Photo Credit:
Imran Firasat

Muslim blasphemy, like the ghetto hood’s respect is an assertion of supremacy by identity. It isn’t a grievance, it’s a right of violence, and if you give into it, then you accept the inferior status that comes from being weak in a system where might makes right and killing people, or threatening to, is what makes one man better than another.

Islam is submission. If you submit to Islam, then you’re a Muslim. If you submit to a Muslim, then you’re a slave. The western blasphemy trial is not the enforced submission of an Islamic legal system that would be crude and brutal, but at least comparatively respectable, it is the enforced submission to Muslim violence. The judges who preside over our blasphemy cases do not believe in Islam, they believe in the danger of Muslim violence. This is not theocracy, it is slavery. For the moment blasphemy prosecutions still involve trying offenders on some charge other than the obvious one. Low-hanging fruit like Imran Firasat or Mark Youssef are the easiest to deal with. Any man whose freedom depends on the whim of a judge can already be locked up or deported any time without the need for actual charges of heresy to be brought. When that isn’t possible, there is always the ubiquitous hate crime which increasingly extends to anything that offends anyone regardless of consequences or intent.These trials are a contradiction, 21st Century legal codes built on sensitivity and tolerance being used to prosecute deviations from a medieval code of insensitivity and intolerance. But that very same contradiction runs through the modern state’s entire approach to Islam. It is impossible to embrace medievalism without becoming medieval. The need to accommodate Islamic medievalism is forcing the medievalization of the modern world’s political and legal systems.The conflict between the modern world and the Muslim world is being waged by the modern rules of international law and peacemaking on one side and by the medieval rules of brutal violence, insincere offers of peace and bigoted fanaticism on the other. Rather than fighting it on its own terms, the modern world is instead trying to accommodate it on its own terms by accommodating its blasphemy codes.

Trapped in a long-term war, our leaders are looking for ways of making the conflict more manageable. If they can’t win the war, they can at least limit the number of attacks. It’s not the open book kind of appeasement, but the double book kind. The open book is still patriotic, but the second book in the bottom drawer is running payments to the terrorists and finding ways to accommodate them. And anyone who runs afoul of the second book, also runs afoul of national security.

Advertisement

War often compromises freedoms, but it rarely compromises the freedom to hurt the enemy’s feelings. But this is a different sort of war. A war with no enemies and no hope of victory. A war whose only hope is that one day our enemies will become better people and stop trying to kill us. Our enemies are fighting to take away our freedoms and we are fighting to take away our own freedoms in the hopes that if we give up some of them to the enemy, he will settle for them and give up on the rest.

In this sort of war, blasphemy is a serious national security threat, not because it truly is, but because our leaders desperately need their Stockholm control points of appeasement, they need to believe that if they crack down on Koran burnings then they can reduce the fighting by 5 percent or 8 percent and that gives them hope that they can one day reduce it by 100 percent.

The actual numbers don’t matter. On the month after Bubba the Love Sponge did not burn the Koran, 50 percent more Americans died in Afghanistan, but the statisticians can always argue that if he had burned it, then 75 percent more or 100 percent more would have died. Islam runs on magical thinking and any effort to appease it must also embrace that same medieval magical thinking. Hoping that blasphemy prosecutions will reduce violence, is psychologically less of a strain than accepting that nothing will, that there is no magic bullet, only regular bullets.

Advertisement

15 COMMENTS

  1. the americans and the rest of the world, instead of fearing the arabs for talking smack about muhamed, they should fear Hashem the G-d of all peoples when they promote gay marrage and immorality. Hes the one that is pounding america with violent storms and dissabling the "most powerful country on earth" all because of their sick ways. the arabs kill homosexuals and blasphimers. israel should do the same.

  2. "proposed to burn a Koran,".

    The guy who wanted to burn the Koran — and did — is a nutcase named Terry Jones. He wanted to burn a Talmud, too — because according to Jones we Jews were responsible for the 9/11 attacks.

    "Muslims have restored blasphemy prosecutions to the United States and Europe through violence."

    There hasn't been a blasphemy prosecution anywhere in the US since the 1920s, and in the 1950s the US Supreme Court ruled such laws unconstitutional.

    I thought that the JP had higher standards for factual content.

  3. "proposed to burn a Koran,".

    The guy who wanted to burn the Koran — and did — is a nutcase named Terry Jones. He wanted to burn a Talmud, too — because according to Jones we Jews were responsible for the 9/11 attacks.

    "Muslims have restored blasphemy prosecutions to the United States and Europe through violence."

    There hasn't been a blasphemy prosecution anywhere in the US since the 1920s, and in the 1950s the US Supreme Court ruled such laws unconstitutional.

    I thought that the JP had higher standards for factual content.

  4. "The United States has a man sitting in prison for making another blasphemous movie, which the government spent weeks blaming for worldwide attacks on American embassies. And he isn’t the first man persecuted or prosecuted for offending Islam.""When Bubba the Love Sponge, a Tampa DJ, proposed to burn a Koran, the commander of the Afghanistan war contacted his girlfriend (who would later be stalked by Petraeus’ girlfriend) to contact the Mayor of Tampa to keep Bubba from burning a Koran. Instead of explaining how the American system works to the Lebanese temptress and her four-star general, the mayor wrote back that the city was working on it."

  5. Sure we restrict freedoms. This makes sense to the extent of wiretapping suspected terrorists, for instance, but that often gets liberals up in arms. I do not think they punished Americans for anti-German speech in WWI or II (in fact, there were attacks in the first-which I am not justifying.) There is no reason our freedom should be restricted in order to appease those who threaten us, and the author's point is that the illusion that this will work is dangerous. Furthermore, where does it end? At WWI and II, it was clear when we won; the war on terrorism is ongoing, and we cannot just say we will live indefinitely in fear of offending Islam. If we do, they've won.

Loading Facebook Comments ...