatened by foreign troops, which is why 90 percent of suicide attackers in Afghanistan are Afghans.
Israelis have their own narrative about terrorism, which holds that Arab fanatics seek to destroy the Jewish state because of what it is, not what it does. But since Israel withdrew its army from Lebanon in May 2000, there has not been a single Lebanese suicide attack. Similarly, since Israel withdrew from Gaza and large parts of the West Bank, Palestinian suicide attacks are down over 90 percent.
Some have disputed the causal link between foreign occupation and suicide terrorism, pointing out that some occupations by foreign powers have not resulted in suicide bombings — for example, critics often cite post-World War II Japan and Germany. Our research provides sufficient evidence to address these criticisms by outlining the two factors that determine the likelihood of suicide terrorism being employed against an occupying force.
The first factor is social distance between the occupier and occupied. The wider the social distance, the more the occupied community may fear losing its way of life. Although other differences may matter, research shows that resistance to occupations is especially likely to escalate to suicide terrorism when there is a difference between the predominant religion of the occupier and the predominant religion of the occupied.
Religious difference matters not because some religions are predisposed to suicide attacks. Indeed, there are religious differences even in purely secular suicide attack campaigns, such as the LTTE (Hindu) against the Sinhalese (Buddhists).
Rather, religious difference matters because it enables terrorist leaders to claim that the occupier is motivated by a religious agenda that can scare both secular and religious members of a local community — this is why Osama bin Laden never misses an opportunity to describe U.S. occupiers as “crusaders” motivated by a Christian agenda to convert Muslims, steal their resources, and change the local population’s way of life.
The second factor is prior rebellion. Suicide terrorism is typically a strategy of last resort, often used by weak actors when other, non-suicidal methods of resistance to occupation fail. This is why we see suicide attack campaigns so often evolve from ordinary terrorist or guerrilla campaigns, as in the cases of Israel and Palestine, the Kurdish rebellion in Turkey, or the LTTE in Sri Lanka.
One of the most important findings from our research is that empowering local groups can reduce suicide terrorism. In Iraq, the surge’s success was not the result of increased U.S. military control of Anbar province, but the empowerment of Sunni tribes, commonly called the Anbar Awakening, which enabled Iraqis to provide for their own security. On the other hand, taking power away from local groups can escalate suicide terrorism. In Afghanistan, U.S. and Western forces began to exert more control over the country’s Pashtun regions starting in early 2006, and suicide attacks dramatically escalated from this point on.
***
The first step is recognizing that occupations in the Muslim world don’t make Americans any safer — in fact, they are at the heart of the problem.
But surely Pape and his team of University of Chicago researchers are wrong. Surely other security experts disagree, right?
No.
The top security experts – conservative hawks and liberal doves alike – agree that waging war in the Middle East weakens national security and increases terrorism. See this, this, this, this, this and this.
As one of the top counter-terrorism experts (the former number 2 counter-terrorism expert at the State Department) told me, starting wars against states which do not pose an imminent threat to America’s national security increases the threat of terrorism because:
One of the principal causes of terrorism is injuries to people and families.
***
And its not only war in general as an abstract concept. The methods we’re using to wage war are increasing terrorism.
As one example, torture reduces our national security and creates new terrorists.
Unfortunately, we are continuing to indiscriminately kill civilians using drone strikes, and we are continuing to torture innocent people (see this, this, this, and this).
This is not a question of being a “Muslim-sympathizer”. I am not a Muslim …. This isn’t about religion at all.
Its all about being practical in protecting our national security.
»
- advertisements -
"Similarly, the 9/11 hijackers used cocaine and drank alcohol, slept with prostitutes and attended strip clubs … but they did not worship at any mosque."
Wait a minute, I thought...oh never mind...I'm gonna go take a nap. Squire nmewn shot his first gobbler this morning around 7:30. We had to get up at 3:30 AM to be in position.
Nineteen pounds, ten & quarter inch beard, 7/8" spurs, from 40yds out.
Nice bird...zzz ;-)
"Squire nmewn shot his first gobbler this morning around 7:30. We had to get up at 3:30 AM to be in position."
You tell young squire great job from a old fart who would rather hunt turkeys then chase young girls. Man I bet that was a sight to see, was Tom struttin his stuff, all blown up, wings dragging the ground, dancing around that jake decoy wantin to whooop his ars?
I will and yes it was struttin...lol.
The hen came by first, then ole Tom followed by six jakes. Tom lost track of her (and so did we) and he went behind a clump of trees to our front with the jakes coming up behind and to our right. We were having squire set up on one of the jakes (to our right) thinking Tom had split the scene...called once...and here came Tom around the left side of the trees and strutted straight across our front (left to right) going toward the six jakes (and our decoy) looking to kick someones ass.
He was about 12:30 and me and my buddy was alternately whispering "shoot him_____, wait a minute____" to squire (trees & brush to our front) and he's trying to process it all while tracking him over the barrel...lol...then we both whispered SHOOT HIM!
BOOM!
So he's flopping around and we're tellin squire about the danger of his spurs when he's like that...and here comes the six jakes who proceed to do what they do...re-assert the "pecking order". Well we decide enough is enough (about 45 seconds) and reveal ourselves so the jakes would take off...went over and broke his neck.
We setup in a blind (pre-positioned Wed.) around 5:30. It was overcast & drizzling rain so they were late this morning, still we were done by 9:00 and back at the restauraunt by 9:30 for some grits & eggs and strut a little ourselves ;-)
Damm! you are all powerful Big Men.
Seen a couple of Bambi's too, we left them to the fates of the coyotes, bears and panthers who for some odd reason, think of them as food ;-)
excellent nmewn!
Congrats.
Always a great feeling for a boy to start putting meat on the table.
Taught my girls to shoot too. Quite a confidence builder.
Thanks, I think he's hooked now ;-)
Timothy McVeigh's fuel oil-fertilizer bomb did not (and could not) have done that damage to the Oklahoma City federal building. He was another one of the government's patsies for another one of the government's control of the sheep by terror programs.
http://www.sott.net/article/261116-A-Noble-Lie-The-Oklahoma-City-Bombing...
"Timothy McVeigh's fuel oil-fertilizer bomb"
Go back to high school chemistry and visit West, Texas. And try again.
You're comparing a 25% loaded truck to an entire factory? Strange how the truck bomb was able to take down the federal building but hardly did any damage to the buildings across the street, not much further away. Try again
Ammonium nitrate took out a whole town in Germany after the war.
A large pile of fertilizer got wet and hardened. Some genius decided a few stick of dynamite would loosen it up and make it usable again. High octane shit, whether you know what you're doing or not.
How much amonium nitrate? Was it a truck or a factory? The truck bomb on the WTC in 1993 didn't do much damage
Uh George, the "9/11 hijackers" have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt to NOT have been Muslims. They were operatives from our own government and Israel.
Why do you continue to imply that there really were 19 Muslims under the direction of Osama bin Laden that were responsible for 9/11 when you know that isn't and cannot be true?
Serfer dude...
you jus drove into the wrong neighbourhood...
now get back in the half ton n back up really slow...
till yu outta Hymietown.
BUT YET OBL TOOK CREDIT FOR IT IN HIS OWN TV BROADCAST!!!
No he didn't. An OBL imposter did. Except for the hat, the imposter didn't look much like OBL.
and I am just agreeing with you guys by posting the following information
I think when a man has everything to lose and nothing to gain from his statement that there might, just might be some truth to it...
[Dr. Steve Pieczenik is one of the world's most experienced international crisis managers and hostage negotiators. He has twenty years experience in resolving international crises for five U.S. administrations.
Dr. Pieczenik received his B.A. from Cornell University, trained in Psychiatry at Harvard and has both an M.D. from Cornell University Medical College and a Ph.D. in International Relations from M.I.T.
He was the first psychiatrist ever to receive a PhD. focusing on international relations, and is the only psychiatrist to ever have served as a Deputy Assistant Secretary of State. He served four presidents as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under Nixon, Ford, Carter, and Bush Sr. and was a Senior Policy Planner under president Reagan. Dr. Pieczenik worked directly with, and reported directly to, Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger, Cyrus Vance, George Schultz and James Baker, as well as the respective White Houses. Dr. Pieczenik was drafted into the Vietnam War. He was assigned in the Public Health Services with the rank of Navy Captain (0-6)... He was subsequently offered a promotion to Rear Admiral (0-7), which he refused on the grounds that he felt honored enough to serve his country, did not want to take a pension and wished to return to civilian life to follow his passions as a physician, entrepreneur and novelist.]
https://stevepieczenik.com/bio.html
[Pieczenik said that Osama Bin Laden died in 2001, “Not because special forces had killed him, but because as a physician I had known that the CIA physicians had treated him and it was on the intelligence roster that he had marfan syndrome,” adding that the US government knew Bin Laden was dead before they invaded Afghanistan.
Marfan syndrome is a degenerative genetic disease for which there is no permanent cure. The illness severely shortens the life span of the sufferer.
“He died of marfan syndrome, Bush junior knew about it, the intelligence community knew about it,” said Pieczenik, noting how CIA physicians had visited Bin Laden in July 2001 at the American Hospital in Dubai.
“He was already very sick from marfan syndrome and he was already dying, so nobody had to kill him,” added Pieczenik, stating that Bin Laden died shortly after 9/11 in his Tora Bora cave complex.]
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2011/05/05/osama-bin-laden-already...
You're half right. They were Muslims who were used as tools by the elites to turn American into a prison state. OBL himself was a tool and CIA asset
What did OBL have to do with 9/11? He denied being involved. There is no credible evidence he had any involvement. The FBI claimed they didn't have any evidence to charge him with being involved with 9/11.
I never claimed he was involved. I said he was a tool. He died in 2002, but was still used as a tool until 2012. He was a boogeyman who was used to scare the sheeple.
As usual,your poorly thought out ramblings are a complete crock of shit. True - not all muslims are terrorists but most terrorists are muslim. Look it up. It's math, dumbass. In case you haven't noticed due to the tinfoil up your ass, these two are also muslims acting in the name of Islam.
Also, again, stop defiling the name of our founding father by attaching it to your purile nonsense.
your idea of 'math' looks startlingly similar to Walt Disneys' extravaganza known as "the Sorcerors' Apprentice"...
aka "Fantasia"...
"founding father"???
Strongly suspect most of you Muzzie Bashers had a fondling father! Definite damage to the synapses. You have my sympathies...of course!
"..most terrorists are muslim."
Which terrorists are you referring to?
A gang of 5 men who sit around in their hut and discuss how they might overthrow the present govt is a gangof poor men with nothing..no job, no hope for the future, living in rubble thanks to the bombs which destroyed their lives.
who is the terrorist. Who is shooting American presidents? Not muslims. I think I know who the terrorists are. Ifyou would leave those people alone, they would bring their people up to the 21 st century. Bomb them back into the dark ages and expect this because what else do they have besides their god?
Jewish people would like nothing better than to wipe every arab off the face of the earth and anyone else who stands in their way of monopolizing this planet under the guise of religion.
Defiling the founding fathers is the intent. Typical propaganda style association.
Reading through these comments I see some very confused, very stupid, very hickish people. Maybe get out of Bumblefuck county every once in awhile and meet some people outside of your inbred genetic pool.
Lost Wages
Lots of blather on the site today. Either a CIA clusterfuck plot or Allah-annointed slap at the Great Satan.
Oh. And tell us about your pedigree. I gotta put another pot on the floor of my trailer- the rains dripping in.
Nice.
A slightly more sophisticated...and hip...version of Kill the Muzzie bastards now!
You rock dude! But no moss on this rollin stone. Sorry, no sale.
Nice try buzzy but be more specific or stfu. Using words like "hickish" "Bumblefuck" and inbred only implies Northeast cracktowns with railroad tracks and names like Kennedy and Skakel.
"Similarly, the 9/11 hijackers used cocaine and drank alcohol, slept with prostitutes and attended strip clubs"
They should have run for congress, they could have cause much more damage if elected.
They did. And they have.
Nosism doesn't elevate this piece above typical straw man dreck.
Ever see a muslime koranimal with one of those faggoty COEXIST bumber stickers made up of religious symbols?
Nope. It's always some white Obama Gay in a Subaru on his way to an athiest meeting.
Religion of peace I tells ya.
A little like Christianity, and its murderous proselytizing in the America's.
Lets not forget the Inquisition and other 'minor' matters also.
Organisized religion is corrupt because its run by humans,just
like governments.
Keep in mind that only the state has the power of coercion. The inquisitions you are referring to were run by the government.
deleted dup post
Bolshevism and Chinese Communist were organized atheists movements that killed tens of millions apiece.
The most radical fundamentalist intolerant religion is atheism
I would put Hinduism in the number #1 spot.
Atheism is not a religion.
"Religion cannot and should not be replaced by atheism. Religion needs to go away and not be replaced by anything. Atheism is not a religion. It’s the absence of religion, and that’s a wonderful thing.
Religion is not morality. Theists ask me, “If there’s no god, what would stop me from raping and killing everyone I want to.” My answer is always: “I, myself, have raped and killed everyone I want to ... and the number for both is zero.” Behaving morally because of a hope of reward or a fear of punishment is not morality. Morality is not bribery or threats. Religion is bribery and threats. Humans have morality. We don’t need religion.
Religion is faith. Faith is belief without evidence. Belief without evidence cannot be shared. Faith is a feeling. Love is also a feeling, but love makes no universal claims. Love is pure. The lover reports on his or her feelings and needs nothing more. Faith claims knowledge of a world we share but without evidence we can share. Feeling love is beautiful. Feeling the earth is 6,000 years old is stupid.
Religion is often just tribalism: pride in a group one was born into, a group that is often believed to have “God” on its side. We don’t need to replace tribalism with anything other than love for all humanity. Let’s do that, okay?
Religion also includes fellowship, joy, compassion, service and great music, and those can be replaced by ... fellowship, joy, compassion, service and great music.
Atheism is the absence of religion. We don’t really need atheism. We just need to get rid of religion."
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/01/22/is-atheism-a-religion/at...
To be free of religion is to be irreligious. There are religions free of theism, such as Buddhism. And there are theistic metaphysical constructs from theoretical physics, which are free of religion, such as some versions of the Strong Anthropic Principle, in which the universe exists by the will of the collective consciousness of its observers.
Atheism is the belief that there are no higher constructive intelligences than that of individual men. The problem is that universe is a big place, with as many dimensions as we can imagine, and it is hard to justify that every little corner of it is free of such beings.
The problem with zealots who call themselves Atheists, are believers in a thing without good justification, yet duplicitously claim to abhor faith. That kind of arrogance, transposed into the machinery of war and murder leads to holocausts. A religious theist at least believes they may be judged badly for their actions by the powers above them. The atheist thinks himself above judgement. Man becomes the judge and there is no moral authority to serve, only Law, which bends to the most powerful. Zealous atheism leads directly to fascism.
Kind of like the big bang theory where matter and energy formed out of nothing and blew up to form the universe? That defies the basic laws of physics
People who say they have had a religous epiphany use that as evidence for their faith. As a construct based upon experience, is that so bad?
'Kind of like the big bang theory where matter and energy formed out of nothing and blew up to form the universe? That defies the basic laws of physics'
Modern physics says that gravity is a form of antienergy, and it balances out the energy to sum to zero.
Personally I think we should be looking at the Big Bang as a collision intersection surface of two colliding hyperuniverses.
No, there is actually evidence for the Big Bang theory, such as the universal background microwave radiation that is widely interpreted as the residual "glow" from the event. And it is erroneous to claim that the purported Big Bang defies the laws of physics --- those laws were presumably created as a result of the Big Bang itself.
In any case, I agree with the previous poster, and will go further with his assertion --- faith, being belief without evidence, is equivalent to insanity.
The reason the Big Bang theory arose is because astronomers note that stars tend to be all moving away from us. Assuming that our position in the cosmos is not unique, that suggests the distance between any two points is increasing over time.
A way to explain that is by looking at what happens to two points on a balloon as it is inflated, the points diverge on the entire surface. The centre of such a universe lies inside the balloon, which is not on the surface, thus according to the Big Bang prototypes, the centre of the universe is not inside the universe.
The problem is in the details, when you put the geometry into Einstein's Law of Gravity, you get results that do not tally with astronomy, thus the need to hypothesize dark matter. One could say that such a need is the failure of the theory.
Yes, "science", to be more precise "mainstream science of 50 odd years ago" is the new intolerant religion.
In it there are offshoots like the nuclear death cult, with it's "hormesis" revelation (which will kill us all if we let them).
Read what I wrote, the last few words are for you.
Pretty much every local government is run by people in it for the money. Corruption under every stone, but I cannot say the same for every little church.