Posted on 04/05/2011 4:28:42 PM PDT by B4Ranch
More On Koran Burning
In his response to Jonah Goldberg's comments on the Koran burning, Andrew McCarthy makes interesting observations, and, rather appropriately I believe,says that he doesn't find the burning of a Koran any more offensive in principle than its opposite extreme - the bizarre hyper-reverence with which the Koran is handled by the Defense Department. Personally, I'm amazed to learn of the "bizarre lengths" our military goes to in order to appease Muslim sensitivities, which surely serve to only re-enforce Islamists' beliefs and anti-non-Muslim behavior:
[...] Down at Gitmo, the Defense Department gives the Koran to each of the terrorists even though DoD knows they interpret it (not without reason) to command them to kill the people who gave it to them. To underscore our precious sensitivity to Muslims, standard procedure calls for the the book to be handled only by Muslim military personnel. Sometimes, though, that is not possible for various reasons. If, as a last resort, one of our non-Muslim troops must handle or transport the book, he must wear white gloves, and he is further instructed primarily to use the right hand (indulging Muslim culture's taboo about the sinister left hand). The book is to be conveyed to the prisoners in a "reverent manner" inside a "clean dry towel." This is a nod to Islamic teaching that infidels are so low a form of life that they should not be touched (as Ayatollah Ali Sistani teaches, non-Muslims are "considered in the same category as urine, feces, semen, dead bodies, blood, dogs, pigs, alcoholic liquors," and "the sweat of an animal who persistently eats [unclean things]."
(See, e.g., my 2007 post on Saudi government guidelines that prohibit Jews and Christians from bringing bibles, crucifixes, Stars of David, etc., into the country -- and, of course, not just non-Muslim accessories but non-Muslim people are barred from entering Mecca and most of Medina, based on the classical interpretation of an injunction found in what Petraeus is fond of calling the Holy Qur'an (sura 9:28: "Truly the pagans are unclean . . . so let them not . . . approach the sacred mosque").
McCarthy goes on to note that he's not a fan of book burning but that there is difference between burning a book as a form of censorship ... and burning a book as symbolic condemnation, which is what the Florida pastor did (which is essentially saying to the Islamists that their belief system is disgusting and incorrigible, and in dire need of reform - all of which indeed apply). Agree with Jones or not, freedom of speech means that we have to allow that argument to be made.
As for our military's kowtowing and appeasement of Muslims, it appears that we are voluntarily taking exceptional steps in helping the Islamists reach their goal of having the West submit to Islam. In fact, going by our treatment of the Koran at Gitmo, Petraeus' being so fond of referring to the Koran as "holy," and his destruction of bibles in Afghanistan, one could say we're already there!
We knew there would be trouble when the half breed took office. General Betrayus is a low blow to our servicemen and women.
I assume you know they aren't talking about using toilet paper, right?
Okay but he needs a little polishing on his “delivery skills”....;D
With Islam - this IS what we’re up against:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2700702/posts?page=1
As you can see I read that article.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.