Lessons learned from the mildly idiotic plans of one Rev. Jones to publicly burn a Koran, regardless of the eventual shakeout (he’s been changing his mind a lot lately), the plan to build a mosque at Ground Zero, and remaining unanswered questions:
1) Muslims expressing deep outrage over this have no sense of proportion. Death threats? Insinuations that US national security is at stake? Compare to the reaction of Christians to the “Piss Christ” “artwork”.
2) Virtually everyone seems to be afraid of making Muslims angry. Could that be because they know this represents a real danger? Why is no one afraid of making Christians angry?
3) Americans have largely forgotten 9/11, despite the many reminders in the press and news coverage recently. They have forgotten how they felt on 9/12. Sadly.
4) Christianity and Islam are not on equal footing as “religions of peace.” Not even close. Not by a country mile. They don’t inhabit the same galaxy.
5) Where is the “moderate” Muslim outrage AT the Muslims who expressed such virulent outrage and threatened violence against Rev. Jones?
6) Why does the mainstream media stress the great patience and understanding that Americans should have for the Muslim ambition to build a Mosque at Ground Zero (!), without also suggesting that Muslims should really just ignore nitwits like Rev. Terry Jones, and not get so excited about his loony plans?
7) Why doesn’t our president make the same connection? Where does he get off telling Rev. Jones how destructive his plan is, but still telling Americans they should be accepting of the Ground Zero mosque, as if that plan represents some great sensitivity to American feelings?
8) Obama’s great political insight and wisdom, his deep connection to the American people, his smooth way with an audience…. all of this is a crock, a media made-up just-so story, which the media got away with in order to get their Annointed One elected, but which the American people have largely seen through.
The biggest loser over the Ground Zero Mosque and Terry Jones stories?
Obama, I think.
September 17th, 2010 8:08 am
Reagan would’ve certainly had the appropriate response to 9/11. I think we’ve all forgotten the marine barracks bombing in Beirut 1983. The appropriate response to an act of insanity is to never respond, or ever get involved at all.
But if we’d rather respond: okay, then obviously the fire ceremony planned by Jones was in response to 9/11 2001, not 2010. As was the “Ground Zero Mosque.” Perhaps if we’d not responded to 9/11/01 in the first place by annihilating innocents, thereby creating larger insurgencies (as Reagan warned), then we wouldn’t be forced to compare the occasional “insanity” of Christianity and Islam in response to past insanities today; which of course is promoting the perpetual circus of insanities and outrages in the future.
It is absolutely pointless to compare an insane act to insane acts of the past unless… one wishes to go insane. Just exactly what is your gripe here? Have most of the modern outrageous insults to Christianity not been responded to respectfully/outrageously enough? By whom? Compared to what? By whose standard of loonyness are we all supposed to judge loonyness, and the outrage generated by loonyness? This is the craziest part of the entire argument! What exactly is the purpose of taking idiocy seriously?!
The leftys and the rightys both will even stoop as low as an act of insanity to have a chance to make one of their weak arguments.