Originally published by Communities @ Washington Times.
An earlier version appeared in San Diego Rostra under a different name also written by Bob Siegel
SAN DIEGO, April 7, 2011 —Well, he did it! He did just what he promised to do for such a long time! Pastor Terry Jones of The Dove World Outreach Center, (a big name for a small church in Gainesville, Florida) finally performed the action which once made news even from the threats themselves: He burned a copy of the Koran and stood by his decision after learning that 20 U.N. workers in Afghanistan were murdered by a mob.
“’We must hold these countries and people accountable for what they have done as well as for any excuses they may use to promote their terrorist activities.” (AFP, 4-2-11)
?There are many overlapping issues to unpack with a story such as this. To start with, 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 but it is legitimate to compare this one specific deed 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.
Many are holding Jones partially responsible for the violence and murder in the wake of his Koran tribunal. And yet, those eager to place blame beyond the killers themselves seem to be forgetting a relevant question: How did news of this small, otherwise unnoticed church’s calendar of events get circulated so quickly? I realize the original couriers were bloggers, a few months ago when Jones first talked about burring the Koran, but if you’ll pardon my play on words, the flame was fanned by our news media. And so, for those who feel that innocent lives were taken as a result of this incident, for those who do think the pastor should be held responsible for every related death, is the media equally culpable? And as we debate that proposition, here’s another important question to ponder: Has the media also contributed to the endangerment of freedom? Most thinking people will agree that neither the Koran nor any book should be burned, but the hysteria created by the media in cases such as this could 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.
It is understandable to experience a roller coaster of paradoxical feelings over this troubling incident. Sometimes words like “yes” or “no” alternate with every pondering thought. No, Pastor Jones should not have burned the Koran. Yes, he still had a constitutional right to do so. No, that is not a good reason for him to burn the book. It was an incredibly stupid gesture, given the already electrified atmosphere related to the subject of Islam. Still, Pastor Jones is correct to take issue with the book itself, despite his exaggerated methods of protest, because the Koran really is a book filled with commands of Jihad. It also contains strong anti-Christian and anti-Semitic language.
“Prophet make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home ….they uttered the word of unbelief and renounced Islam after embracing it.” (Surah 9)
“Believers, take neither the Jews nor the Christians for your friends. They are friends with one another. Whoever of you seeks their friendship will become one of their number. God does not guide the wrong doers…. The most implacable of men are the Jews and the pagans.” (Surah 5)
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 but many other Muslims take the Jihad commands seriously.
Admittedly, it is possible to misuse verses by pulling them out of context, but the only true, authentic context is verified by asking what the original author honestly meant to say. Mohammad himself, (professed author in more of a currier fashion, claiming that Allah was the true author) conquered with a sword. 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.
But whatever the Koran may say inside, such an ominous action as book burning could potentially lead to eventual Hate Speech legislation and that would be a sad day for America. 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, just might find cherished free speech thrown out like a baby with the bath water.
Observe how New York University law professor, Stephen Gillers talked about this subject in USA Today last year on Sept 9, 2010 when Pastor Jones was in the news but the book had not yet been burned:
“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.” (USA Today, 9-9-10)
We ought not assume that Gillers was calling for an abolishment of the constitution but it’s still rather chilling to hear a law professor refer to our constitution as “inconvenient” and it makes us wonder where he might stand if a rewriting of the constitution were put up for a vote.
So much for the kind of rhetoric we heard before Jones had even done anything. Now that the deed is an accomplished fact, the less than responsible commentary continues, such as Senator Lindsey Graham’s reaction in his interview with CBS’ Bob Schieffer.
“I wish we could find a way to hold people accountable,” Graham said. “Free speech is a great idea, but we’re in a war…During World War II, we had limits on what you could do if it inspired the enemy.” He then continued by saying we should do “anything we can to push back here in America against acts like this that put our troops at risk” (Face The Nation, 4-3-11).
Good one, Senator! In other words: “Free speech is important but it should still be repressed at times.” What a brilliant burst of inspiration from a leader of our great nation!
To be fair, Graham has since back peddled his statement somewhat, having incurred criticism from Mark Steyn and others. In an interview with National Review On Line, April 4, 2011, he told Robert Costa, “I am not suggesting that we have a constitutional amendment to ban Koran burning, or Bible burning, or anything else. I am suggesting that I wish that we could make people accountable.”
The meaning of accountability apart from law was not clarified. And when asked if he should be an advocate for the First Amendment or General Petraeus’ desire to see our government condemn Koran burning, Graham defended Petraeus.
“You know what? Let me tell you, the First Amendment means nothing without people like General Petraeus. I don’t believe that the First Amendment allows you to burn the flag or picket the funeral of a slain service member. I am going to continue to speak out and say that’s wrong. The First Amendment does allow you to express yourself and burn a Koran. I’m sure that’s the law, but I don’t think it’s a responsible use of our First Amendment right.”
Taking both inteviews into account, Graham seems to have made some contradictory statements about free speech. Where his heart truly comes down on the matter is anyone’s guess. We can give him the benefit of the doubt and accept his latter qualifications, but one wonders if such an explanation would have been offered had he not been challenged.
Meanwhile, the Petraeus statement itself is cause for caution. Much as we might respect the man as a military hero, his recent words are rather chilling:
“The American Congress and Senate must condemn this in clear words, show their stance, and prevent such incidents from happening again.” (Reuters, 4-3-11)
How does the government prevent something without passing a new law? Petraeus’ concern for the lives of our soldiers and others in Afghanistan may invoke sympathy and excuses for such a remark, but at the expense of making the obvious, obvious, Pastor Jones (whose actions we may detest) is not responsible for what goes on in Afghanistan. Those responsible for murder and violence are the ones who commit murder and violence.
Frankly, such acts of terror do not really need much inspiration anyway. 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. Ironically, I do not recall much Muslim outrage when Jewish synagogues were burnt down immediately after Israel turned Gaza over to the Palestinians.
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, Osama told us quite plainly why the Pentagon and World Trade Center were attacked and he told us before the attack even took place.
In May 1998, ABC reporter John Miller conducted a videotape interview of Osama bin Laden.
John Miller: Mr. bin Laden, you have issued a fatwah calling on Muslims to kill Americans where they can, when they can. Is that directed at all Americans, just the American military, just the Americans in Saudi Arabia?
Osama bin Laden: Allah has ordered us to glorify the truth and to defend Muslim land, especially the Arab peninsula … against the unbelievers. After World War II, the Americans grew unfair and more oppressive towards people in general and Muslims in particular. … The Americans started it and retaliation and punishment should be carried out following the principle of reciprocity, especially when women and children are involved. Through history, America has not been known to differentiate between the military and the civilians or between men and women or adults and children. Those who threw atomic bombs and used the weapons of mass destruction against Nagasaki and Hiroshima were the Americans. Can the bombs differentiate between military and women and infants and children? America has no religion that can deter her from exterminating whole peoples. Your position against Muslims in Palestine is despicable and disgraceful. America has no shame. … We believe that the worst thieves in the world today and the worst terrorists are the Americans. Nothing could stop you except perhaps retaliation in kind. We do not have to differentiate between military or civilian. As far as we are concerned, they are all targets, and this is what the fatwah says … . The fatwah is general (comprehensive) and it includes all those who participate in, or help the Jewish occupiers in killing Muslims.”
Quite some time later, in 2006, a video arrived from Al Qaeda messenger, Adam Yahiye Gadahn instructing Americans to 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! Although the video listed other grievences against America, the unwillingness on our part to convert was paramount.
“To Americans and the rest of Christendom we say, either repent (your) misguided ways and enter into the light of truth or keep your poison to yourself and suffer the consequences in this world and the next.” (Hot Air, 9-2-06).
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. 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. If we go the way of Canada with its “Hate Speech” legislation, all that will have been accomplished is a more sanitized form of book burning called censorship.
Share this on
