Posted on 09/09/2010 10:05:18 AM PDT by Rashputin
:o])
This editorial would have been strengthened if the author had known about an unpublicized incident when army authorities in Afghanistan last year ordered Bibles to be burned.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2586041/posts
So, it’s OK if the military under Obama burns a Bible, presumably with his blessing, but it’s not OK if a private party threatens to burn a Koran?
Good one.
A couple autobiographies by an empty suit man-child come to mind.
The are 1.5 billion Muslims in the world and if only 1% of them are radicals that is 1.5 million Muslims. But to many that 1% is a scary number that could cause a lot of harm. I believe this is why some have negative feelings towards the Muslim Religion. The Muslim leaders have a responsibility to educate those with negative feelings about their religion and condemn the radicals. I don’t think this has been properly done and has resulted in acts like the burning of the Koran. In no way do I support the pastors and their planned actions but can understand their frustration. When Muslim leaders and believers start to threat retaliation that only feeds the frustration. The Muslim leaders need to step up.
As was previously mentioned, it’s not like you are trying to burn every copy.
I agree with reading a few select passages from a book to highlight a fundamentally flawed basis.
Book review critics do it all the time, kinda like a mental bonfire burning for books .
Burning Playboys is an altogether different story.
First of all, Islam is a political entity disguised as a religion.
Job 34:10-12
King James Version
“Therefore hearken unto me, ye men of understanding: far be it from God, that he should do wickedness; and from the Almighty, that he should commit iniquity. For the work of a man shall he render unto him, and cause every man to find according to his ways. Yea, surely God will not do wickedly, neither will the Almighty pervert judgment.”
Muslims believe in the Old Testament prophets, but only if they agree with the newest “visions” of Mohammed. Trying to point this out to the Muslims is Mission Impossible. It is their political duty to eradicate other beliefs, world wide.
If a Christian is meek, forgiving and humble, the Muslims want to destroy that person for being “weak.”
The job of the Muslim leaders is to foment hatred toward any culture that is different. Asking them to help us “understand” Islam is a losing battle.
If a Muslim departs from Islam, it is a death sentence for him/her and all the family members. Political, not religious.
Those along with the idiot islams funny book, and they should have a right nice bonfire for roasting whatever.
Even if only 1% of Muslims are “radical”, the other 99% are controlled by the 1%. The “moderate” Muslims are just useful idiots or tools for who you call “radical”. The truth is that the Quran is radical and Mohammad was radical. The Muslims who follow the Quran and Mohammad are radical.
“Moderate” or “peaceful” Muslims are nice, but they are just lazy or ignorant of what their Quran actually commands. The root of “radical” Islam is the Quran. Until people wake up to that fact, the “moderates” will continue to infiltrate and grow amoung us “infidels” pushing us to accept their sharia and customs, until we submit (the meaning of Islam) to their Quranian based laws and customs.
Thats one percent of THEIR religion. You are right!...They need to deal with THEIR one percent to prove to us they are not in agreement. So far, I see nothing!
If the Christian symbolism offends these conflicted "Americans," why can't they simply speak somewhere else? In both those instances, the weight of tradition and prestige of the august institution certainly outranks those small men with temporary "entitlement."
Since 1789 is an awfully long time. I often wondered if, when Clinton attended the Walsh School of Foreign Service there, he was allowed to make such an absurd request when he was required to be in Gaston Hall.
I absolutely believe that when voluntarily visiting a retarded clture, no matter how primitive, it is a choice to defer to their customs no matter how bizzare. However, when finding ourselves in a hostile country as victors in a conflict, we make the rules and set the conditions.
When we are there in response to help of any kind, military or humanitarian, again, we make the rules, we don't defer to the subhumans.
I just love the military rules. Does a citizen lose the Bill of Rights when serving, if it does not conflict or directly compromise his duties as a soldier? Does reading a bible during his off duty time compromise his duties? Does wearing a crucifix or medal? Only a frighteningly rigid and arbitrary mind would think so.
Specially, if restrictions are created to "please" the people who requested help, or lost a war, a second thought is in order.
Particularly, when we have no more wealth or blood to give, "take it or leave it" is the order of the day.
People have to sacrifice in their own country to be secure and free; When someone else must do it for them, it must be totaly voluntary, on an individual basis, or not at all.
When execution is restored for cowardice, insubordination and treason, I might reconsider. Or not. Most people choose to die on their own terms.
If you truly believe that only 1% of world muslims would maim or kill given the opportunity, you need to lighten up on your "pollyana pills," and find a short course of "History of islam 101."
Personally, after reading From Time Immemorial by Joan Peters* and Jihad, by Paul Fregosi** from among the couple of dozen books I have read about islam, I know that the number of potential killers and mass murderers is at least 20%. I Would compromise at 10%, but that is a monumentally scary number, if civilized countries continue to allow them to infiltrate the normal world with ease and impunity.
Bear in mind that these real and potential killers can't move about and do their thing without a much larger base of supporters, either contributing directly and silently, or simply by acquiescense.
It doesn't much matter if most of their victims are fellow countrymen or Americans or Brits; their random victims of the last 1000 years must number in the tens of millions.
We must be always reminded that most, perhaps 75% of the world muslims are but a few steps away from the stone age, tribalism and intimate familiarity with death in all its forms. Treating them as equals will only make us "lunch."
* This book is specially useful for two reasons : the author set out to prove the case for the Palestinians; as the book amply proves to any reasonable person, it did not work out that way; and secondly, all facts, statistics and documented history came directly from the Turkish archives, hardly a source hostile to islam, since the Turkish Empire was islam at the time. This is one of the most heavily referenced books you are likely to read.
** This one is not for the squeamish there are many documented and referenced means of gratuitous killing of enemies, resisters and apostates that makes the "Inquisition" seem like a picnic. But for imaginative ways to kill, islam has no peer. Even Nazi death factories could learn a few things from the "religion of peace."
And not just Catholic, according to a protestant missionary friend in Abuja.
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.