I can hear the liberal rants now - "what kind of extremist," "what a moron," "remove this post," BLAH, BLAH - READ THE FULL POST, BEFORE MAKING A JUDGMENT!!! A minister in Florida wants to burn some Quran/Koran books. Lest we forget - a book is PAPER WITH INK ON IT!!!!! I will make a linguistic, a technological and logical statement to make this ALL TO CLEAR!!! 1 - linguistic) The Quran/Koran does not entirely consist of its entirety in some paper in Florida. If the pieces of paper in Florida are burnt to coals...the Quran/Koran will still exist in the world. 2 - technological) I don't know entirely about the Quran/Koran, but the Bible exists on-line on the Internet. You can get the Bible on CD, DVD, hard disk etc. I don't think some guy burning a paper Quran/Koran in Florida will wipe out those who follow the Quran/Koran or the content/message of the Koran or any copies found throughout the world. 3 - logical) "paper copy of Koran in Florida" != "all Korans throughout the world" Now, here is my problem and here is where I ask if ALL Muslims need to be wiped off the face of the planet?! I can see Petraeus and the "State Dept." saying that the burning of a Koran in Florida could cause violence to US soldiers around the world and hurts US reception around the world. Here is where my problem lies...does the US make policy based upon some nut jobs resorting to violence? That the US gov't has responded in such a way can only lead to the question..."If Jews/Christians/Buddhists/Hindus resorted to violence at the drop of a hat - or burning of their sacred documents, would the US give them a special place and respond with policy that is different, because of the threat of violence?" Would some religious group get special treatment from the US government, if they threated to actively and massively killed all Muslims - based on some Muslim group burning one of their sacred documents? Some Dutch cartoonist makes fun of Mohhamed - death threats and violence by the Muslims. A MUSLIM writes a book contrary to Islam - death threats and violence - Salmon Rushdi. The Muslims have problems with resistance to a mosque in lower Manhattan. Do they have the same concern that you can't build a NEW synagogue/church/Hindu temple in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.??????? What if the West imposed an "inverted Sharia" - a Muslim man's testimony in court only counts for a half of a non-Muslims testimony. Rape a Muslim woman - she has to have four Muslims testify as eyewitnesses. A Muslim woman's testimony only would count for 1 fourth of the testimony of a Western man's testimony? Do we see the Muslims in the West protesting for such treatment? It is THEIR religion that calls for such things in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan, etc.? Justice is justice, no???? -gastropod
They (the muzz) want global religious war in my opinion. Some modern form of the crusades could emerge if this keeps up. I suppose if we saw a series of large attacks on Western interests and people you might first see retaliation against muzz immigrants here and in europe. France is ready to blow. Its unpleasant to believe it could be possible because of the holocaust. But I don't remember terrorists wearing yarmulkas killing thousands of innocent people in lower manhattan so I guess the muzz problem is different in the sense that they are the ones pushing the trouble on us.
I am concerned that my message didn't come through in the post above...here is what I am saying... The military and State Department and the rest of our dumb ass politicians in the West should be condemning the dumb ass Muslims (and YES - THAT IS NOT ALL MUSLIMS) that are violent or threaten violence because of some guy burning a Koran in Florida. The problem is not the burning of some paper in Florida. The problem is the violence or threatened violence, because some paper is burnt in Florida!
Muslims are far more sensitive to any perceived insult or dishonor than you or I. Gastropod, I doubt the average Muslim would even be capable of understanding your argument, no matter how thoroughly and repeatedly you tried to explain it to him. They're been indoctrinated since birth with an entirely different set of values. If this Quran burning goes through, millions of Muslims worldwide WILL feel <b>real</b> psychological pain from it, they WILL feel the need to shed even more American blood than usual (to 'return the insult'- a necessary act in their culture), and American lives WILL be lost as a direct result of this pastor's senseless provocation. To better understand how many Muslims see the world: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=63611&highlight=pride A guilt culture (i.e., the West) is typically and primarily concerned with truth, justice, and the preservation of individual rights. As noted earlier, the emotion of guilt is what keeps a person from behavior that goes against his/her own code of conduct as well as the cultureâs. Excessive guilt can, of course, be pathological. In contrast, in a typical shame culture (i.e., Arab/Islamic culture) what other people believe has a far more powerful impact on behavior than even what the individual believes. The desire to preserve honor and avoid shame to the exclusion of all else is one of the primary foundations of the culture. This desire has several side-effects, including granting the individual carte blanche to (1)engage in wrong-doing as long as no-one knows about it, or knows he is involved; and (2) engage in any necessary behavior, including wrong-doing (i.e., murder, beheading, etc.) in order to avoid shame and/or recover honor. Although it is hard for someone in a guilt culture to appreciate, it may be impossible for an individual in a shame culture to even admit to himself that he is guilty (even when he is)--particularly when everyone else considers him to be guilty-- because of the shame involved. As long as others remain convinced he is innocent, the individuals does not experience either guilt or shame. A great deal of effort therefore goes into making sure that others are convinced of your innocence, even if you are guilty. Remember maintaining honor is what is important--not truth, not justice, and not tolerance or restraint. One of the ways that those who fear shame protect their fragile self is to subjugate those who he perceives as weaker. By doing so, he can rationalize that he is superior to the subjugated individual. In fact, this is the only way he can maximize his honor. In Arab/Islamic culture, women are one of the primary instruments of achieving honor. Hence the bizarre and distorted attitude that the culture has toward women and the exaggerated means by which "honor" must be maintained. So strong is the cultural pressure, even women buy into the delusion. ... There is no shame involved in insulting or denigrating other cultures for Muslims. Therefore such insults are acceptable. That is why there is a disconnect between the disgusting cartoons that are incredibly offensive to Jews and Christians and/or the West (see here), yet at the same time, they angrily DEMAND on threat of violence that even the most mildly offensive cartoons (i.e., the Danish ones here) be immediately repudiated. SHAME MUST BE AVOIDED AT ALL COSTS. Everything else is secondary. Contradictions are irrelevant; logic and reason unimportant. HONOR MUST BE RESTORED, and this can only be done at the expense of those who originated the "insult".
Educate or eradicate. They will choose their own outcome but the world will not tolerate the elevation of a book above human life.
That's what you would think but it's not true. The world absolutely WILL tolerate it. The world is full of a bunch of appeasers and kiss asses like our Euro friends, liberals and the ACLU who think that we just need to be nice to them and tolerant of them and they will be nice to us. The Hartford City Council is reconsidering its proposal to have local imams perform Islamic invocations at the beginning of council meetings in September. Council President rJo Winch called a news conference Wednesday to address the uproar over the proposal she supported Tuesday. In an email sent out by the City Council on Tuesday called the plan "an act of solidarity with our Muslim brothers and sisters."
I find this issue troubling. The OP makes a good point, namely that we cannot let our policies or principles be compromised because of the threat of violence from fanatics. I don't care what their provocation is. Gen. Patreus and others in our government have made a terrible mistake in appearing to justify such violence. If they had to say something, they should have said we have a free society where people can do things even if it offends others. The contrast with the GZ mosque situation is telling. People who object to it have been told basically to shut the f*ck up because we might offend muslims. In fact, that seems to be the case pretty much anytime something with them comes up. The usual liberal loudmouths are strangely silent about muslims treatment of their favorite issues like homosexuals, abortion, freedom of religion, womens' rights. The same liberals who condemn Evangelicals in the harshest terms lose their voice where muslims are involved. Is it because somehow muslims have become protected by the PC code or is it simply self-censorship due to fear? Probably both. As a practical matter, there is a very easy solution to protect our country and our values. We have to stop virtually all muslim immigration here. Otherwise, we will end up like the UK and parts of europe, with muslim-only neighborhoods, demands for a separate legal system run by muslims, violence against anyone who disagrees with them, etc. We should also stop the inflow of funds from Saudi Arabia and elsewhere to build mosques and support radical clerics.
To 377Ohm and you and the others who understand what my point is: THANK YOU!!!!! For the poster who said the Muslims will feel "real" pain from the burning of some paper...tough! The problem is on THEIR side!!!! A paper burnt thousands of miles from me will NOT hurt me! We are defecating on American values, so that we can bow to "Muslim sensibilities." -g
Oh Shit! No fukkin Way!!!! The real tragedy is, most addicts are amongst the most intelligent people on this planet. Far smarter than I. Imagine the potential if you could sustain sobriety.
The real problem is fence sitting. All or nothing. The Powell Doctrine......stay out it, but if we have get in it, destroy everything that moves. We are looking for a happy medium where there is none, AAA. The the Muslims do their thing, or expel them. If they resist, destroy them. We as a nation need to decide which way we are going to go. As an American, freedom is something important to me, I would vote against the censorship of the KKK, my posts on this forum are consistent to that effect. But if we are going to deny that freedom to a people, then we should go all out, and eradicate them. Do you really want that, AAA. Think about it. Someday, our nation may decide your particular brand of humanity should not be tolerated. Is that the precedent you wish to set? You are one of the brighter folks on this site, and I have a feeling that your words can control large groups of people, as mine can. Think as someone who has lives in their hands, do we really want to say, fuk the Muslims? If we do, we must be sure to leave not one of them breathing. We must commit Genocide. Is that who we are, AAA?