Skip to comments.The Missing Link Wore Underpants
Posted on 08/27/2011 12:21:39 PM PDT by TR Clancy
By the U-Bombers concept of justice, one he shares with millions of jihadists around the world, an aggressive act is a permissible defensive act when waged against anyone defaming Muhammad. So fundamental a truth is this in the U-Bombers mind that he sees no need to include in his motion any details, real or invented, of any wrongdoing or provcative behavior on the part of the officers that could explain his outbrust of violence. He never says the officers flushed his Koran, or called him an Islamophobic name, or tried to read to him from the polytheist Bible. What he does say is that the United States legally allows the defamation of Muhammad (PBUH), and by allowing so it is defaming and Abusing Him] PBUH.
This is his legal argument, that because the American system of free speech doesnt prohibit criticism of Muhammad under pain of execution, (à la Saudi Arabia, Iran, or, soon, Egypt) then its clearly lawful for any Muslim to attack Americans whenever and wherever the opportunity arises.
(Excerpt) Read more at dearbornunderground.blogspot.com ...
By the same reasoning am I as an American lawfully allowed to perform a lethal pre-emptive strike against any Muslim in self defense?
No. That would be silly...
An interesting and well written article, if a bit long.
He’s proposing a game changing way to learn from these koranimals in custody & I agree.
“Properly made use of, (which I doubt very much he will be), the U-Bomber could be priceless as a living diorama for demonstrating to skeptical Americans that there really is an unmistakeable chain linking the attacks of 9/11 with thousands of violent events before and after in what the Muslim Brotherhood defines as the Grand Jihad.”
I shudder to think that there may one day be a “Dearborn Underground”.
It could be said that while some black people will go into a “blind rage” if someone calls them the “n word”, a word of disrespect, some Muslims will go into a “blind rage” when other people use the “M word” (Mohammed) in a way they do not consider respectful.
In either case, the only solution to their problem was envisioned by the rather grotesque comedian Lenny Bruce.
He did a “comedy” routine that was almost entirely the use of the “n word”, repeated over and over again, moving around the stage to end up in front of a large, increasingly angry black man, and at then end screaming the word into his face again and again.
Then Bruce calmly said, “You were about ready to punch me out just now, weren’t you?” Then he went into a dialogue about the power of words, and how by being restricted, censored, or banned, just made such words more and more powerful.
And he concluded by saying that if everyone used the “n word” all the time, it would lose its power, and no longer would a small black boy run home crying to his mother, deeply hurt, angry and ashamed because some other little boy had called him the “n word”.
In his time, that was a famous routine, and many people agreed with Bruce, but sadly, his idea was just too much for most people, so the “n word” kept its venom and is still forbidden. But it has good company, for with political correctness, more and more words are censored or banned by the left, with the MSM taking the lead in prohibiting the use of forbidden words, no matter how true or accurate.
But my point is that the same rule applies to the “M word”.
Remember the cynical hysterics because of the Mohammed cartoons? How about people who are butchered every year for allegedly “insulting Islam”, or “defacing the Koran”?
The Lenny Bruce theory applies here as well. That is, what would suck the venom out of this would be to continually sneer at Mohammed, insult Islam, and deface the Koran, along with all of the other forbidden things that Muslims rage about, so that eventually they would stop caring?
Then Internet would be good for this. Everything from millions of spam emails that insult Islam, going off randomly every minute, to programs that rewrite and repost news from around the world, so that it includes random insults, as well as Koranic ruination hither and yon.
So say a news item like “Lady Gaga clean sweep at Grammy Awards, to thundering applause”, the headline reads “Lady Gaga defiles Koran at Grammy Awards, to thundering applause.”
Eventually it would be hard to distinguish “real” insults from fake ones. And the rage would burn itself out.
The headline led me to believe the article was about
Yes, my posts are too long. Thanks for sticking with it. Try to see it as my way of doing reparation for all the incomplete nonsense being exchanged at 140 characters or less [sic].
Hmm I have a T-shirt idea for Atheists.
Here is what it should have printed on it:
How I feel about Prophets:
Joseph Smith Sucks
I will give a thousand dollars to the first Atheist who has enough “cajones” to wear one all day while walking around Dearborn Mi.
What? No Takers?
Gee are the Atheists scared of the third name listed for some reason. I can guarantee you they would be happy to wear this shirt (sans the third name) in Salt Lake City, Or in Rome, or even in Israel.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.