You are here

Attacking Ourselves Instead of Defending Each Other

Error message

  • Deprecated function: Optional parameter $decorators_applied declared before required parameter $app is implicitly treated as a required parameter in include_once() (line 3532 of /home/ethepmkq/public_html/drupal7core/includes/
  • Deprecated function: Optional parameter $relations declared before required parameter $app is implicitly treated as a required parameter in include_once() (line 3532 of /home/ethepmkq/public_html/drupal7core/includes/

Last week’s peaking hullabaloo over the Koranflagration and the Hamasque prompted Maxed Out Mama to step outside of her usual economic territory:

[B]y making, quite literally, a federal case of it, they have all conveyed the global message that rioting, burning, stabbing and any other type of barbaric Islamic behavior justify the suspension of the US Constitution when it comes to Muslims. In short, very prominent members of our executive are attempting to, de facto, suspend the constitution in such a way that it must inevitably have given the greatest surge of joy to violent Islamic factions since 9/11.

In 2003, Osama bin Laden wrote:

America is a great power possessed of tremendous military might and a wide-ranging economy, but all this is built on an unstable foundation which can be targeted, with special attention to its obvious weak spots. If America is hit in one hundredth of these weak spots, God willing, it will stumble, wither away and relinquish world leadership.

ObL’s strategy is working. I hold the Constitution to be an excellent foundation for a nation. But if we’re using an architectural metaphor, it is only the blueprint. The foundation is built of The People and is perpetually renewed. And we’re not really following the blueprint anymore.

Maxed Out Mama continues:

It's clear that none of these people are speaking out of principle. If they were, they'd be having fits over chocolate Jesuses, Piss Christ, and all that sort of thing.

We rearrange our national foundation in reaction to momentary circumstances instead of abiding by plan and principle.

And we should all be astounded and appalled at the theory that the actions of some podunk little church are going to provide more of a recruiting tool to violent Islamic terrorists than the bombings in Yemen, Pakistan and the actions in Afghanistan and Iraq. The fact that these witless examples of a tragic inability to reason could make that argument in public scares me almost as much as the rest of it.

Big Media leveraged the power of Reverend Jones. Even so, nothing motivates better than success. Mussulmen who want to be mad will always find justification. But succesfully blowing people up is more than motivation. It is inspiration.

Certainly the events of last week have gone a long way toward justifying the belief of a surprisingly large minority of the US population that Obama is Muslim. If you look just as his actions, it would appear that he is not on our side.

If it is accurate to say that Islamic and Arabic culture is shame-based, then public perspective is what shapes and defines that society. When the current President takes such pains to respect factions of Islam, it is a success for the Mussulmen. And if there is an irreconcilable conflict between those factions and the ideals outlined in the U.S. Constitution, success for them is failure for us. Politics is zero-sum.

There is another less obvious implication. The implied disrespect to the vast majority of American Muslims, who do support the Constitution, should not be blinked at. When the FBI warned the podunk pastor that his congregation could be subject to attack, it clearly was implying that Muslim attacks on our soil could not be stopped.

Emphasis added. That’s a damning conclusion. Under the current administration, the United States government cannot defend its people. We are losing.

I see a parallel to the argument about a woman in a short dress being responsible for being raped. Reverend Jones was “asking for it”. But if the cops knew the woman would be looking fine and walking alone on a dangerous street at a particular time, they could stop a potential rapist. The FBI and Obama would rather have the woman in a burka than fulfill their responsibility to protect her provocative expression.


Interestingly those of us out here who are not "peoples of the book" i.e Jewish, Christian or Moslem, have an awful time telling you guys apart... both in theology and actual behavior. Read that as you will and don't assume you know who the "good guys" really are.

It’s not too hard to decide who the bad guys are, though. If you have trouble, look for the people exploding themselves in crowds.

Like the Roman Catholic I.R.A or the Basque E.T.A? Surely if Muslims are all a bunch of evil killers, like many of your postings imply, the same could be said of Catholics? As I said it's very hard to tell you peoples of the book apart...

Neither the IRA nor the Basques claim religion as primary motivation. They are political independence movements.

To keep the parallel, wouldn’t we have to call Islam a system of politics instead of a religion?

You also jump to a conclusion that I am “of the book”. I’m not. But I judge the evidence differently and do see a vital distinction between the operation of Muslim wackos and other Abrahamic wackos.

Finally, never forget that more people have been killed by atheists than all the Book-following factions combined. If you’re dancing around a smug point about the inferiority of faithful people, please say so directly.

Why do you assume I am an atheist? There are other religions...and many Islamic terror groups like Hamas and the P.L.O are also political groups. Perhaps a good question you should ask yourself is why we have trouble felling too much sympathy for your viewpoint. Perhaps it has to do with the way it is presented?

Nope, I do not assume your atheism. I only detect the atheistic pattern of argument. What are you? Why keep playing cat-and-mouse? Do you have a position?

I’m not concerned about why you (or whomever shares your undefined position) doesn’t sympathize. I’m not a support group or a drum circle. Those who need a cuddle and pat on the head can turn elsewhere. Do you need a handjob before you’ll do the right thing?

If you can see through the religious mask of the violent factions, what’s your argument with my position? The book one claims as inpsiration matters most when it is used to justify blowing up tourists. I see that only in Islamic factions and Maoist factions. What am I missing?

Whoever threatens to blow up tourists because somebody burned a book is my enemy. Whoever threatens to blow up book-burners just for their Koranflagration is my enemy. Same for those who want to blow up those who burn flags and Constitutions. Your sensibilities are not an actionable harm under the common law.

Thank you for commenting, but I really don’t see your point.