I know it’s been a minute since my last column; not that anyone missed me, but I like to try to be semi-consistent. Not to be secret squirrel here, but I will tell you I am working on something sort of special and that all will be revealed at another time.
Anyway…I’ve got a lot I wanna mention in a short space so I’ll dispense with the tomfoolery.
SMOKE ‘EM IF YOU GOT ‘EM
This week, Florida Pastor Terry Jones had announced that his church was going to have a Koran burning party to commemorate the Sept 11th attacks.
While I’m not a big fan of book burning in general, I supported this Pastor 100%. He was simply exercising his 1st Amendment right.
Pastor, I say (to borrow a phrase from Johnny Storm) flame on if you so choose.
I know it seems crazy to support a book burning of any kind. The whole thing brings to mind scary black & white images of WWII Germany. But how in all honesty could I support the Ground Zero Mosque as a free speech issue and NOT support this obvious act of protest? I think both of these issues fall under the big umbrella of the Bill of Rights.
Many on the politically correct side of things say that the book burning Pastor would have endangered Americans by doing this, that this treatment of the Koran would anger Muslims worldwide. I say too bad for the Muslims in this case. They don’t have the right to be free from criticism and protest any more than anyone else does.
I understand the Koran is a sacred holy text. Still too bad. To people who do not believe in the Koran, the book has no more significance than “The Cat in the Hat.” And regardless of what the Pastor or anyone else does, no group has the right to commit acts of violence based on an insult, real or imagined.
Furthermore, Pastor Jones drew the ire of the President, General Petraus, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton – to name a few. If a group of Muslims got together and burned the Bible, I doubt seriously any of those folks would make a peep. In this instance, I think they should have likewise kept their PC yaps shut. (Unless of course they’d like to do their constitutionally bound duty to protect the Pastors right to free speech and remind the world at large the we here in the USA take our rights seriously and we take even more seriously the safety of our citizens and soldiers both at home and overseas and further any person or group who attempts to do harm to any citizen of the US for this or any other reason will be dealt with swiftly and severely…If any of our leaders want to step up and DO THEIR JOB, hey, feel free) (Otherwise, you can shut it.).
The Pastor was not the bad guy here. I’ll grant you he’s a little extreme, BUT killing people over a book is WAY more extreme.
The people who are willing to commit violence over the burning of a book are the bad guys. Recall a few years back if you will when a Dutch newspaper published a cartoon that bore the likeness of Mohammad which is strictly forbidden in Islam. Muslims around the world were outraged committed acts of violence. Attempts were made on the life of the cartoonist. But neither the cartoonist, nor the newspaper were at fault for the violence. Outrage, is fine and dandy. Violence on behalf of your God or any God is not.
I know it seems like radical reasoning here to some people, but the people RESPONSIBLE for the acts of violence that occur in connection with this book burning or any other demonstration are the people who are COMMITTING the acts of violence.
Let me be clear here. I am not anti-Muslim, but I’m not pro-Muslim either. I’m Muslim indifferent. Nor am I necessarily pro-book burning. I’m pro-free speech. And the burning of the Koran is a free speech issue.
WHY THE PRESIDENT DOESN’T GET IT
I want to get this straight – President Obama is FOR keeping the middle class tax breaks set up by GW but opposed to giving tax breaks for the rich…
If I am not mistaken here the logic is as follows: it’s OK to tax the rich MORE because they can afford it.
I mean I realize that our entire tax system is set up this way, but taxing the rich more heavily because they can take it seems really wrong to me. (Especially when you consider that rich people for the most part are less dependent on government services than poor people. But hey, why screw up a good liberal tax system with facts and such).
So I guess from now on when you stand in line at McDonald’s they will charge you for your burger based on you income. If you make $50k a year, your burger is 2 bucks. If you make $200k, your Happy Meal is 6 bucks – because hey! You can afford it!
That quite frankly is unfair and stupid.
(Dear Lord Baby Jesus…please bless our leaders with the idea of a “flat tax”…What’s that Lord? No “Flat tax” because it denies politicians the ability to manipulate tax breaks and rebates for special interest groups that keep them in power? Okay, thanks anyway Lord Baby Jesus.)
(BTW: Flat tax doesn’t mean we all pay the same dollar figure. That would be even stupider than the current system. Flat tax means we all pay the same percentage. Let’s say the tax is 10%. That means if you make $50k, you pay 10% of that. If you make $1 million you pay 10% of that. It’s so fair that politicos on both sides HATE the idea. Generally speaking that’s how you can tell it’s a great idea.)
WHY THE PRESIDENT DOESN’T GET IT PART DEUX
This week President Obama announced tens of billions of dollars to be released immediately to the states for infrastructure improvements, the idea being that increased construction and development will create thousands of jobs and therefore stimulate the economy.
While this is a very clever political ploy, it’s a ploy nonetheless and NOT a solution for our sagging economy OR our unemployment rates.
What the President is hoping is that he can get those unemployment totals down prior to the election. The unemployment figures are the key to the Dems remaining in power. If they can’t pull that in all likelihood they will lose a few seats.
While this new stimulus package will no doubt get some people to work – which is a good thing – it won’t help you unless you are a construction worker, an engineer or in another related occupation.
I’m an out of work talk show host…this package helps me not at all, and chances are it won’t help you OR the economy either. But If I am a drinker of Obama flavored Kool-Aid, I’ll see those unemployment numbers going down temporarily and by golly I’ll know then that Big O (Obama, not Oprah) has things in control. He’ll have my vote.
Except that this is a Band-Aid on a bullet wound. Sooner or later the government’s cash will run out, the jobs will dry up and unless other action is taken we’ll be right back at jump street.
But by the Obama will be in his second term and untouchable and it won’t matter…
Well played Mr. President.
Just in case you want to FIX the problem here’s how: help businesses. They are the key. If you put programs together to support businesses- tax cuts, incentives, loan programs et cetera- they will hire more people in a variety of fields, not just one or two. Those people will now have income and support other businesses and restart the economy.
Oh but wait…businesses are owned by rich people, and the Dems hate rich people because rich people have the nerve to want to keep their money instead of letting the government take it all for failed social programs and fruitless “stimulus” packages designed to fool the public into thinking the government is just here to help.
Damn. My plan was so close.
NEXT TIME
My position on Obama care comes back to haunt me – no insurance and a $3,000 prescription. But I am not changing my opinion. I tell you why next week.
you are an idiot. First, there’s cause and effect issues with burning any religious items. That’s the problem with Americans. We base everything on the physical or shall I say the “Big Picture”. Us as american lost compassion, morals and what I believe America was based on which is Love for your fellow man.
Your just a bitter mis-guided Obama hater. No president have accomplished and had more bills passed then him in the same time frame. Base a man of his principals. It could be worst. We could have a president who leads us to a war that drives us into further debt, while getting richer in the process.
Michael White
You are right with respect to President Obama being prolific in promulgating laws, unfortunately these laws are devastatingly damaging to the US economy and citizens.
America would have been better off had the President done nothing.
BR
Boy that Obama flavored kool-aid must be yummy.
If you think rich people should pay more in tax simply because they can, you are an idiot.
If you think that the infrastructure stimulus package will help the economy in any real way you are and idiot.
And if you think the pastor burning books is anything other than a free speech issue you are an idiot.
I find it offensive when people burn the flag. If I see some one doing it I might feel inclined to kick their ass. Now I personally may feel morally justified in doing so. But morals are personal and morality aside I do not get a free pass in kicking some ones ass over something I don’t like. And by condemning the pastor instead if the Muslims who are hell bent for blood in this case we are focusing on the wrong part of the issue.
Now if you were NOT and idiot, which based on your not you clearly are, you could make the “fire in a theater” argument about the pastor. That given the current political environment his right to free speech is sort of “capped” by the fact that it could endanger lives. I will but thy argument as valid but I disagree with it based on the fact that it still sends the wrong message to those who will do harm to us based on supposed insults.
To bad you are and idiot and didn’t make that argument.
And if you think the book burning is anything other than protected
On the book burning question
Sometimes these pages are difficult to read because of the extremism shown by opposing factions. There appears to be more mudslinging than honest debate.
Let’s correct a few things here:
1. Burning a book has nothing to do with “Freedom of Speech”; it is not speech but an action. The overbroad interpretation of the 1st Amendment has wasted many taxpayers’ dollars in courts, state capitals, congress and the senate. For example, a flag burning amendment to the constitution passed though the house in 2005, but failed to get the required majority in the Senate in 2006. Those of us who lived through the Vietnam era will remember the various protests, subsequent arrests, and, in most cases acquittal of the protestors. States individually structured, debated, and sometimes enacted their own laws in an attempt to make flag burning illegal, but this was generally a waste of time and tax payers money, as legal precedents could be cited.
2. You would be better to talk about a “Hate Crime”, but first you have to establish that there is, in fact, a crime. If the pastor owns the book it might be difficult to prove that a crime has been committed. However, the 2009 Matthew Shepard Act would possibly cover this, and therefore deem it a crime: A hate crime is committed on the basis of a person’s race, religion, nation origin, perceived gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability.
3. I agree with Maynard when he says, “They (Muslims) don’t have the right to be free from criticism and protest any more than anyone else does. However, there is a major caveat here; this right only stretches to the shores of the United States, and no further.
4. The cartoons Maynard refers to were, in fact, published in Denmark, not the Netherlands. What DID happen in the Netherlands, in 2004 was that the film director Theo van Gough (related to Vincent van Gogh) was murdered by one Mohammed Bouyeri as van Gogh was cycling to work. Bouyeri shot van Gogh eight times with an HS 2000 handgun, and Van Gogh died on the spot. Bouyeri then attempted to decapitate him with one knife,and stabbed him in the chest with another. The two knives were left implanted in his torso, one attaching a five-page note to his body. The note (Text) threatened Western countries, Jews and Ayaan Hirsi Ali (at that time a Dutch politician). Van Gogh was murdered because he frequently, vocally and in film, expressed his belief that political Islam was a serious threat to the western culture.
In view of the above, I believe Maynard is correct when he states: “I know it seems like radical reasoning here to some people, but the people RESPONSIBLE for the acts of violence that occur in connection with this book burning or any other demonstration are the people who are COMMITTING the acts of violence.”
Pshew !! Well, I don’t think you’re an idiot. I think that as despicable as I consider ANY book burning, just as I have to suck it up when a Bible or American flag is burned, others have to accept a koran burning for the same reason. It’s called The Bill of Rights, and it cuts both ways.
As for sensitivity to Islam, when they show some sensitivity, perhaps they’ll receive it in return. Since 2001, hundreds of Christian, Jewish, Hindu, and Buddhists buildings have been burned and destroyed around the world, by muslims, not to mention the thousands of people killed.
As for Obama, he is a failure. As anyone who looked at his past and his record, his associates, and his total lack of experience in anything but rabble rousing, er, “community organizing” could, and did, inform people that he would be.
70% of the population sees this, why the other 30% don’t, I can’t fathom…but it is definitely NOT because the 70% are the idiots.
Two wrongs never make a right…the Muslims are using poor judgement by building an “in-your-face” mosk at ground zero, and the pastor is exercising poor judgement by wanting to burn the Muslim holy book as an “in-you-face” retalliation. While both are within their legal right to do these things both have lost sight of morales, which I’m quite sure both religions teach. Shame on them! As for the Obama Kool Aid drinkers of the world–he’s been disasterous for this nation…as was Bush and Clinton and Bush before. I say “yes” to the flat tax and let’s try electing a woman and see what she can do.
The only idiot I see here is Pastor Jones. His agenda is unclear although I suspect it has everything to do with gaining attention for his church/ego. One of the first lessons I learned in Sunday School as a child was “Love thy neighbor” which seems to have been completely lost on Pastor Jones and his ilk.
I’m with you on the book burning Maynard. Someone’s freedom of speech should not be curtailed due to the inability of someone else to react rationally to it.
The argument of “can” he burn it has been addressed, the first amendment clearly gives him that right. The current issue is more “should” he burn the Koran. The answer to this is a simple risk-reward scenario. The potential reward for burning the koran is very little (think little pile of burnt paper) vs. the possible risk of losing American lives by individuals that enraged at the burning. If just one angry muslim kills one American soldier as a result, that is way too many for the 10 second “thrill” of burning a Koran.
If anyone burned the American flag or the bible very few politicans or other liberals would utter a word. It would be a non issue. But if you insult one of the privledged minoritys you’re called all kind of names.I say let them burn the koran and if the Muslems get mad so be it. The Muslems who would attack us for the burning are the ones who hate us anyway and would like to see America destroyed.
Concern is not about Muslims being angry. Concern is about the violence that could arise from that anger and be inflicted on innocents. A precedent exists for reasonable worry that it could occur.
So, once again, the muslims say, “If you do that WE WILL KILL YOU”. The question is, do we allow ourselves to be bullied by barbarian animals, or do we stand up like men, live freely, and retaliate ruthlessly if they attack us in any way.
why are you so fuckin’ long winded…hell, say it, get out, done deal…long winded bullshit turns me off. There’s a quote by Mark Twain, something like ‘take the utmost brevity to write the most relevant with levity.’
I’m pleased to be in agreement with “Maynard’s Musings”. Every point was spot on. I’ve said it before, if “peaceful” muslims see a “radical” commit an atrocity their reaction will range from the worst case – aid and abet, to their best case – do nothing. You may note that the vast majority of muslims are peaceful, but don’t make the mistake of thinking they see someone of any other faith as remotely human or deserving of any respect or decency. One thing the crazy reverend has done is to put on a display for even the most thick witted exactly what happens when you even threaten to insult islam – that wonderful religion of peace (if you don’t agree we’re peaceful we’ll cut your head off). Apparently the message of islam is so fragile that it cannot withstand the destruction of a Koran. I doubt there are 10 people in the world that can even understand the original text – one that the blind faithful will kill for based on someone else’s translation. I hate to see a book burned as well, but the real idiots are the brainwashed slack jawed morons that would commit violence over any book.
I am not certain how frequently you have interacted with muslims but my guess would be not at all. My interactions are extensive as I am employed by an agency that has many muslims and I can tell you they are, to a person, respectful and polite, and treat coworkers and the public with more respect than many christians.
I will add that they are also willing to discuss their religion, explain their beliefs, and accept that we can all coexist without needing to agree on religion. Are you aware there are muslim Judges and Masters in our court system in this state? Do you believe they are unable to see others not of their religion as deserving of respect and decency?
A common acknowledgement and greeting I receive from my muslim coworkers is “peace in passing”. A beautiful sentiment I have always thought and one you would do well to consider.
If the “peaceful” muslim community would stop turning a blind eye on extremism I’m sure the billion or so of them could quickly reduce it to a level of insignificance. You’re right, I just throw these criticisms around willy nilly… oh, no wait it’s what I heard about while I was over seas… not from muslims living here in the minority. Among other tales I could tell, my own father in law described how a muslim behind him in line to apply for a job described how he could just kill him and be closer to getting the job… peaceful muslim to Catholic. Just chatting…
Ahh, the muslim as a minority is a much more polite creature than the muslim as a majority. Ask any Christian or Jew still surviving and cowering in fear for their lives in ANY muslim majority country.
Muslims make up approx 1 1/2% of the American population. There will be many anecdotal stories of friendly muslims in America. For the true picture you must view Islam on the world wide stage. Go to the website Jihad Watch. They chronicle the daily terror attacks and massacres committed by the “religion of peace and a big pile of bodies”. Since 9/11, 2001 there have been more than 15,000 terrorist attacks, both large and small, in the world. If you would like to see Islamic justice, in the form of beheadings, stonings of women, maiming of children, I can direct you to those sites. Once seen, you will NEVER compare Islam to any other religion again.
My point is simply that painting all muslims with the terrorist brush in innacurate and unfair to those who are moderate, decent, and working stiffs alongside you and me.
I know, Billy Jack, and I agree. My point is that there are not enough moderates to outweigh the horror and bloodshed of their 7th century barbarian co-religionists. When you watch the nightmare of a woman being stoned to death, I assure you, the thought, “yeah, but there are nice muslims” does not enter your mind.
This article is disappointing due to the lack of critical thinking and/or research. I usually enjoy Maynard’s musings but Maynard is obviously very busy working on his other project that has yet to be unveiled. First of all, the burning of the Koran has nothing to do with Freedom of Speech but everything to do with the violence that WILL occur during the aftermath. The argument presented in the article is rational but flawed. We are dealing with irrational, extremist, radical people including the good Pastor. Having a debate over religion will prove itself to be fruitless so let’s chalk this 911 rally up to a Pastor seeking 15 minutes of fame. Recent history has shown us that radical muslims will kill over the simplest of incidents. The Dutch newspaper cartoon was referenced in the article above and brought to memory the violence which followed after a cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad was published. The entire incident was crazy yet Maynard is OK with the Pastor exercising his right to freedom of speech? That is crazy as well. The President, the Secretary of State and General Petraus were correct and had a responsibility to speak out against the planned book burning. Why? To protect the troops and all other civilians, missionaries, peace keepers and Christian’s working on foreign soil especially those located in muslim countries. Speaking out against the book burning doesn’t mean that the US is bowing down to islam; we are simply trying to keep our citizens safe. Maynard will you knock on Mr. and Mrs. Smith’s door and relay the message that their son or daughter was killed due to a boot-leg Pastor and his flock of 30 burning the Koran on the front lawn. Maybe the military will send you to knock on those doors and explain the Pastor’s right to freedom of speech. Not one life is worth losing over a Pastor’s desire to make a statement. We know the devils that we are dealing with.
Maynard what is going on with the name calling? If I happen to agree with some of the policies presented by the Obama administration does that make me a Kool Aid drinker? I believe there are some independent thinkers on this board although they are few and far between. I disagree with your argument against the Obama tax plan. I believe that you over simplified the argument and didn’t back up your position with any facts. You made statements such as “If I am not mistaken here the logic is as follows: it’s OK to tax the rich MORE because they can afford it.” and “So I guess from now on when you stand in line at McDonald’s they will charge you for your burger based on you income. If you make $50k a year, your burger is 2 bucks. If you make $200k, your Happy Meal is 6 bucks – because hey! You can afford it!” Why are taxes being raised? Deficit, Debt, spending. How much will taxes up? The tax rate under Clinton was 39% under Bush they were cut to 36% and Obama is proposing to raise them to 39% again. Is that asking to much of the rich….maybe, I am sure an argument can be made against a tax hike.
I partially agree (is that a real position) with you in regards to the new stimulus infrastructure program. The program can be successful but should have been implemented 18 months ago instead of today.
You also stated in your article ” Just in case you want to FIX the problem here’s how: help businesses. They are the key. If you put programs together to support businesses- tax cuts, incentives, loan programs et cetera- they will hire more people in a variety of fields, not just one or two. Those people will now have income and support other businesses and restart the economy.” I love this argument. Are you for more government or less government? These programs exist and have existed for years and are currently being funded by the tax payers. Do not be naive in thinking that it is the poor that depend on the government the most (as previously stated). The rich, big business, big banks have benefited and profited more under Obama’s “failed” stimulus package then any other group. Fifty percent of the stimulus package were tax cuts. Obama negotiated this package in his obtus quest for bi-partisanship.
Quote “I’m an out of work talk show host….this package helps me not at all”. The goverment can’t help all of us but I sincerely hope that you find employment or start your own business soon.
On taxation
The flat tax is certainly not a new idea, in fact that is how monetary taxation started!
In our culture, taxes are justified as they fund activities that are necessary and beneficial to society. However, as Maynard suggests, the original purpose of taxation (The collection of revenue) has been tainted by that other form of taxation, the re-distribution of wealth. The history of taxation becomes even more sordid when one considers the famed expression “No taxation without representation”.
Taxation in the USA is now a massive industry, the rules of taxation are vast and un-interpretable, spawning another large industry, that of taxation attorneys and accountants. The system is now so large and autonomous (The IRS alone employs between 93,000 and 100,000 people, but they can’t be precise!) that even if our “representatives” wished to do so, they could not stop the machine.
It is a fact, however, that some countries HAVE operated, and DO operate with flat taxation, for example the State of Jersey in the Channel Islands off the coast of France. The rate of taxation was set in 1928 at 20% of income, and has not varied since then. However, 80 years later, in 2008, the Bailiff introduced a Goods and Services Tax (very similar to sales tax) of 3%. This tax was not created through need, but at the demands of the European Economic Union to ensure they became compliant. (Not surprisingly, there has been no consequential reduction of the flat tax rate! There is a kicker to this – of the 23 countries known to operate using the flat tax system, 21 are former USSR bloc countries.
The issue of “No taxation without representation” is one of accountability. If the only taxation one enjoys is income tax, that should be fairly easy to accomplish, at least as far as the IRS are concerned. The debate, however, is what happens to the collected revenue, how is it distributed, spent, pissed away or otherwise disbursed. This not easily researchable, and there is no direct and understandable accounting to the people.
Then we get into the other miasma of taxes levied on us; at the last count there were over 70 different taxes potentially to be paid by a person living and working in Harford County. Therefore, it makes sense that we adopt a flat tax system at the federal, state and municipality level.
There seems to be a belief and acceptance in our culture that if it exists, it must be taxed! However, they don’t nail you at birth, they get you on the way out!
I am neither a proponent for, or against flat tax, but if it is going to be done, it has to be a total revolution, not a tepid attempt at change. The largest obstacle I see to any change is your elected representatives. They would lose most of their ability to argue, finagle, or reasonably gain funds for their electorate, and they would certainly not find it so easy to avoid paying taxes themselves.
On taxation
Taxation in the US is a beast. A beast that cannot be contained or suppressed with simple solutions including the flat tax. The entire tax system must be recalibrated. The article from Maynard intertwined taxes and politics (not so strange bed fellows)and muddied up whatever point he was trying to make. In my humble opinion.
On the Stimulus Bill:
We all probably agree that the infrastructure could do with a bit of tidying up, but, as Maynard rightly says, this will not have a deep and lasting effect on our economy.
If you want to reduce the unemployment rate, thereby boosting the economy, stop taxing employers on their payroll.
If I agree to employ someone at a salary of $50,000 per annum, the actual cost to the business is a little over $54,000 per annum. Take the money you were going to spend on the stimulus bill to meet the consequent shortcomings on FED, FICA and unemployment contributions.
Although there are many government programs to aid small businesses, most of us shun these; we can’t deal with the excessive red tape going in, and we don’t wish to be beholden to anyone, particularly when we are asked to put our homes on the line to become part of a program.
Make it easier for employers, and I honestly believe there would be a reduction in the unemployment rate.
On the Stimulus Bill
An infrastructure stimulus bill if large enough and implemented correctly could work and would have a lasting effect on the economy. There is an old saying in some social circles “Come big or stay at home” The President didn’t come big enough and you know the rest.
So when my friends and I show up to burn Bibles alongside those burning the Koran we should expect zero opposition according to you. Sounds great, see you there!
Thankfully, living in America gives us the right to freedom of speech and expression. With this great freedom, comes the responsibility of having to put up with speech and expression that we dislike without trying to harm the speaker. That said, although I despise extremists of any faith, burning Qurans is totally wrong. Peaceful protests without interference is what this country is all about.
The Florida Pastor who wants to burn Qurans has created an international shitstorm that prompted leading political and religious figures to issue statements condemning the plans.
How would any of you guys feel if someone wanted to burn your New Testament, Torah or other sacred text? I bet many of you would be outraged. Have any of you actually read what the Quran says? If so, please put the offensive parts on this thread.
But if some dope from Lower Slobstinia wishes to burn a bible, Christians don’t take to the streets yelling “Death to Slobstinia” and burn Lower Slobstinian flags. The leaders of the various Christian churches would not fire their parishoners up for revenge. Slobstinians would not need to fear car bombs or beheadings by Christians because of the actions of some extremists looking for publicity.
The rest of the world is much more reasonable and civilized and can separate the actions of a few nuts from the intents of a entire country or religion. The radical Islamists paint the infidels with a big brush and associates the actions of a few with the entire group, and has no tolerance for any deviation from their way of thinking. The moderate Islamists are not willing to speak out against the radicals, which can only lead the non-Islamists to interpret it as passive acceptance and perhaps agreement in principle.
I agree with Sheesh and much of this is what I’ve said all along. The “moderates” cannot afford to remain on the sidelines giving tacit approval by their inaction. As far as I’m concerned people can burn any book they like since I’m wise enough to know the message doesn’t die with the book. Allowing someone to affect your emotions is granting them power over you. As far as I’m concerned, the violent outrage displayed indicates just how fragile a hold many muslims have on reality and civil behavior.
Thankfully, living in America gives us the right to freedom of speech and expression. With this great freedom, comes the responsibility of having to put up with speech and expression that we dislike without trying to harm the speaker. That said, although I despise extremists of any faith, burning Qurans is totally wrong. Peaceful protests without interference is what this country is all about.
The Florida Pastor who wants to burn Qurans has created an international shitstorm that prompted leading political and religious figures to issue statements condemning the plans.
How would any of you guys feel if someone wanted to burn your New Testament, Torah or other sacred text? I bet many of you would be outraged. Have any of you actually read what the Quran says? Did anyone find it offensive? If so, please put the offensive parts on this thread.
Number 1, we’ve been told for decades that burning Bibles and placing Crucifixes in urine are free speech. Number 2, it’s obvious that you have never read the koran. Here as you requested….
Here is the Jew hating inspiration for Muslims. From their book, the word of their god.
The Koran on the Jews
“Strongest among men in enmity to the believers wilt thou find the Jews…” (5:82).
“Curses were pronounced on those among the Children of Israel who rejected Faith, by the tongue of David and of Jesus the son of Mary: because they disobeyed and persisted in excesses.” (5:78).
“Is it ever so that when they make a covenant a party of them set it aside? The truth is, most of them believe not. And when there came to them a messenger from Allah [Muhammad], confirming what was with them [the Torah], a party of the people of the Book threw away the Book of Allah behind their backs, as if (it had been something) they did not know!” (2:100-101).
“The People of the Book know well that that is the truth from their Lord. Nor is Allah unmindful of what they do” (2:143-144).
“Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” (9:29).
“And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah (Himself) fighteth against them. How perverse are they!” (9:30)
The Jews killed their prophets (2:61; 2:87; 2:91; 3:21; 3:112; 3:181; 3:183; 4:155; 5:70), and boast “we killed the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary” (4:157).
“Allah hath heard the taunt of those who say: ‘Truly, Allah is indigent and we are rich!’ We shall certainly record their word and (their act) of slaying the prophets in defiance of right, and We shall say: ‘Taste ye the penalty of the Scorching Fire!’” (3:181)
“Why do not the rabbis and the doctors of Law forbid them from their (habit of) uttering sinful words and eating things forbidden? Evil indeed are their works.” (5:63)
“The Jews say: ‘Allah’s hand is tied up.’ Be their hands tied up and be they accursed for the (blasphemy) they utter. Nay, both His hands are widely outstretched: He giveth and spendeth (of His bounty) as He pleaseth. But the revelation that cometh to thee from Allah increaseth in most of them their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy. Amongst them we have placed enmity and hatred till the Day of Judgment. Every time they kindle the fire of war, Allah doth extinguish it; but they (ever) strive to do mischief on earth. And Allah loveth not those who do mischief” (5:64).
The Jews “strive to do mischief on earth” – that is, fasaad, for which the punishment is specified in 5:33: “they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land.”
“Ye are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, and believing in Allah. If only the People of the Book had faith, it were best for them: among them are some who have faith, but most of them are perverted transgressors. They will do you no harm, barring a trifling annoyance; if they come out to fight you, they will show you their backs, and no help shall they get. Shame is pitched over them (like a tent) wherever they are found, except when under a covenant (of protection) from Allah and from men; they draw on themselves wrath from Allah, and pitched over them is (the tent of) destitution. This because they rejected the Signs of Allah, and slew the prophets in defiance of right; this because they rebelled and transgressed beyond bounds.” (3:110-112)
“And because of their breaking their covenant, We have cursed them and made hard their hearts. They change words from their context and forget a part of that whereof they were admonished. Thou wilt not cease to discover treachery from all save a few of them. But bear with them and pardon them. Lo! Allah loveth the kindly (5:13).
“Among the People of the Book are some who, if entrusted with a hoard of gold, will (readily) pay it back; others, who, if entrusted with a single silver coin, will not repay it unless thou constantly stoodest demanding, because, they say, ‘there is no call on us (to keep faith) with these ignorant (Pagans).’ but they tell a lie against Allah, and (well) they know it.” (3:75)
“O Messenger! let not those grieve thee, who race each other into unbelief: (whether it be) among those who say ‘We believe’ with their lips but whose hearts have no faith; or it be among the Jews — men who will listen to any lie — will listen even to others who have never so much as come to thee. They change the words from their (right) times and places: they say, ‘If ye are given this, take it, but if not, beware!’ If any one’s trial is intended by Allah, thou hast no authority in the least for him against Allah. For such – it is not Allah’s will to purify their hearts. For them there is disgrace in this world, and in the Hereafter a heavy punishment.” (5:41)
“There is a party of them who distort the Scripture with their tongues, that ye may think that what they say is from the Scripture, when it is not from the Scripture. And they say: It is from Allah, when it is not from Allah; and they speak a lie concerning Allah knowingly” (3:78).
“Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say: ‘This is from Allah,’ to traffic with it for miserable price! Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.” (2:79)
“But because of their breach of their covenant, We cursed them, and made their hearts grow hard; they change the words from their (right) places and forget a good part of the message that was sent them, nor wilt thou cease to find them- barring a few – ever bent on (new) deceits: but forgive them, and overlook (their misdeeds): for Allah loveth those who are kind.” (5:13)
“Many of the People of the Scripture long to make you disbelievers after your belief, through envy on their own account, after the truth hath become manifest unto them’” (2:109).
“And when there comes to them a Book from Allah, confirming what is with them, although from of old they had prayed for victory against those without Faith, when there comes to them that which they (should) have recognised, they refuse to believe in it but the curse of Allah is on those without Faith. “ (2:89)
“For the iniquity of the Jews We made unlawful for them certain (foods) good and wholesome which had been lawful for them; in that they hindered many from Allah’s Way; that they took usury, though they were forbidden; and that they devoured men’s substance wrongfully; we have prepared for those among them who reject faith a grievous punishment.” (4:160-161)
“Thou wilt indeed find them, of all people, most greedy of life,-even more than the idolaters: Each one of them wishes He could be given a life of a thousand years: But the grant of such life will not save him from (due) punishment. For Allah sees well all that they do.” (2:96)
Allah transforms disobedient Jews into apes and pigs (2:63-66; 5:59-60; 7:166).
A Christian man was set on fire in Egypt yesterday. He died. Then his father was stabbed to death. His sin? He expressed romantic interest in a muslim woman. Is the world condemning this? Why not? Is it OK to burn non-muslims, but not the koran? Why did our far left media turn a nobody, podunk, country preacher burning a koran into an international incident? Because they could use it to tar ANYONE who is against the ground zero mosque as being represented by that idiot. They used that tactic despite the potential for loss of life in the Middle East. As it turned out there were riots in Kashmir about the burning koran issue. Two people died and a couple score were injured. But the Left got to brand me as a book burner. God save us from the jihadist loving, Christian hating, Left.
OMG I hope he finds a job soon!!!!!!