« So Just Who Is AhMadinejad Trying To Impress? | Main | Terrorist attacks in Morocco and in Algeria »
April 12, 2007
Bacon Is A Hate Crime
I got a kick out of the article I point to in this post because I'm always harassing my Muslim friends about going out for pork chops or bacon (hell, us practicing Catholics don't eat fish on Friday, and some of my Jewish friends don't eat pork). But bacon on a Koran is a hate crime?
Be careful what you do with your leftover bacon in Clarksville, Tennessee, you just might end up having the FBI called in on you:
...Two hours before the Islamic Center of Clarksville held its 1 p.m. Friday prayer service, called Jummah, a Quran was found vandalized on the front steps.The police in Clarksville have got to be real... The front of the Quran, Islam's holy book, read "Mohammad pedophile" while an expletive was written inside, smeared under two strips of bacon, according to a Clarksville Police report. The report labeled the incident a hate crime.
...The Islamic Center was founded in June 2005. Heath estimates a little more than 40 Muslim families live in the Clarksville and Fort Campbell areas. Heath and other Muslims are not taking this lightly. He said police told him they would contact the FBI and send out more patrols to monitor the center.
Jerome and his fellow Muslims should be looking on the bright side, at least it wasn't a horse's head.
On a similar topic - at least it applies to bacon, Raymond Ibrahim has a few very pertinent questions about Muslims from other countries that come to Western countries (obviously, his questions don't apply to our friend Jerome in Clarksville), and asks if living in strict accordance to sharia is the first priority of some Muslims, one wonders: Why have they voluntarily come and immersed themselves in infidel countries that do not recognize sharia law and, indeed, allow many things that run counter to it, such as the selling and consumption of alcohol and pork and the liberal intermingling of the sexes?
... if common sense does not dissuade them from relocating to the West, the very sharia they claim to want to closely observe should. For instance, if pork and alcohol are condemned (e.g., Koran 5:4; 2:219), voluntarily living among infidels, idolaters, and atheists is looked on no better. The Koran declares: "O you who believe! Take neither Jews nor Christians as friends...whoever among you turns to them is one of them" (5:51).The title of Ibrahim's piece is "What Do Muslims Want," and although he never actually answers the question, fundamentalist and extremist Muslims have already made the answer perfectly clear. They want you and me to bend to their ways and become Muslims living under sharia - and they have no intentions of assimilating.... There are countless verses and traditions, in fact, that make it clear that Muslims are to be in a constant state of animosity toward non-Muslims, waging war through tongue and teeth in order to spread Islam, and, when finally in a position of superiority, discriminating against those who refuse to convert (see, for example, 3:28, 5:73, 5:17, 9:5, 9:25, etc).
... So why are some Muslims making public scenes here in the United States over scanning bacon or transporting customers with sealed bottles of wine in their luggage while at the same time freely choosing to live with -- and of course benefit from -- those whom they are commanded to hate and wage war upon, or at the very least, disavow and be clean of?
"Straining out a gnat while swallowing a camel" has long been a sure sign of hypocrisy. All Muslims who freely migrate to the West must understand that they can't have it both ways -- that they can't have their cake and eat it, too. They must choose between either strictly upholding the laws and customs of 7th-century Arabia (in which case they should remain in their "sharia friendly" countries of origin) or, if prosperity and comfort is their first choice, let them relocate to the West, but prepare to assimilate -- that is, compromise -- to some degree. It's a simple question of priorities.
Related: I found these comments at the article interesting. I had never heard this before.
Most Americans don't realize that the very first foreign military engagement of the United States after gaining our independence was a response to proactive Muslim aggression - the First Barbary War, fought in the Mediterranean Sea. Muslim pirates had been demanding (and receiving) the Jizyah tax from American trade ships in exchange for safe passage, which eventually amounted to 20 percent of U.S. government annual revenues by the year 1800. In 1786, when Thomas Jefferson and John Adams went to negotiate with Tripoli's ambassador in London, they asked him by what right the pirates extorted money and took slaves. Jefferson reported to Congress:The source of the above reference is a very good article (contrary to what the title implies, it is not anti-Muslim) - "Islam is not a Peaceful Religion." [... the politically incorrect fact (is) that Islam is an ideology that inherently promotes violence, subjugation, and inequality.]"The ambassador answered us that [the right] was founded on the Laws of the Prophet (Mohammed), that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have answered their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman (Muslim) who should be slain in battle was sure to go to heaven."
Cross posted from Hyscience
Posted by Richard at April 12, 2007 8:49 AM
