By Nathan Barton
Indiana – Infidelanda, apparently.
Muslims are “outraged” that a billboard east of Indianapolis tells “untruths” about their Prophet Mohammed (peanut butter und honig). In the article, USA Today equates the billboard to the man who attacked two Muslima teenagers and then stabbed and killed two people who came to their defense, and to other examples of Islamophobic rage and attacks.
Never mind that the billboard doesn’t contain the words “prophet” or “Mohammed” or “Islam” – the closest words are in large letters and quotes; “The Perfect Man.”
Never mind that there is no identification of who put it up – the only identification on the sign is “Educate Truthophobes.” Now, truthophobe (quite a ridiculous made-up word: a more correct word would be “aletheiaphobe”) (a person who fears truth) seems to have been coined to label and denigrate people who are also described as being Islamophobic – fearing Islam or fearing Muslims. (There is an Australian website [Truthophobes.com] (mentioned in the article) which appears to have adopted the name as a badge of honor, and use it to describe Muslims and others who fear the truth about Islam, its teachings, practices, and history, especially that of its founder.)
Amazingly, an American congressman condemns the billboard as “untrue” and says its author is taking Islamic history and text out of context. (The congressman, Andre Carson, “represents” most of Indianapolis and its immediate suburbs, and is a black Muslim with degrees in criminal justice and business management, and has been in Congress since 2008 after being in local and state government.)
I am reminded of other members of Congress who are concerned that too many Marines would cause the island of Guam to tip over, and that illicit cash can be “decontaminated” by freezing them in large blocks, to name a few
And the statements – if they ARE describing the Islamic Prophet – are all true, and documented not just by secular historians but by Islamic historians, and indeed in documents revered by most if not all Muslims. (The term “rapist” or its Arabic equivalent is not used – but the actions described are that of a rapist.) Indeed, many of these things have been and are viewed by many (even a majority) of Muslims as praiseworthy, good things for the man to have done.
At least by Muslims who are faithful followers of him and obedient to the commands of the Koran and the other documents (including the Hidatha and Shari’ah) – but many or most American Muslims are considered apostate and heretics by most of their Muslim brothers and sisters worldwide because of their beliefs and actions on such things as jihad, shar’ia, and jizya.
One of the people complaining about the billboard (a Muslim) says that she fears that the billboard’s message will cause more persecution, more violence against, Muslims.
Mmm. If the truth about their Prophet causes people to hate them and persecute them, perhaps they can be encouraged by the example of the followers of several earlier “prophets” who endured (and continue to endure) that for thousands of years.
And if they don’t like the truth being told about their Prophet, perhaps they need to find another one.
Not another truth, but another prophet. One who wasn’t a rapist, a pedophile, a warlord, and a bloody butcher of innocents.
Of course, these people condemning the billboard are free to do so. It’s something called “free speech.” But then, I guess that means that the people who authored and paid for the billboard must also have the right to write/publish what they did. Given the reaction to this (and to other actions deemed to be disrespectful of this particular Prophet (the one we assume the billboard is referring to), is it any wonder that the people doing this are a bit shy about admitting to who they are? True, Indiana is not California. So maybe they might not have too great a risk of having their homes firebombed, their vehicles fitted out with IEDs, or being beaten up as they walk down the street or go shopping. But still.
And of course, if the Muslims can’t stomach other people having the freedom of speech to say nasty (if true) things about Mohammed (peanut butter und honig), as well as about the “christian” God and His Son, and Moses and everyone else… they can always move someplace else. Like back to the nations of the Ummah – the Muslim dar al’Islam or lands of Muslim domination. Where they won’t have to worry about anyone having some bogus right of free speech. And anyone who even insinuates anything but absolute respect, love, and obedience of their Prophet is as close to a quick trip to eternal torment in Jahannam as the nearest pile of rocks.