Originally published by San Diego Rostra September 10, 2010
I have written much about Islam but this is my first (and hopefully last) piece on the infamous Terry Jones’ saga. Rarely do we see one news story spiral into such a panorama of emotional and philosophical discussions. Since it is human nature to react first and listen second, people find themselves starting with one argument, only to get whisked into strange new territory, unaware of the cyclone which blew them there. We desperately need a strainer big enough to retain only the important points from this sea of varied ideas. Hopefully my article will provide at least a modicum of focus and clarity.
When I first turned on the news Thursday morning, Pastor Terry Jones, of The Dove World Outreach Center, (a big name for a small church in Gainesville, Florida) was still planning a public burning of the Koran on Saturday, the anniversary of 9/11. Said Jones, “This book is not a book of peace. This book is responsible for 9/11.”
Then, sometime in the afternoon, everything changed: Jones said he had secured a meeting with Feisal Rauf, the no less controversial Imam who will head a mosque being built on the vicinity of Ground Zero. In exchange for an alleged promise to relocate this provocative mosque, Jones promised to cancel his barbecue which had become the talk of the town. Then, early in the evening, the story morphed once again. This time, Jones said his reason for not burning the books was a concern for the safety of our Afghanistan troops, endangered by those fanatical elements who viewed his Koran destruction as the worst kind of sacrilege. It was interesting seeing two completely unrelated reasons for pulling the plug, but then the FBI had visited Jones earlier and maybe that secret undisclosed little huddle had something to do with the pastor’s two back to back changes of heart. In any event, Jones’ book burning is off, even as Rauf insists more emphatically that his mosque is coming soon to a theater near Ground Zero.
The mere suggestion of book burning creeps me out and gives me the horrors. I realize NAZI analogies are used to death these days by anyone who wants to shut up an opponent, but in this specific case, we really are talking about something the NAZIS actually did. In fact, the burning of books was one of Hitler’s very early acts for the obvious reason of controlling information. No, I am not comparing Pastor Jones to Hitler. Yes, I am comparing this one specific proposed action to an action of Hitler. Words may be terrible. Words may even be dangerous. But they are to be fought only with other words. The moment we fight them by suppressing them, the good words die with the bad.
Still, there is so much more going on here than the simple question of whether or not books should be burned. One little church in Florida has created a national dialogue of overlapping, pretzel twisted subjects, from the safety of our troops in Afghanistan, to the proposed mosque at Ground Zero, to notions of good, peaceful Muslims, as opposed to bad, violent Muslims, to First Amendment discussions, to political consistency (or lack there of) to mind reading itself. Let me remove that last checker from the board immediately since it seems the most tangential and least important part of the discussion.
I keep hearing all kinds of speculation about Pastor Jones’ motives; how this is merely a sensationalist attempt to put a world spotlight on his otherwise obscure 50 member church. The man may indeed be a sensationalist. It’s not for me to say. Evidently, I don’t have as much gifted insight as our television talking heads. Since other, more important, issues are related to this news story (many of them a matter of freedom, life and death) why waste time on a question that will never be answered anyway until the day Pastor Jones stands before God?
On the other hand, there is one relevant discussion related to the size of his congregation: How did news of this small, otherwise unnoticed church’s calender of events get circulated so quickly? I realize the original couriers were bloggers, but if you’ll pardon my play on words, the flame was fanned by our news media. And so, for those who feared that American lives could be in danger from militant Muslims as a result of this potential incident, for those do who think the pastor should be held responsible for every related death, is the media equally culpable? To their credit, the Associated Press said it would not film the book burning, but they still intended to be on the site, interviewing people and reporting the event. Look how inflated this once scrawny inner tube became?
As a matter of fact, the media has done more than endanger lives. They have also contributed to the endangerment of freedom. This leads to my bottom line: No I do not believe the Koran or any book should be burned, but I fear the hysteria created by the media in cases such as this will someday jeopardize our right to speak against the Koran at a time when a brainwashed Politically Correct nation needs a sobering wake up call before she sleeps away her freedom.
This may be the only relevant truth masked by mixed messages as our emotions go on a roller coaster ride, one second up, one second down, wanting to say yes or no as the subject changes faster than flashing images of an MTV video. First you want to agree with a statement, the next minute, you need to disagree with a related but much different proposition.
It can be confusing. We want to stand by our Yes’ s when affirmation is needed and we want to guard our No’s when compromise waits in the wings.
With that in mind, perhaps the label yes or no may just help to sift through the fog until a clear front seat window view becomes painfully, but undeniably, apparent.
No, Pastor Jones should not burn copies of the Koran.
Yes, he still has a constitutional right to do so.
No, that is not a good reason for him to burn the book. It would be an incredibly stupid gesture, given the already electrified atmosphere related to the subject of Islam, however…
Yes, Pastor Jones is correct to take issue with the book itself, despite his exaggerated methods of protest.
Yes, the Koran really is a book filled with commands of Jihad. It also contains strong anti-Christian and anti-Semitic language.
No, those are not the only verses in the Koran.
Yes, there are also verses which talk about peace, but both sets of scriptural passages are in there.
Yes, many Muslims focus only on the peaceful verses.
Yes, many other Muslims take the Jihad commands seriously.
Yes, it is possible to take verses out of context, but the only true, authentic context is verified by asking what the original author truly meant to say. Mohammad himself conquered with a sword. How do you think he took Mecca? Therefore, it is fairly obvious (albeit not Politically Correct) to understand that the Jihad commands were intended by Mohammed to be taken literally and not figuratively.
Yes, such an ominous action as book burning will undoubtedly lead to eventual Hate Speech legislation, but no, it shouldn’t. In the name of banning book burnings, those of us who wish to seriously challenge the Koran through the peaceful exchange of words and a modest little portion of our Constitution called the First Amendment, will find cherished free speech thrown out like a baby with the bath water.
If you think I’m exaggerating my concern, I remind you that it is already against the law to speak against Islam in Canada.
In the meantime, Pastor Jones is being censored on the internet. Dan Goodgame, a spokesman for the web host company, Rackspace Hosting, said two websites operated by the Dove World Outreach Center, were being closed down.
And listen to how they talk about this news in USA Today: Sept 9, 2010 under a heading they entitled: “The inconvenient Constitution.”
“The incident was a reminder of how inconvenient the Constitution can be.
‘The First Amendment, as it’s been interpreted, would probably not win if it were put up to a vote,’ said Gillers, whose media law class discussed the case. ‘It is very hard to explain to people why this sort of conduct should be permitted.’”
No, we do not want to lose our rights to freedom of speech but…
Yes, Pastor Jones should be talked out of burning these Korans, even by our President who said “This is a recruitment bonanza for Al Qaeda. You know you could have serious violence in places like Pakistan or Afghanistan.”
Obama went on to say that under U.S. law, Pastor Jones has a right to his actions but it is not incumbent upon human beings to do every single thing they are allowed.
Speaking on national television Thursday morning, Obama urged Jones to “listen to those better angels.”
Interesting. Isn’t that what most people were saying about Feisal Rauf’s plan to build a mosque on the vicinity of Ground Zero? But …
No, Obama has not tried to talk Feisal Rauf into ceasing his unpopular construction plans. Obama couldn’t bring himself to say that this was an inappropriate action and slap in the face to 3000 9/11 victims. And while we’re in the neighborhood of New York City…
Yes, Rauf also has a constitutional right to express himself with offensive actions such as a Ground Zero mosque, assuming the man is not a militant Muslim who believes in overthrowing the very constitution he calls upon to protect his current rights, a huge assumption inasmuch as he has praised Hamas in Arabic and refused to renounce Hamas in English, which means he probably should not be allowed to build a mosque anywhere, but…
Yes, hypothetically, if none of the data above were accurate, he or any other “peaceful” Muslim should be allowed to build a mosque any place they want, but…
No, he should not build this one on Ground Zero, for even if he thought he had the nicest intentions, the act still displays the same bad taste and provocative behavior as the book burning by Pastor Jones who also claims to have the best of intentions.
Yes, the burning of the Koran would inspire violence from Muslims toward Americans in foreign countries, but …
No, that will not make pastor Jones responsible. Those responsible for murder and violence are the ones who commit murder and violence. And…
No, such acts of violence and terror do not really need much inspiration. Had it not been the Burning Book Of the Month Club, it would have been something else. When a Danish newspaper published a cartoon of Mohammad, riots and burnings broke out all over the world. When Dutch film director, Theo Van Gogh made a movie about the mistreatment of women in Muslim countries, he was stabbed to death on the street in broad daylight. (Gee, that ought to teach us to stop calling Islam a violent religion! ) When it was falsely reported that an American prison guard in Guantanamo Bay flushed a Koran down the toilet, Muslims committed murders in retaliation. But that’s nothing: Some Muslims have threatened violence if an infidel so much as touches the Koran.
Ironically, I do not recall much Muslim outrage when Jewish synagogues were burnt down immediately after Israel turned Gaza over to the Palestinians. Meanwhile, countless Jewish and Christian organizations all over America have swiftly and vehemently condemned the plans of Pastor Jones but this hasn’t stopped Muslims all over the world from burning American flags and expressing outrage at “yet even more American Muslim hatred.” Those who would chastise us to not blame all Muslims for the actions of a “a few terrorist extremists” have no problem whatsoever indicting all Christians for the actions of a fifty member church.
Other events credited with “recruiting terrorists,” include the Iraq War and the Afghanistan War. Oddly enough neither of those events had happened yet when Osama Bin Laden orchestrated the attack on 9/11. As a matter of fact, Bin Laden told us quite plainly why the Pentagon and World Trade Center were attacked: The American infidels had dared to set foot on Saudi Arabian soil! Guilty as charged. We did indeed land our troops in Saudi Arabia to protect them from Iraq, their enemy country which had just conquered Kuwait and was arming for further expansion. Quite some time later, a letter from Al Qaeda said, “Americans be on notice. Convert to Islam or Die.” It did not say, “Hey, we know you Americans are split about the war and equally divided over how to interpret Islam. To those of you on the Left who defend us in such a tolerant, sensitive, Politically Correct way, shucks, we sure appreciate you.” No, the command to convert or die was there for all Americans, period! But then, that is the big elephant in the room, isn’t it? The real recruiting tool for terrorism and anti-American hatred is the Koran itself. Much as the sophisticated elite hate to hear this, the command to convert or destroy the infidel is found in their sacred scriptures (Surah 9). No, that does not mean I approve of burning the book and yes, I am aware of the many Muslims who do not take Surah 9 seriously, either reinterpreting the passage, or ignoring it altogether. But the passage exists. So do many companion Koran verses.
Perhaps Obama’s inconsistency of concern is enlightened when we remember the Ground Zero mosque creates no parallel fear of violent retaliation from Christians, Jews or other religions. And with that, we’ve come full circle: Even as we admit that the Koran should not be burned, it is high time for an honest discussion about the action inspired words contained in that little book.
Feisal Rauf has provided a dishonest discussion so far, but even he explained on Larry King Live why that mosque absolutely has to be completed.
“There is a certain anger here, no doubt. But if you don’t do this right, anger will explode in the Muslim world. If this is not handled correctly, this crisis could become much bigger than the Danish cartoon crisis, which resulted in attacks on Danish embassies in various parts of the Muslim world. And we have a much larger footprint in the Muslim world. If we don’t handle this crisis correctly, it could become something which could really become very, very, very dangerous indeed.”
See how it all works? Better not burn any Korans. OK, 99.9 percent of us didn’t want to do that anyway, but it doesn’t end there. Better not forbid that mosque at Ground Zero either. Better not even raise your voice in protest, for that makes you hateful and anti-Muslim. And better not draw Mohammad. Better not make movies about Muslim violence or even discuss Muslim violence. (In England a man was arrested for telling his neighbor that Muslims are responsible for 9/11 and in this same merry old England, many schools stopped teaching on the holocaust because Muslims found it offensive.) Continuing with the taboo list: Better not wage wars against countries that harbor Muslim terrorists. Finally, how dare we open the Koran and show those verses which command all the violence?
We must carefully restrain our words and our actions even as outspoken Muslims call other Muslims to wage war. Sooner or later the truth will eventually sink in: If we really want to stop inciting Muslim violence we need to either convert or basically just stop existing.
Under most circumstances, such ludicrous demands would never be taken seriously. But the Politically Correct individual makes a strange bedfellow with the Jihadist. If we go the way of Canada, making it against the law to speak against Islam, all that will have been accomplished is a more sanitized form of book burning called censorship. Once it is against the law to call Islam a violent religion, brace yourself for violence at the hand of Muslims like you’ve never seen before.
We can never approve book burnings. But we’d be well advised to at least pay attention to the concern which inspired this particular book burning that never took place. Even our President who insists Islam is a religion of peace, was desperate to stop the book burning for fear of American lives. And his favorite Imam has expressed that exact same fear should the Ground Zero mosque not be built.
Share this on
