It’s funny, isn’t it, how every single time isslam deliberately provokes us, and they do so on a regular basis, we’re told to simply roll over in the name of “tolerance” yet, on the very rare occasions when somebody has the nuts to turn the table and provoke right back, we’re being the “unreasonable” ones.
Hardly a day goes by where we’re not lectured by the Liberal Media and various and sundry other blockheads who think themselves our “betters” on how we need to “understand the other side’s grievances” and put their behavior in “cultural context”, behavior that is always attributed to an infinitesimally small extremist minority, even when they march in the millions in cities all over the world, pillaging and murdering as they go.
And then, when somebody on our side has the testicular fortitude to say “enough is e-NOUGH!” and see how that “minority” likes being spat in their faces, nobody is interested in “why we hate them”, we’re just being fanatical bigots who really ought to be locked away lest we provoke the allegedly peaceful religion of isslam to violence. Anybody see a logical disconnect here? If not, please go to the back of the class and shut up while those of us with a brain try to have a conversation.
When we commit a provocation that amounts to burning a handful of books, we invoke the wrath and hectoring of every pea-brained blowhard “enlightened” chowderhead out there yet, when they commit the provocation of wanting to erect a victory monument to the “religion” in whose name 3,000 of our countrymen were brutally murdered right next door to the place they were murdered, not a peep comes from those clownshoes except for calling anybody who thinks it’s insensitive all of the worst names they can think of.
Judging from their coverage of the Florida preacher who plans on burning a quran the answer is yes, they would.
Would they respond in the same way if I announced that I was publically going to spit on and put a crucifix in a jar of urine? Well, we already know the answer to that one.