I've brought up the issue of consistency several times. But I'd like to raise it again.
In the following passage, a man points out two alternatives for Muhammad. If Muhammad is victorious over the Quraysh, he will be remembered as the man who slaughtered his own tribesmen. If the Quraysh are victorious over him, Muhammad's followers will abandon him. Think about Abu Bakr's response:
Urwah went to the Prophet and began speaking to him. The Prophet spoke as he had spoken to Budayl. Then Urwah said: "Muhammad, tell me: if you extirpate [i.e. exterminate] your tribesmen, have you ever heard of any of the Arabs who destroyed his own race before you? And if the contrary comes to pass, by God I see both prominent people and rabble who are likely to flee and leave you." Abu Bakr said, "Go suck the clitoris of al-Lat! Would we flee and leave him?" (History of al-Tabari, Volume 8, p. 76)
Al-Lat was a goddess worshipped by Urwah (yes, this is the same al-Lat praised by Muhammad in the infamous "Satanic Verses"). Notice that Abu Bakr responds to Urwah's reasonable comment with an extraordinarily offensive insult against Urwah's religious beliefs.
What would happen if someone on this blog were to utter such an insult about Muhammad? Muslims would be shouting from the rooftops that we're offensive, bigoted, hate-filled, racist Islamophobes. Yahya Snow would go around telling people to rebuke us (as he's doing right now). And yet Abu Bakr was free to insult people's religious beliefs in the most offensive terms imaginable. Hypocrisy anyone?