|
February 06, 2006
Did it almost happen here?
Unless this 1997 report is incorrect, the statue of Muhammad on the United States Supreme Court building triggered riots on the other side of the world nearly a decade ago: March 14, 1997Hey! That's the same "fascist" dime I dropped the dime on back in 2004! Last December, Islamists noticed the depiction of Mohammed, and declared that the display violated Muslim law which prohibits the showing of any countenance of the "prophet." A coalition of Islamic groups lobbied to have the image sand blasted, and even offered to pay for the project and to replace it with a marble inscription bearing quotations from the Koran.Hey, isn't that a coverup of our own history they demanded? The nerve! Fortunately, Rehnquist didn't go along with it: On Wednesday, Chief Justice William Rehnquist said that altering the frieze would damage the artistry of the work. "It is part of the architectural and aesthetic unit that has been in place more than 60 years," wrote Rehnquist adding, "Altering the depiction of Mohammed would impair the artistic integrity of the whole."The more things change, the more they stay the same? Sheesh! What baffles me is that I have not been able to verify the above story, which was written by Conrad Goeringer, described as "Senior Staff Writer for American Atheist Magazine, and Director of Online Services for the organization." Why didn't I hear about this, and why isn't it appearing elsewhere? Might it be fictional? UPDATE: Eugene Volokh has more on CAIR. (Apparently the group believes that potrayals of religious figures "in a way that many adherents of the religion find blasphemous" above should be constitutionally prohibited as "hate speech" or "incitement.") I think CAIR should remember that this is still the United States. MORE (02/07/06): The story is confirmed in this anniversary report at CAIR's web site, on page 22. (Via this WorldNetDaily article, datelined today.) posted by Eric on 02.06.06 at 06:47 PM |
|
December 2006
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
December 2006
November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Holiday Blogging
The right to be irrational? I'm cool with the passion fashion Climate change meltdown at the polls? If you're wrong, then so is God? Have a nice day, asshole! Scarlet "R"? Consuming power while empowering consumption Shrinking is growth! My dirty thoughts
Links
Site Credits
|
|
It doesn't help that the Prophet is holding the Book of Allah in his left hand. Back then, they didn't use toilet paper and, to put it as delicately as possible, let's just say the left hand was avoided where hygiene was required.