locally owned since 1854

Frank Ryan: Middle East rioting and our appeasement policy

Posted 10/9/12

Sticks and stones!Few people would consider denigrating any religion or person to be a reasonable, mature and decent way to behave.

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

Frank Ryan: Middle East rioting and our appeasement policy

Posted

Yet when riots and killings are allegedly sparked by “hate crimes,” the insanity of the violent reaction is equally unpalatable to those in the civilized world.  

The reactions to these riots, though, by the Obama administration are equally stupefying. To even remotely condone riots and killings as a reasonable reaction to verbal insults is inconceivable. The despicable killings and violence should have been condemned. Our nation appears weak when we react in any other way.

There is underlying philosophy used by these politicians to condone condemning only the one broadcasting th insult. That philosophy espouses that if someone perceives themselves as a victim, it is acceptable to react in any way that you wish, civilized or not.

With such a principle of victimization, the entire concept of vigilante justice takes on an entirely new meaning.

Legislation on hate crimes was designed to protect the victim, not justify violent reactions to the crime. For
President Barack Obama to placate an uncivilized action in the name of securing tranquility is precisely the type of appeasement that propelled the world into World War II.

The president does not understand the Middle East at all, and his response showed it.

Hate crime laws in the U.S. are dealt with by the FBI. The FBI’s own website on hate crimes states:

“Crimes of hatred and prejudice – from lynchings to cross burnings to vandalism of synagogues – are a sad fact of American history, but the term “hate crime” did not enter the nation’s vocabulary until the 1980s, when emerging hate groups like the Skinheads launched a wave of bias-related crime. The FBI began investigating what we now call hate crimes as far back as World War I, when the Ku Klux Klan first attracted our attention. Today, we remain dedicated to working with state and local partners to prevent these crimes and to bring to justice those who commit them.”

Recently, criminal elements attacked Buddhists in Bangladesh over a Facebook photo of a burnt Koran. Homes of innocent Buddhists were ransacked, looted and then set ablaze. The person who tagged the photo is in protective custody.

The arrest of those who sparked the riots and reactions to the photo, though, has not yet taken place.

The rioters’ actions have been characterized by many in the Obama administration as sad reactions to verbal attacks against Islam rather than equally uncivilized conduct by rioters against the innocent in the Buddhist village.

Just as in the case of the killing of our ambassador in Sept. 2012, the perception by many is that this administration feels that the demonstrators were somehow justified in their irresponsible and illegal conduct. It just was not their fault. The rioters were sad victims.

The crimes against these Muslim religious were verbal in nature and not physical. I understand that abuse and hatred can come from words, pictures, as well as a fist. But when and where is the line drawn in which those reacting to the verbal offenses are accountable for their actions?

It makes no sense at all that any government would attempt to justify the acts of these Muslim terrorists out of fear of what else they may do. It makes no sense at all.

In an almost surreal move, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation made a plea at the United Nations asking for a ban on insulting the Prophet Muhammed.

I understand completely that insulting another person’s faith or another person for that matter is unacceptable conduct. The plea by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, however, would have been significantly more palatable if the organization decried the violent reaction of some of the members of their faith.

My faith, the Christian faith, was insulted by artwork funded by the U.S. government, by offenses verbally when I visited Qatar when I had a Bible in my luggage as a U.S. Marine colonel, and the entire Conscience Clause violations of the Affordable Care Act.

But apparently abusing Christians is acceptable to this administration.

In the Jewish and Christian faiths, as well as many others, we are taught by our rabbis, priests, and ministers to pray for those who hate us.

The world would have felt significantly more accommodating to the Islamic faith should the Organization of Islamic Cooperation have condemned the violence of their followers as well as he irresponsible acts which allegedly triggered the violence.

Violence in the name of religion is a crime. Violence against religion is a crime as well. Unfortunately, the U. S. government considers hate crimes only when it placates a special interest group of their choosing.

That policy of appeasement is a recipe for disaster.

Frank Ryan is a CPA from Lebanon County and retired Marine colonel who lectures on ethics for state CPA societies.

Comments

No comments on this story | Please log in to comment by clicking here
Please log in or register to add your comment