Burning Korans...A Stupid Idea That Reveals A Lot Of People Are Stupid

Let me just say up front that the guy who wants to do this is an attention whore who is about the worst advertisement of Christianity one could imagine short of Fred Phelps. Burning Korans gives needless offensive to decent Muslims (you know, the ones who won't riot and kill over it) and accomplishes nothing. I mean, book burning? Really? If that's what you resort to as part of your "argument", you've already lost.

But enough about some band of kooks, the much more interesting story is in the reaction to this "pastor" from the MFM and the rest of the left.

I find it amusing that people like Keith Olbermann are jumping on the bandwagon to oppose this stunt on the grounds that Gen. Petraeus says it will endanger the troops. Now I have no doubt of the General's sincerity (more about that in a moment) but I find it rather interesting that suddenly the left is concerned with the impact of a protest on the safety of the troops.

Imagine the reaction if a few years back Petraeus had said anti-war protests and the constant promotion in the media of photos from Abu Gharib put American lives in danger and hurt the war effort. Do you really think Olby, Andrew Sullivan or any of their friends on the left would have suddenly cleaned up their language and taken on Code Pink, International Answers and then Senator Barack Obama?

In fact, I recall several news outlets breaking news and winning major awards for revealing national security secrets. Where was the outrage then about the danger to American lives?

Funny that, huh?

Another interesting byproduct of this situation is once again the disconnect between the "Islam equals peace" rhetoric and the reality people see on a daily basis. If Islam is so peaceful and only a "tiny minority' of Muslims are "violent extremists", why do we constantly have to be so damn sensitive to pissing them off?

When the whole Piss Christ thing happened Christians were told to suck it up and shut up. I don't remember anyone worrying about marauding bands of Presbyterians going on a murder spree over it. But when it comes to cartoons or a bunch of loons (a true 'tiny minority) burning some books, the world has to go on red alert if it involves Islam. Why is that exactly?

Naturally, some are making the story about those evil anti-Islamic conservatives. How come they never see the story is actually about the violence in the Islamic world? Now personally, I don't think terrorists need any more inducement to violence, they being terrorists and all but it would be nice if for once a liberal could find a bad guy in the world other than American conservatives.

It's also interesting that this group of idiots in Florida is seen as representing America in the Muslim world but we are forever being told by Muslim leaders not to equate Islam with the thousands of acts of terrorism conducted in the name of Islam. How do those two circles get squared?

Aren't we always told after a terror plot is connected to a Muslim that we can not and will not tolerate a backlash against innocent Muslims? Fair enough but it's a wasted warning since there never has been a backlash in America despite repeated attacks. Shouldn't those always crying about these phantom backlashes be lecturing Muslims around the world not to create a backlash against American soldiers because of the actions of a few idiots in Florida?

A final and somewhat related thought...Chris Matthews was in full lather a few weeks ago that people weren't sufficiently accepting of Obama's profession to be a Christian. It wasn't enough to simply 'take him at his word', apparently one had to go out and affirmatively vouch for what was in Obama's heart. Matthews was very clear that we are to accept what people say about their religious affiliations....

We‘ve got to get to Rush Limbaugh, just to complete the hat trick here. Here‘s Mitch McConnell, Reverend Franklin Graham, and now Rush Limbaugh today on this topic. Is Barack Obama of the—everybody watching right now, by the way, gets credit for being of the religion you say you are. You go to the church, you go to the synagogue, the mosque, whatever. That‘s the one you‘re a member of. That‘s the one you are. We accept that in America. It‘s called freedom of religion and respect for religion.

Apparently, the new rule is, Oh, I take him at his word, which means, I really don‘t really have any reason believe he‘s telling the truth.

...If somebody says, I‘m Jewish, and says, No, you‘re not, that‘s a character assault. You are who you say you are in this country. And if somebody says you‘re not who you say you are, you‘re calling you a liar!

I'd like to know if Matthews and others on the left think that applies to Muslim terrorists. Aren't we constantly told that bin Laden isn't really a Muslim, that Nidal Hasan wasn't actually practicing Islam but perverting it? Shouldn't I take these and other Muslim terrorists profession of faith as seriously as I take Obama's or anyone elses? Didn't Chris Matthews just tell me that was the rule?

Again, when it comes to Islam the rules are always different.

Added: Just to be clear about something...we are in a war that has many facets. One of them is strategic communications and double standard or not, we have to live within that reality. This post isn't about that or how to strike the right balance between exposing the truth and accepting some convenient fictions for the sake of a larger victory. I do recognize that at some levels that reality exists and has to be accommodated but this is a blog post, not a book or strategy document. My target here is the political left in America, not the greater issues involved.

Added II: Aren't liberals engaging in Islamaphobia when the assume Muslims will react to this with violence? Soft bigotry of low expectations!

posted by DrewM. at 11:52 AM

| Access Comments