Why Islam is Disrepsected

[Bonnie]

By Jeff Jacoby

IT WAS front-page news this week when Newsweek retracted a report claiming that a US interrogator in Guantanamo had flushed a copy of the Koran down a toilet. Everywhere it was noted that Newsweek's story had sparked widespread Muslim rioting, in which at least 17 people were killed. But there was no mention of deadly protests triggered in recent years by comparable acts of desecration against other religions

No one recalled, for example, that American Catholics lashed out in violent rampages in 1989, after photographer Andres Serrano's ''Piss Christ" -- a photograph of a crucifix submerged in urine -- was included in an exhibition subsidized by the National Endowment for the Arts. Or that they rioted in 1992 when singer Sinead O'Connor, appearing on ''Saturday Night Live," ripped up a photograph of Pope John Paul II.

There was no reminder that Jewish communities erupted in lethal violence in 2000, after Arabs demolished Joseph's Tomb, torching the ancient shrine and murdering a young rabbi who tried to save a Torah. And nobody noted that Buddhists went on a killing spree in 2001 in response to the destruction of two priceless, 1,500-year-old statues of Buddha by the Taliban government in Afghanistan.

Of course, there was a good reason all these bloody protests went unremembered in the coverage of the Newsweek affair: They never occurred.

Christians, Jews, and Buddhists don't lash out in homicidal rage when their religion is insulted. They don't call for holy war and riot in the streets. It would be unthinkable for a mainstream priest, rabbi, or lama to demand that a blasphemer be slain. But when Reuters reported what Mohammad Hanif, the imam of a Muslim seminary in Pakistan, said about the alleged Koran-flushers -- ''They should be hung. They should be killed in public so that no one can dare to insult Islam and its sacred symbols" -- was any reader surprised?
The Muslim riots should have been met by outrage and condemnation. From every part of the civilized world should have come denunciations of those who would react to the supposed destruction of a book with brutal threats and the slaughter of 17 innocent people. But the chorus of condemnation was directed not at the killers and the fanatics who incited them, but at Newsweek.

From the White House down, the magazine was slammed -- for running an item it should have known might prove incendiary, for relying on a shaky source, for its animus toward the military and the war. Over and over, Newsweek was blamed for the riots' death toll. Conservative pundits in particular piled on. ''Newsweek lied, people died" was the headline on Michelle Malkin's popular website. At NationalReview.com, Paul Marshall of Freedom House fumed: ''What planet do these [Newsweek] people live on? . . . Anybody with a little knowledge could have told them it was likely that people would die as a result of the article." All of Marshall's choler was reserved for Newsweek; he had no criticism at all for the marauders in the Muslim street.

Then there was Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who announced at a Senate hearing that she had a message for ''Muslims in America and throughout the world." And what was that message? That decent people do not resort to murder just because someone has offended their religious sensibilities? That the primitive bloodlust raging in Afghanistan and Pakistan was evidence of the Muslim world's dysfunctional political culture?

No: Her message was that ''disrespect for the Holy Koran is not now, nor has it ever been, nor will it ever be, tolerated by the United States."

Granted, Rice spoke while the rioting was still taking place and her goal was to reduce the anti-American fever. But what ''Muslims in America and throughout the world" most need to hear is not pandering sweet-talk. What they need is a blunt reminder that the real desecration of Islam is not what some interrogator in Guantanamo might have done to the Koran. It is what totalitarian Muslim zealots have been doing to innocent human beings in the name of Islam. It is 9/11 and Beslan and Bali and Daniel Pearl and the USS Cole. It is trains in Madrid and schoolbuses in Israel and an ''insurgency" in Iraq that slaughters Muslims as they pray and vote and line up for work. It is Hamas and Al Qaeda and sermons filled with infidel-hatred and exhortations to ''martyrdom."

But what disgraces Islam above all is the vast majority of the planet's Muslims saying nothing and doing nothing about the jihadist cancer eating away at their religion. It is Free Muslims Against Terrorism, a pro-democracy organization, calling on Muslims and Middle Easterners to ''converge on our nation's capital for a rally against terrorism" -- and having only 50 people show up.

Yes, Islam is disrespected. That will only change when throngs of passionate Muslims show up for rallies against terrorism, and when rabble-rousers trying to gin up a riot over a defiled Koran can't get the time of day.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ed...rticles/2005/05/19/why_islam_is_disrespected/

 

[archangel]

Well first off I would say it is because they are still living in the 7th century..
Women are classified as second class citizens...killing and torture in the name of Allah is accepted behavoir...IMO this is not a religion...it is masked as such...however it is nothing more than a radical political party with 7th century philosophy...

 

[Adam's Apple]

Jacoby is so right in that article! Where is the "good" Muslims outrage?

 

[no1tovote4]

Jacoby is so right in that article! Where is the "good" Muslims outrage?

It is largely unreported. Queen Rayna of Jordan has led several marches against Muslim violence in her country. And she's hot too!

 

[Arabian]

Well first off I would say it is because they are still living in the 7th century...
Women are classified as second class citizens...killing and torture in the name of Allah is accepted behavior...IMO this is not a religion...it is masked as such...however it is nothing more than a radical political party with 7th century philosophy...

actually what annoys me is that you all repeat the same things without understanding it,, its just cause you heard other saying the same words,,,
what is the relation between the technology and second class citizen and the women clothes,,, is it when we are civilized or if there are more technology the women should wear less clothes ,, I mean in the 1st century she should wear more clothes than now a day,, who complained to you,, who allowed you to talk for Muslims women,,, imp Muslim girl and I didn’t complain no one did,,,, do you want all people walk down street with out any clothes for example,, I think if Islam said so "which is impossible" you will say see how Islam let women walk down in the street.....
and again read the concept of Jihad before you say what all of you says,, it is just like a tape every one say what in it,,,
sorry if I was tough but really all of u say the same,, with out reading why or reading the concept of Islam and understand it well,, sorry again bro

 

[Shattered]

Muslim girl and I didn’t complain no one did,,,, do you want all people walk down street with out any clothes for example

You're not allowed to complain - if you did, you'd get your ass kicked.

 

[Gem]

Arabian,

Actually, if a Muslim woman wants to wear a bikini, a hijab, or wants to be completely covered from head to toe with only her eyes uncovered that is fine with me....I don't care and I will respect her choices. I just believe that she should be permitted to make those choices without facing violence if she chooses something different then what her neighbor would like.

What I will NOT respect, is her family stoning her to death when she is raped, or a husband throwing acid in the face of his wife because he suspects her of adultery...honor killings are still accepted and, in some places, all too common aspects of Muslim extremist culture.

 

[archangel]

actually what annoys me is that you all repeat the same things without understanding it,, its just cause you heard other saying the same words,,,
what is the relation between the technology and second class citizen and the women clothes,,, is it when we are civilized or if there are more technology the women should wear less clothes ,, I mean in the 1st century she should wear more clothes than now a day,, who complained to you,, who allowed you to talk for Muslims women,,, imp Muslim girl and I didn’t complain no one did,,,, do you want all people walk down street with out any clothes for example,, I think if Islam said so "which is impossible" you will say see how Islam let women walk down in the street.....
and again read the concept of Jihad before you say what all of you says,, it is just like a tape every one say what in it,,,
sorry if I was tough but really all of u say the same,, with out reading why or reading the concept of Islam and understand it well,, sorry again bro

I'm not sure if you are a woman or man...I am assuming by your comments you are a woman...If so please explain to me why in Saudi Arabia women are not allowed to drive...and cannot go about without a escort...a family member of the male persuasion or husband...as for clothes....what are you talking about...I do not believe or have seen for that matter US girls going around half naked in the streets...you watch way too much TV..."Girls gone wild" or movies produced in Hollywood...do US girls dress a little sexy...yes I would say....however I prefer to look at them vs a girl dressed in a tent!

Islam is nothing more than a radical political party masked as a religion...I can attest...living in Nevada....having seen Saudi men and women in my state...gambling...dancing..drinking and just out partying...then when they get on the plane to go home...wallah a miraculous change occours...back with the tents and head gear...a little hypocritical to say the least...

You really need to pay attention as to what your leaders say and do...rather then take them for their word...they are taking you down a dark and phoney path...if you prefer to marry someone who you are told is best for you rather than who you fall in love with...well so be it...don't tell me you think everyone in the world should agree with this hypocrisy! :huh:

 

[Shattered]

I do not believe or have seen for that matter US girls going around half naked in the streets...

Not to argue your point or anything, but when it comes to the above, you obviously never leave your house...Girls running around half naked is the *norm* now...

 

[Annie]

Not to argue your point or anything, but when it comes to the above, you obviously never leave your house...Girls running around half naked is the *norm* now...

In Wisconsin? Your weather must be much warmer than here!

I don't think that most girls are 'running around half naked...' It's gross when it's middle age women running around looking like their daughters.

 

[Shattered]

In Wisconsin? Your weather must be much warmer than here!

I don't think that most girls are 'running around half naked...' It's gross when it's middle age women running around looking like their daughters.

Weather plays no part in what some people will wear - trust me. Not here, anyway.. The most recent bit of outrageousness was a 17-ish year old girl that was about 5'10", and a good, SOLID 75lbs overweight that wore a tiny bra-type top, and too tight pants, while sporting a belly ring that didn't quite lay right. She figured that since she was well tanned, she could pull it off.

That's about 3/4 nekkid, IMO.

 

[Annie]

Weather plays no part in what some people will wear - trust me. Not here, anyway.. The most recent bit of outrageousness was a 17-ish year old girl that was about 5'10", and a good, SOLID 75lbs overweight that wore a tiny bra-type top, and too tight pants, while sporting a belly ring that didn't quite lay right. She figured that since she was well tanned, she could pull it off.

That's about 3/4 nekkid, IMO.

Several is not most/all/whatever. Most girls still dress 'just fine.' If a high school girl wants to wear jeans, a short top, and belly ring, fine. I wouldn't want my daughter to, but that's me. Truth to tell, I picked my fights carefully and usually won.

If a heavier girl wants to wear them, well we can hope they'll learn. What dumb things did you do at 17 or were you always perfect?

 

[archangel]

Not to argue your point or anything, but when it comes to the above, you obviously never leave your house...Girls running around half naked is the *norm* now...

Depends on how one defines half naked...in my definition it would mean breast or other parts totally exposed...not just a little left to the imagination...and yes I do leave my house...quite frequently...do alot of boating...see alot of girls in bikini's do not consider this to be naked...sexy hell yeah but not obnoxious....geez get a grip young lady! :bangheads

 

[Shattered]

Several is not most/all/whatever. Most girls still dress 'just fine.' If a high school girl wants to wear jeans, a short top, and belly ring, fine. I wouldn't want my daughter to, but that's me. Truth to tell, I picked my fights carefully and usually won.

If a heavier girl wants to wear them, well we can hope they'll learn. What dumb things did you do at 17 or were you always perfect?

I did something *totally* dumb at 16-17.. Worked my teenage years away, and wasted all that perfectly good money on kitchen supplies and concerts.

 

[Shattered]

Depends on how one defines half naked...in my definition it would mean breast or other parts totally exposed...not just a little left to the imagination...and yes I do leave my house...quite frequently...do alot of boating...see alot of girls in bikini's do not consider this to be naked...sexy hell yeah but not obnoxious....geez get a grip young lady! :bangheads

Umm.. I'd think that would qualify as totally naked - not half. Half, to me, is where 50% of your total body is exposed.. Damn those public education math classes. :tng:

 

[Annie]

I did something *totally* dumb at 16-17.. Worked my teenage years away, and wasted all that perfectly good money on kitchen supplies and concerts.

Gee I worked too, still managed to make a few mistakes, though didn't think so at the time. I'm still working on how to reach perfection.

 

[archangel]

Umm.. I'd think that would qualify as totally naked - not half. Half, to me, is where 50% of your total body is exposed.. Damn those public education math classes. :tng:

So if you were to see me at the lake wearing cut offs and a t-shirt I am in your definition 1/2 naked OMG I am so emabarrassed!

 

[Shattered]

So if you were to see me at the lake wearing cut offs and a t-shirt I am in your definition 1/2 naked OMG I am so emabarrassed!

I never said anything was *wrong* with it (unless you don't have the bod for it - then cover it up). I just said it was the *norm*.

 

[archangel]

Gee I worked too, still managed to make a few mistakes, though didn't think so at the time. I'm still working on how to reach perfection. [/QUOTE

Would have recipricated all out of reps to give...next time...!shattered is a funny girl though!I wonder if she wears a bikini! maybe not!

 

[Said1]

Gee I worked too, still managed to make a few mistakes, though didn't think so at the time. I'm still working on how to reach perfection.

I wasted my teenage life working too, and I'm surprised my mother didn't burn some of the outfits I *bought*. I mean, that's why I had a job, so I could buy clothes she wouldn't, and smokes and other stuff.