““Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive. The venom of asps is under their lips. Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.”

The controversy over the proposed “Ground Zero Mosque” and the uproar over Pastor Terry Jones and the Dove World Outreach Center’s plan to burn copies of the Quran on September 11 serve to further expose the acute lack of truth and honesty in today’s society.

I find myself asking the obvious questions and marveling at the inability (more likely, refusal) of many to understand and accept the obvious answers.

For example, why do the same people who demand “freedom of religion” for the “Ground Zero” Muslims excoriate Pastor Jones’ for practicing his religion in the way that he sees fit? Why is it wrong to criticize Muslims for their practices, yet perfectly fine to denounce the Gainesville, FL church’s expression of its own faith?

Some critics of the Quran burning are worried that it will lead to violence in the Muslim world. Here’s a novel idea– why don’t the critics hold the riotous Muslims responsible for their own conduct? Since when does a book burning have to result in a riot?

Nothing compels Muslims to respond with anger and violence… except their own religion.

When a Muslim cleric in Iran calls the United States “the Great Satan,” why do Islamic moderates not denounce the inflammatory rhetoric and criticize the imam for words that could lead to violence? Is it because Americans, primarily adherents of the Christian faith, aren’t likely to take to the streets in anger, behead any Muslims that they find and issue fatwas calling for the death of all non-Christians?

Could it be that Pastor Jones’ critics know that the followers of Mohammed are absolutely incapable of rational, reasonable, non-violent expression of their faith; that they really are likely to go nuts when, for example, a Danish newspaper prints cartoon depictions of Mohammed or a non-Muslim writes a novel that casts their prophet in an unflattering light?

(In 1989, Ayatolla Khomeini, the supreme leader of Iran (where there is no “separation of church and state”), ordered all “good Muslims” to kill Salman Rushdie, the author of The Satanic Verses, and anyone else associated with the book’s publication. Although Rushdie lives today, 38 others have died as a direct result of the “peaceful” Ayatolla’s fatwa.)

I believe that incinerating a stack of books is pointless, but why must the Pastor of the Dove World Outreach Center be tolerant of the religion of Islam when its most ardent followers have absolutely no tolerance for his religion?

Why is it that our own government denounces the Quran burning as “un-American” while acquiescing to, and even commending a religion that allows men to deny their wives food and sustenance if they refuse to obey their sexual demands; requires women to get permission from their husbands to work; and allows rapists to avoid prosecution by paying the victims?

The burning of the Quran may be extreme, what is more “un-American” than a religion whose extremists celebrate the death of over 3,000 “infidels” on 09/11/2001?

The mere fact that I ask these questions marks me as bigoted, racist or, at the very least, intolerant. None of those adjectives describe me; rather, I am simply mad as hell. Hypocrisy has gone mainstream and I am tired of it.

I refuse to give evil a pass.

The defiant wife of the cleric behind the planned mosque near Ground Zero vowed yesterday to go ahead with the project — calling it a “history-making moment” in the fight against “Islamophobia.”

Khan said that “there is too much at stake…” including “…the development of the Muslims here [in the United States]…” She has drawn the battle lines and boasts that her holy warriors will not back down:

“We have to take our opponents and transform them… we have to educate them… we have to convince people…. our ideals must prevail… we have to fight… this is the bigger fight…”

Daisy asked, “When will Muslims be accepted as plain old Americans?”

To Daisy, I reply… most Muslims in this country live like and are accepted as “plain old Americans.” It’s just the ones who crash planes into our buildings, killing over 3,000 other “plain old Americans” that aren’t accepted. It’s just the ones who practice a religion that requires adherents to kill the “infidels” (non-Muslims) that we fear.

We also have a problem with those “peace-loving” Muslims who liken the spread of Islam in the U.S. to a war to be won. And I have no love for Muslim clerics and their wives who have no clue nor care why Americans might be opposed to the construction of a mosque mere feet—as the landing gear falls—from the most important monument to American freedom in this generation’s memory.

Meanwhile, a Saudi judge is searching for a hospital that would be willing to purposely paralyze a man. The judge convicted him of attacking another man with a cleaver and paralyzing him. The judge is apparently considering the “eye for an eye” punishment, which the brother of the victim says is “our legal right under Islamic law.”

Imam’s wife ‘won’t cave’ on Ground Zero mosque, blames GOP – NYPOST.com

The embattled ex-head of the research center at the heart of the Climate-gate scandal dropped a bombshell over the weekend, admitting in an interview with the BBC that there has been no global warming over the past 15 years.

FOXNews.com – Global Warming in Last 15 Years Insignificant, U.K.’s Top Climate Scientist Admits

While Lady Liberty has stood immobile in New York Harbor, immigration has risen and fallen and risen again. Lazarus — and Reagan, even more so — dreamed that the unchanging values she symbolizes give us an innate talent for being a nation of immigrants. Wrong then and wrong now. Like Americans of every era, we’ll be held to account for how we manage the door and for what happens to immigrants and their offspring when they live among us.

Roberto Suro — The Statue of Liberty’s Real Stand – washingtonpost.com

The defense of its citizenry is one of the foundational purposes of a federal government. If the U.S. courts will not protect an American citizen on his own land, this country is in dire straits.

An Arizona man who has waged a 10-year campaign to stop a flood of illegal immigrants from crossing his property is being sued by 16 Mexican nationals who accuse him of conspiring to violate their civil rights when he stopped them at gunpoint on his ranch on the U.S.-Mexico border.

Washington Times – 16 illegals sue Arizona rancher