My Terrorist Doc

"Hiya, doc. Thanks for taking time to see me. I think I tore something in my knee and wondered if you could look it over."

"The problem is that all you western swine are weak in the knee! All of you are corrupt and evil and that is why I and other doctors plot your murder!"

"Huh, doc?"

"What I meant to say is that you are getting older now, Tom. You need to slow it down. Tell me, when I press on this spot does it hurt?"

"Ouch, doc. That hurts."

"You want hurt! I'll give you hurt — the kind of hurt your people give to my people with your imperialist ways. You should know that when you next enjoy a beverage at your neighborhood pub, I will blow you and your friends into the next life!

"Huh, doc?"

"What I meant to say is that you have strained a ligament, Tom. I will x-ray it to get a better understanding, then I will apply my medical training to restore you to good health."

"Great, doc. You studied in Iraq, didn't you? Isn't it wonderful that you could move to America, a free and open country, and enjoy such a good life?

"Ha! I move here to plot the destruction and murder of the American dogs who stand in the way of my religious vision! I and a handful of other fanatics will make you embrace my vision or die! Under the guise of nurturing good health, I plot and plan and one day I hope to kill you!"

"Huh, doc?"

 "What I meant to say is you are right, Tom. America is a great country. It is my great honor to serve — in fact, according to Independent Catholic News, Muslim doctors take an oath to devote their lives to serving other humans, God's most precious creation."

"Wow, that's great, doc. Many American doctors embrace such an oath, too. What a great profession yours is to be able to save and nurture life."

"Nurture life, Tom! Ha! Didn't you see the article in the Telegraph? A group of 45 Muslim doctors have threatened, in internet chat sites, to use car bombs and rocket grenades within America! We apply our sharp intellects to devise new methods to kill you — clever methods that no free and open society can prevent!

"Huh, doc?"

"What I meant to say, Tom, is that you are right. There is no greater gift than to nurture life. That is why being a doctor is such a perfect cover! We can hide among you, pretending to care and give, when what we are really after is your death!

"Huh, doc?"

"You American pigs do not understand who we really are! We laugh at you. You think it is the poor and uneducated among us who strap on vest bombs and sacrifice themselves for the cause."


"But that is not so at all. Our fanatical ideology cuts across all classes, all geographies all levels of intelligence and education. You fail to understand what we are trying to tell you — that we want to kill you. We will kill you unless you accept our fanatical teachings."


"You decadent westerns are corrupted by the excesses of your culture. Your people are confused and unfocused. You are ignorant, too — you do not understand what we are trying to tell you. We will kill you while you sleep!

"Doc, I'm not sure I follow you. You're talking about my knee?"

"Yes, Tom, your knee. What I meant to say is that you need to rest your knee and pack it down with some ice. I want you to take two aspirin. And, if for some reason our car bombs fail to detonate and you survive the night, call me in the morning."

Subscribe to CE
(It's free)

Go to Catholic Exchange homepage

  • Guest

    Wow, I sure don't find that to be humorous.  Scroll back a few hundred years and you will find the vast majority of Christians having the same attitude, "if you're not gonna join us we're gonna kill you."


    Surely you don't really think that all Muslims seek to kill us.  Regardless of education level or anything else, it is the minority of them, the very extreme who seek our demise.  Don't give in to stereotyping or discrimination based on religious views, I think we're all a little better than that by now.  I hope… 

  • Guest

    Todd Davis

    I would like to say that this "doctor" reminds me in some ways of those American doctors who seem one way but in truth they would kill a baby in a second. And act like 'There is no greater gift than to nurture life. '

  • Guest

    See more on what Muslims really think of Catholics:


    This ought to help us interact with Muslim more appropriately and evengelically. 

  • Guest

    I presume this was meant to be humorous.  Having read a great deal on Islam, I fail to see the humor.  It is a demand of their religion to kill all "infidels" (that's us, folks).  That being so (whether we want to believe it or not), when my American doctor left his practice and turned it over to a Muslim, I left, too.  Thanks, but no thanks.

  • Guest

    Let's see: some people don't think it's funny because all Muslims don't want to kill us.  One person thinks it isn't funny because some Muslims do want to kill all of us.

    But it is really funny because humor is based on the unexpected and we weren't expecting Muslim doctors to be trying to kill us.  And that BTW is the point — not the humor.

  • Guest

    Don't fall for that story about how Christians a few hundred years back did the same thing.  That's pure baloney.  If you are referring to the inquisition, that was mostly a run by Spain's government, not by the Church. And certainly not  in the scope we have today with radical Islamists.

  • Guest

    This kind of humor only perpetuates stereotypes and paranoia.  Hmmmm…I like a funny piece same as the next guy, but in this case, I think the jokes cut too close to the bone.  How about making fun of Western paranoia and decadence, to level the playing field?  How would we feel if this were a piece making fun of a priest attempting to seduce a young altar server?  Ouch, right?  Too close to the bone.  We'd do better to show some leadership in fostering interfaith communication and greater understanding among all God's people.


  • Guest

    I could not agree more with 'Walker', Catholic Exchange has lowered its' editorial standard. If a website that was as well known as Catholic exchange on an alternate "left liberal" site ever published an article portraying the catholic church as this portrayed Muslims, Bill Donahue from The Catholic League (whom I do support) would be screaming in every media outlet for an apology. My position on Islam is irrelavent, it is the fact that CatholicExchange constantly whines about how anti-catholic everyone is and then has the gall to bash another religion. This is perhaps why people who do not understand the catholic faith feel free to call us bigots and hypocrites. In the future, maybe you should put a muzzle on arogant writers;e.g.,Mark Shea, and publish the truths about the glory of catholism without feeling the need to belittle others.

    I have lost a lot of respect for Catholicexchange and I have been a fan for years. This site is becoming increasingly neo-conservative and seems to have forgotten the true mission of the Catholic Church. Teach the Truth.

    J.G. Estabrook

  • Guest

    Jge313, I will settle for assisting you to read more carefully. This was NOT about all Muslims at all.  It was about a recent phenomenon in the news.  Also, yes, the purpose of CE is to teach the truth.  But please take a look at the article on Social Communication that we ran on Monday:

    The purpose of CE is not merely to keep reiterating the same dogma over and over to Catholics who already believe. It is to evangelize. It is to engage the culture. Our mission statement is found in the About Us tab above; you might try reading it. You might try looking at our tagline: Your Faith, Your life, Your World.

    Every time we run an article that is about the culture, movies, books, politics, etc., we get this little core of the ghettoized faithful who pitch a fit to tell us that we are losing sight of what it means to be Catholic. Because they want a site that appeals just to them, whereas our vision is to be a site that people searching the 'net for other things will happen upon, be intrigued by, and decide to hang around. Having a column by a popular syndicated columnist like Tom Purcell (who happens to be Catholic, BTW) is a way to draw people in, besides the fact that many of our readers enjoy reading him and if you look at his archived articles you will see that there are many positive comments under them.

    And Walker, we have already run plenty of articles about fostering interfaith communication and understanding of Islam in particular — including a series that Mark Shea did recently and for which the usual subjects damned him to hell.

    Anyway, Jge313, thanks so much for your vote of confidence in this hard-working editorial team of a handful of people who make this huge treasure-trove site available to you everyday for free (except that it costs CE multiple 10s of thousands of dollars every month to be here and a very small percentage of our viewers donate).  Like Mark Shea (who is about as far from a neo-con as you could get) always says, “No good deed will go unpunished.”

    For the glory of Catholicism see the series we have ben running by David Hartline:

  • Guest

    Dear mkochan,

    It seems I hit a nerve, aye? Your condescending attitude is a nice touch, but I am afraid that I do not need your assistance in reading; I can manage quite well without your help. But let us not quibble like adolescents (I am asumming you are not one.).

    Let us look at your reply to my post. It consists of six paragraphs. In paragraph one. In your first sentance you set the tone of your reply as the aforementioned above already states. Now here is where you need to brush up on your own reading skills, for I never stated that the article in mention was about all Muslims, what I did state was that if another prominent website pubished such a parody of Catholicism the catholic league would hit the media outlets screaming for an apology. Your own Mr. Shea would most likley put in his two cents. Then you agree with me and state that the pupose of CE is to teach the Truth (I capitalized the T in truth for a reason.) Then you direct me to an article you published on Mon. All well and fine.

    In paragraph two, you immeadiatly contradict yourself and say that it is not the sole pupose of CE to continue to teach the Truth, but rather it is also the purpose to evangelize. I doubt very much that any Muslim who happened onto CE and read the article would be standing in line to convert. In fact, It would most likely have fostered only more hatered. You state CE wants to engage the culture…well, even radical Muslim terrorists want to do that…but everyone will agree, it is not the best way. There is more to engaging culture than just getting their attention. Then again, you immeadiatly revert and tell me to 'try' reading your mission statement and tagline. Here again you contradict your own words. For a site that does not want to cater to Catholics who already believe, then what "Faith", "life" and "world" are you refering to.

    Now the third paragraph. This by far is your best piece of writing. I mean that sincerely. It flows very well and I honestly believe that every writer tries to write paragraphs this well. But you have drawn some conclusions that are way off the mark. One. I have never written into CE for any issue; News, movies, culture or otherwise. I loved the "this little core of ghettoized faithful" that is classic. I don't quite know who you might be refering to…the SSPX perhaps…I really don't know. Let me assure you, I am not, nor do I feel like I am, in a little core of ghettoized faithful. As I stated, I have been a fan of CE for years, in fact I have you set as my homepage. I did not "pitch a fit" about anything, much less about where CE might be on the Catholic spectrum. The idea of having intriging articles to catch web surfers is a good idea. There is a difference between intriging and insulting. As for Mr. Purcell, he really is not all that popular as far as opinion columist go. Yes, I have read him before (on your site) and some of his coluums were worth the read. Stating that he is Catholic means absolutly nothing…so is John Kerry, Ted Kennedy and Nancy Pelosi…But I hope you never start publishing their views on the Catholic faith.

    The forth paragraph was not even addressed to me. I mentioned Walker as a segue into my post. I certainly hope that no one assumes he or she endores my views…sorry Walker if I caused you any grief.

    The fifth paragraph, with the exception of the dig on me at the beginning, was all basically self praise. As C.S. Lewis has said, he believes the most insidious sin is pride, because it leads to all the other sins, and no one believes they are guilty of it. Yes, I am guilty of it too. By the way, I am in that small percentage of viewers who have donated. As far as Mark Shea being as far away from a neo-conservative as one could get…well I think that might make him, by logic, a left wing liberal…and I highly doubt that he is. I personnally have nothing against Mr.Shea…I used to read his blog…but now it seems that has become CE.

    I did not ask, nor do I need, you to tell me how to find out about the Glories of the Catholic Faith. Belloc, Chesterton, Crocker, Sheen and not to mention the many saints, doctors and Popes have suceeded quite well.

    I must end with stating that I still fail to see how you can justify bigotry and the belittling of another faith, for whatever reason…if it makes you feel better calling it a response to a news story, well that is something you can work out, but no matter how you justify it, an insulting parody of another religion, especialy Islam, That always has been and will continue to be one of the largest threats to Christendom, is by no means an attempt to evangelize or convert anyone.


                                                               John G. Estabrook

  • Guest

    Mr. Estabrook, glad you wrote back. I do not as you put it "justify bigotry and the belittling of another faith."  If I thought that was the intent of Mr. Purcell's article I would not have run it. I do not believe that the article makes fun of the Muslim religion. In fact the article actually brings out that murderous jihadist doctors are acting contrary to the tenets of the Muslim faith, and I quote: "according to Independent Catholic News, Muslim doctors take an oath to devote their lives to serving other humans, God's most precious creation."

    The article also clearly distinguished between jihadists and the majority of the Muslims by saying, "I and a handful of other fanatics will make you embrace my vision or die."

    Rather I believe that the purpose of the article was to make clear to Americans some points that too many Americans are still not getting, i.e. how close to home the threat is and who the enemy is:

    "A group of 45 Muslim doctors have threatened, in internet chat sites, to use car bombs and rocket grenades within America."

    "Our fanatical ideology cuts across all classes, all geographies, all levels of intelligence and education."

    Here is what your argument looks like to me in the additional light of the kind and charitable (choke, choke) email you sent to us today:  We dare not mention, and we especially dare not use satire to point out, that some fanatical Muslims hate us and want to kill us because if we mention this we will insult Muslims who will then hate us and want to kill us.

    But then again, you might be right about how a Muslim would read it. I am actually very willing to entertain criticism of any of our articles and have entertained a great deal even with my own articles.  I have frequently posted well-written, well-thought-out criticisms of articles in our viewer's letters column. But it is called a viewer's letters column because it is for viewers and since you have made your utter disdain for us known and declared your intent to ruin the reputation of CE among other Catholic apostolates, we don't need to worry about you being one of our viewers, do we? I'm sure that in the blindness of his arrogance, Mark Shea won't even notice that you aren't reading him anymore.

  • Guest

    Dear mkochan,

    I truly fail to believe that you cannot see the point that I am making. The muslims are actually a non factor in my argument. Substitute Muslim for any other Faith. Call them protestants, Angelicans, Jehovah Whitnesses, Jews, Unitarians or Hindus. It matters not to the point that I have tried to make.

    The stated goal of CE is to evangelize, inform and educate the public of the Truths of the Catholic faith. Once you satirize and insult someones beliefs; Again I repeat anyones deeply held religious beliefs; Their defenses will immediatly go up and you loose all possiable chances at a disscussion based on reason. Without reason, a person will react with emotions that are not tempered by reason. In other words you are speaking to a deaf ear. You have lost all chances to evangelize, inform or educate.

    As far as my uncharitable email. It was only in response to your equally uncharitable public post addressed to me. My email was not public. You again are jumping to conclusions when you say I have an utter disdain for your website. I know you are intelligent enough to connect the dots. Why would I finacialy support you, have you as my home page since shortly after you changed over from e3mil and HAVE to open your site just to get on the internet. Obviusly, I don't have utter disdain for your website or I would not have it as my homepage. I would have to be a moron or a masochist to do such a thing.

    I challenge you to show me where I ever declared my intent to ruin your reputation among other catholic apostolates. That thought never entered my mind…by the way, you give me much too much credit if you believe that I or any other one person could ruin your reputation on the internet…as I stated before, CE is very well known as being loyal to the Faith. The only referance I made that you could have construed as a threat to ruin your reputation was my intent to contact to review your ratings. For those readers of yours who are not familar with Catholicculture, it is an exellent web site that has many resources. One of which happens to be a rating system for websites claiming to be catholic. the ratings are based on a colored coded system…green is good, yellow use caution and red is to avoid. It is based on fidelity to the faith, content and useability. You know very well CE has a triple green rating. The only reason I contacted CC is that other web sites have been given a yellow rating for being uncharitable and I believe, as you know, that the article you pubished by Mr. Purcell was very uncharitable and served no purpose in evangelizing or informing anyone of anything. You also know that your rating will not change.

    As for worrying about me being one of your viewers, that is just your condasending attiude coming through. Why in the world would you care if I read or don't read your content.

    The bottom line is I am not one to blog or to put up posts. Opinions are cheap…everyone has one. The only reason I did in this case is because I am a fan of CE and I read it daily. Most of your content is informative and eddifying. That is also true of most of your columnists, yourself included…you can put up a fight…whew. The only reason this whole episode has unfolded is because I do care about CE and the Catholic Faith and I felt and still feel that the article was beneath your normal content. As for my comments in regards to Mark Shea…I have my reasons for believing him to be arrogant and I will not state them here or anywhere else…Believe it or not I do respect him; as I stated, I was once a regular reader of his blog and I will not slander or libal him in anyway. He deserves the respect he has. If I have a problem with him I will take it up with him if I so choose, but I would not use a public forum to do so.

    Let me end by saying that I do believe that CE is one of the best Catholic resorces on the web….A bit defensive…but still one of the best. Just because I do not agree with all of your content or all of your columnists does not mean as a whole I do not like your site. Anyone who agreed with everything and everyone on your sight or any site, would have to be an unthinking automatron. I must say mkochan, I will definately be looking forward to reading you in the future. But please, don't feel you must defend Mark Shea…I am quite sure he is very able to do that himself.

  • Guest

    I do not mind disagreement.  In fact, it was my idea to have comment boxes like this below articles for the very purpose of allowing a thousand little disagreements to bloom.

    I do mind however when someone wants not merely to disagree with an article, but to have it erased, to demand that we not publish it. If the demand was based upon something that we had inadvertently allowed on the site that contradicted the Church, we would hasten to remove it. But when it falls into that large realm of issues about which Catholics may legitimately disagree, we prefer to allow the disagreement to air. I can name any number of issues over which readers on both sides have insisted we should remove or should not have published articles they disagree with.

    I understand your point perfectly well. You think that this article mocks the Muslim faith and that we should not mock any faith because 1. we object to it when others mock our faith (violation of the Golden Rule) and 2. it gives them (Muslims) "ammunition for hatred against the Catholic Faith" and "will not convert them" therefore 3. "it only serves to make the battle for Christendom all that much difficult." (Quotations from your email.)

    Everything you say is predicated upon the idea that this article mocks Islam. I disagree.  I do not think that it mocks Islam. I think it satirizes a certain recently-prominent group of violent jihadists, not anyone's deeply held beliefs. To be more precise, the satire is really directed toward Americans, symbolized by the patient, who are deaf and blind to the threat. I think you have read it incorrectly. I have provided several instances from within the text of the article that I believe refute your claim that it mocks Islam or is disrespectfully directed at all Muslims.

    You wrote: "Just because I do not agree with all of your content or all of your columnists does not mean as a whole I do not like your site."  But why is that? I mean this is the same site about which you wrote:

    Catholic Exchange has lowered its' editorial standard

    CatholicExchange constantly whines about how anti-catholic everyone is and then has the gall to bash another religion

    I have lost a lot of respect for Catholicexchange

    This site is becoming increasingly neo-conservative and seems to have forgotten the true mission of the Catholic Church

    And that was just in your first comment on the article. In your subsequent email you wrote:

    I have felt that your content lately sounds more like preaching to the choir than teaching the True Faith.

    (God forbid that any of us who work here should become "defensive" after all this. Besides you are a donor, so you have paid for the right to beat us up.)

    The bottom line is that this whiny, disrespectable, neo-conservative site with lowered standards that has forgotten the true mission of the Church and is merely preaching to the choir is one that you "like" and are a "fan of."

    I am tempted to invite you to go "like" some other Catholic site, but I really don't want to inflict you on any of our co-religionists.  Maybe you can find a Lutheran site to be a fan of instead.

  • Guest

    I think we would all do well to imagine Jesus is reading these posts. 

    Just a thought.


  • Guest

    to scontini

    No no no, it's all true about what Christians did back then. the spanish government was all christian. You don't need the crime to be approved by the pope in person.  We are speaking about Christians in general.

    And not only the inquisitions. Crusades too. Including those in Eastern Europea. They were openly or tacitly approved by the pope ,carried out by the Christians. They killed everybody that didn't adopt Christianity. That's common knowledge. What muslims are doing now, killing a few hundred people in terrorist acts per year doesnt even amount to one per cent of what christans did in ,say, the Middle Ages.