Last night I watched Glenn Beck. He was discussing the Koran burning by Pastor Terry Jones and the subsequent murderous temper tantrum of the Muslims of Afghanistan.
Beck can be brilliant at times. He can also be obtuse. He labeled those who burn the Koran as "book burners."
Ah, the term "book burner" is one of those convenient phrases that remove the necessity of logical argument and rational thinking from any debate. The term simply brings up all the right images, i.e. negative ones. Enough said. No need to explain.
Well gee, didn't Nazis burn books? Yes they did, primarily books by Jewish scholars. Now we have a book, the Koran, that is highly antisemitic, filled with Jew hatred and whose author would have agreed with the Nazis, particularly about the "final solution." But we can't burn it, because book burning in every case is a nefarious act. Or is it?
Would it be a negative to burn Mein Kampf? Or The Turner Diaries, the book that inspired Timothy McVeigh to blow up a federal building? How about instructional manuals on how to build bombs to use in terrorism, or how to murder someone without getting caught? Books on those subjects do exist.
What I am saying to Glenn Beck and others with their heads anally inserted is this: book burning can be a very good thing. It all depends on the book. The Koran is one of those books that should be burned.
See my explanations for why this is true at this link.