I saw the future a couple of years ago while in Cologne, Germany.... [W]e toured the city and wanted to see the cathedral. The square around the cathedral was filled with protesting Turkish Muslims, who took umbrage at some television show the week before.... When a native was asked about this, he replied that they come out every Sunday to complain about some other perceived slight. The Permanently Pi**ed Off Religion of Peace. –– American Thinker poster Easyed43, May 1, 2011
There is a pernicious new species of bigot abroad in the land: supposedly conservative, claiming (usually) to be Christians, but completely ignorant of what Christians really believe in; revelling in the supposed EEEEEVIL MOOOSLIMS who "want to take over the world" in a "new caliphate" and "turn all Christians and Jews into dhimmi slaves", yadda yaddaa... while hiding in their parent's basements and posting under pseudonyms.
I call 'em Crusader Rabbits: they're like chicken hawks, but worse. (And by 'worse than chicken hawks' I mean that in BOTH senses.)
One example of this variety of particularly lame lepus is the eternally loathesome Rick Martinez, AKA Twadjie, AKA "Rodan", at "TheBlogmocracy.com."
A second example is my nameless sitepest, who shows up about every two weeks to spew. Based on commonalities of writing style, I assume he, too, is Rick Martinez, but I can't be sure.
There was even an attempt by certain bigots to start an "anti-Islamist" (read, anti-Islamic) website under the name Crusader Rabbit a few years ago. And, no, I'm not going to provide a link; that's why God created Google.
A much more subtle example -- subtle enough at least to be taken seriously enough by the publisher of The American Thinker to be given editorial space -- ranted last week about the near riot when some soul-damaged dimwit who'd tried to burn a Koran in public decided to rub Dearborn's nose in it.
The piece, Andrew. G. Bostom's "Dearborn, Michigan: America's First Sharia-Compliant Muslim Enclave?", is for some reason no longer listed on AT's main page, but can still be read here.
The typical response to these can be found, appallingly, on Lucianne.com's comment page, in which readers responded by referring to Dearborn as "Dirtbagistan.... Turdistan.... Get the Heck- Out -Of -There- Stan...." and similar witticisms. FreeRepublic was worse: "What if 100,000 of us descended on the place armed?" or "As many shoes as they throw must be all of em walking around barefooted".
I'm assuming that Thomas Lifson at AT, a man I admire, showed some second thoughts and in good sense decided to pull the piece from his site; in any case, it no longer appears to be available.
For good reason. Mr. Bostom's screed is, frankly, repugnant to anyone with even the slightest understanding of what is at stake.
Terry Jones -- I refer not the Monty Python genius, to whom goes all honor, but the vile little Koran-burning preacher from Florida -- came here to deliberately diss, not merely a book, but the entire the immigrant community in Dearborn, Michigan, a city they call home. And by this man's argument, the police decision to prevent a riot somehow constituted a violation of his First Amendment rights.
Bullshit, little Eva.
It is time that a fifth-generation Detroiter, someone who actually knows Muslims from Dearborn personally -- who is also a lifetime Republican, a conservative, and a Tea Party supporter -- to stand up to those who think that Jones is a "conservative" or believe he is acting patriotically or as a Christian believes when he tries to burn a Koran in front of a mob of Muslims.
Let's be clear: the Muslims in Dearborn are enraged about the attempt to destroy the Koran in their hometown.
And they have every right to be enraged.
It's not Sharia Law to not want to see your holiest thing desecrated. It's human nature, and basic justice, that you are let be to worship as you want.
I have a number of contacts in the Islamic community in Dearborn -- a former whites-only racist sanctuary ("Keep Dearborn Clean!") when it was run by Orville Hubbard lo those many years ago -- and I have yet to encounter a single one who views their community as either Islamist or even Islamic. They know that they live in an American city, under American laws. The enormous majority of them came here because they don't want to live in an Islamist state. And: They are not stupid.
Not so Mr. Jones. Jones has malignly violated one of the primary rules of civilized life: thou shalt not crap on another man's altar, even if you don't believe in it.
Now, to express disagreement, indeed, vituperative disrespect, for the precepts or followers of another's religion is entirely within the meaning of the freedoms of the First Amendment. One can express disdain for someone else's faith in print, or even in speech: thus the long standing annoyances of, say, anti-Catholic rantings in the comic books of "Jack T. Chick," or the march of Nazis through Skokie, Illinois, must be taken in stride. Freedom of speech and religion means freedom of religion for the other guy, too, whether you like it or not.
But even so, there is a line that one does not cross.
One does not paint a swastika on a synagogue. One does not knowingly buy a Whopper for a Hindu. One does not smash a prayer shrine or a cross on the side of a freeway.
And no, one does not publicly burn a Koran. Ever. Even if you believe it's utterly false. And even if the First Amendment seems to allow it.
It's not hard to see why.
To a Muslim -- to a Muslim, mind -- the Koran is the very manifestation of God Himself.
The fact that it is (ahem) a mere book to anybody who is not a Muslim does not change the fact that that is precisely how it is seen by Islamic believers. A non believer can respect this fact without buying into the belief, just as one can respect the scrolls of the Torah without believing that they represent the Last Word of God.
Burning a Koran is not a mere attempt by Jones to preach. It is an aggressive act of destructive religious hostility. Some acts of religious hostility are so profound that they betray a particular level of vileness by the actor–indeed, approaching the Satanic.
Those who compare burning a Koran to burning a Bible miss the point entirely. An individual Bible, even to the most zealous of Sola Scriptura advocates, is not The Bible. The Bible cannot be destroyed. The words of the Bible resound regardless of the fate of any particular volume, so the violent and willed violent destruction of a single Bible is no more (or less) disturbing than the destruction of any book.
Not so in Islam. The destruction of a Koran, to a Muslim believer, is quite different: it is considered a direct affront to God Himself: akin (if one is Catholic or Orthodox) to the desecration of a consecrated Communion Host, the very Body and Blood of Christ.
This is not an idle comparison. Muslims view the Koran as essentially holy in itself. And there are indeed profoundly evil individuals who yearn to desecrate the Blessed Sacrament: hence the heavy security in even the most humble of Catholic parishes given for consecrated but unconsumed Hosts. Likewise, there are those who yearn to desecrate other symbols of God, not out of a zeal for their own vision of God but out of an impenitent spite against God Himself, no matter how clothed.
Thus the outrage of those, like Dearborn's Islamic community, is perfectly understandable even if one does not believe, or even consciously and formally rejects, the claims made by the Koran.
A mere review of the article's comments -- not to mention in Lucianne.com or freerepublic.com -- shows that Dearborn's Islamic community has reason to be concerned about someone who would do this. Far too many Conservatives think that to be patriotic or to uphold Christianity requires that you say vile things about Islam or Muslims. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Jones could not possibly be more wrong, nor those who support him.
The destruction of a Koran in Dearborn goes beyond mere symbolism. It becomes a visible threat of the destruction of the community. A man who fears not God (in the eyes of the Muslim) would certainly not fear to try to destroy those who believe in Him as a Muslim does. The smoke arising from a burned Koran is, to a Muslim, the smoke of Hell and of genocide.
This is not an idle threat: it has happened in our lifetimes already. There is already one group of people, certain politicians, soldiers and other individuals of the soi-disant "Republika Srpska" in Bosnia, with the blood of anti-Muslim genocide on their hands. And Muslims in Dearborn remember this. What has happened once, and in recent memory, can certainly happen again.
To acknowledge that reality is not to endorse Sharia, it is merely to acknowledge the Islamic community as fellow members of the human race, with beliefs (and fears!) as profound as one's own, even if they are not adhered to by others.
Leave them alone.
It is time for us who are part of the American Conservative movement to acknowledge those among them who seem to blithely support the burning of the Koran and the destruction of Islam, and spit them forth, in the way Israel reacted to the blasphemous violence of Baruch Goldstein at the Cave of the Patriarchs. There is no room for Crusader Rabbits in the conservative movement.
It is not necessary to desecrate that held holy by Islam while still opposing it. Indeed, it is both wrong and counterproductive.
Islam has much to answer for in the realm of human rights... but not necessarily more than many other peoples. For instance: EasyEd43, quoted above, mentioned that in Cologne, Germany, the Muslims protest weekly. And for some reason the Jewish community of Cologne, who no doubt would have far more to be aggrieved about by Germany than Muslims ever have, for some reason never protest at all. EasyEd43 should contemplate why this is so ... and tremble.
For "where they burn books, they will also in the end burn men." - Heinrich Heine.