Would World Leaders Demand a Halt to a Bible Burning?

In Monty Python, the actor Terrry Jones portrayed a number of ridiculous religious leaders in their comedic theater of the absurd, hilariously lampooning many different religions. Now the real world is more absurd than art. The western worlds tip toeing around the sensitivites of one single religion, is now its own theater of the absurd. Though the unrelated pastor,Terry Jones, in Gainesville Florida, chose an action with a history that calls to mind some very unfortunate correlations (book burning), he tapped into an issue that bears close examination. Perhaps this pastor of a tiny,fringe church didn't have the education, capacity, or erudition, to make the argument that many around the world feel needs to be addressed, but his action drew worldwide attention, because at some level, so many feel that atleast his impulse, was justified.  

A useful thought puzzle would be to consider what would be the reaction of all these leaders, potentates, and media, if the pastor were threatening to burn bibles, and the Vatican responded by saying that non-Catholics would be killed in retaliation? What if a United States General stated publicly that he felt American troops would be attacked and killed in whatever predominantly Catholic countries they were stationed in? Would the world be condemning the pastors action, or the Catholic church? In another analogy, what would be the public reaction if the political leaders of Israel chose to threaten violence against UN soldiers stationed in de-militarized zones, if any theaters aired Mel Gibsons version of "The Passion"? What would the elites be calling for, if the ADL were cautioning there would be violence by jews, against all non jews around the world, should that film be released? Would Pat Buchannon be suggesting that Mel Gibson be arrested as a threat to national security? Would Hillary Clinton,President Obama, and the UN be demanding that the studio and theaters cave in to the demands, or would they instead be condemning Israeli and Jewish leaders?

When does mere potential affront, or even actual insult, justify violence, or even the threat of violence? Somehow, the ruling class of the United States and the western nations have a double standard when it comes to Islam. No other faith or creed is given such deference to its hyperactive sensitivity to insult. No other faith is awarded such latitude to both engage in violence and threaten violence. While western ruling elites will condemn the murder of Theo Van Gogh, thefatwah against Salmon Rushdie, and the death threats against Hirsi Ali, out of the other side of their collective mouths, they urge deference to the wishes of the perpetrators. The attempts to placate this violent cult have risen to the absurd, and seemingly everyone except the "ruling class" knows it. When a respected academic press decides to print a book about the worldwide controversy over the Dutch editorial cartoons portraying the bloody nature of Islam, yet is cowed into neglecting to put copies of the cartoons that are the actual subject of the book, in the book itself, the very nature of reality takes on a cartoonish nature.

When the Cartoon Network refuses to air an episode of "South Park", because it contains a cartoon image of Mohammad, on the selfsame program where they have been lampooning Jesus,Moses, Buddah (and Charleton Heston) for years, something has clearly gone awry in the western world. It is this theater of the absurd, which is rewarding the apalling behavior of this sole religion, that draws the Gainesville pastor to consider "Koran burning". Though he didn't have the sophistication to apply for a government grant to fund "artwork", suspending a copy of the Koran in urine (in homage to past grants by the National Endowment of the Arts), he nonetheless made his point. Somehow, the "Religion of Submission", is getting the "ruling elites" of the western world to indeed submit to its demands and depredations. However, in doing so they are adding to the list of grievances for which their general populations will soon be holding them accountable.People will not long follow, or even listen, to leaders who are cowardly,and demand that their subjects accept insult and denigration.

While the ruling class may be deluding themselves into believing that they are advocating for "tolerance", the fact that they apply different standards to the "Religion of Submission" than to any other faith, puts the lie to thatclaim. Whether it is political correctness run amok, or actual fear ofMuslim violence, is irrelevant. The deference to an alien creeds demands for special treatment, is not leadership, it is appeasement, and the general public knows it. Even a semi-educated pastor of a 49 member church, in a small town in north Florida knows it. Unless the "ruling class" starts to stand its ground and take action, others like the pastor will start taking action. The actions they take, across the western world, will not be as nuanced, balanced, or appropriate as the actions a courageous "ruling class" could or should take,in standing up to the demands of a terroristic cult. For what else should we call a creed, that threatens violence every time they don't get their way? Certainly, no one is laughing.

This is my third attemp to be PC..........

FUK them all...........and let GOD sort them out Or whom/what you believe.










9/11



I have NOT forgotten

Much truth there.

Guy Montag?

On a related note, the powers that be cater to one certain race.

He's right.

Dead nuts.

Thought you all would like it - very well done IMHO.