US burn Koran, 14 killed in retaliation

[WIP]

Who's saying it's "right" to do it? There's a difference between "right" and "a right." But just because we don't think it's the right thing to do does not make him responsible for the acts of others. Furthermore, if it's a given that people will die when someone burns a Koran, I'd say that's a real problem -- and not with the person burning the Koran.

What this pastor did was the act of an individual and has nothing whatsoever to do with "America," and you don't have to "understand" how he sees the world around him. He's going to see it differently than you do, just as you see it differently than others do. Furthermore, he destroyed a book. He didn't set out to destroy people; only a book.

Were there any Muslims rioting in America? And if there were no Americans serving in Afghanistan, would it have even made the news that 7 UN staff members were killed by a mob in Afghanistan? The only reason why this is even a news event is because U.S. troops have been put in greater danger, and the unrealistic mission of nation-building in Afghanistan is now clearly a futile effort.

And many Canadians are not concerned about U.S. conservatives sudden newfound embrace of freedom of speech, but the danger it places our soldiers in as well.

[weegie]

Were there any Muslims rioting in America? And if there were no Americans serving in Afghanistan, would it have even made the news that 7 UN staff members were killed by a mob in Afghanistan? The only reason why this is even a news event is because U.S. troops have been put in greater danger, and the unrealistic mission of nation-building in Afghanistan is now clearly a futile effort.

And many Canadians are not concerned about U.S. conservatives sudden newfound embrace of freedom of speech, but the danger it places our soldiers in as well.

Don't know where you live but it would have made UK news regardless of the reasoning behind the riot, and we couldn't care less about what happens to US troops.

[weegie]

It's easy to understand why the Middle-East hates America, you all seem to look down your noses at them as if they're inferior to you. Infact you seem to look down upon all non-americans, I mean c'mon, I'm a patriot and everything and believe my country is the best thing to grace this planet since sliced bread but I don't pretend were better than anyone else or look at others as if they're less of a man than I am. Get real.

[Oleg Bach]

Are you saying Muslims are the equivalent of mad dogs?

Some Christians, Jews and Muslims are mad dogs.

[Oleg Bach]

This issue is settled. You have the right of freedom of speech but not the freedom of phyical action - if that action brings about harm to others. I can say all the vile things to you that I want - I can insult you. I am free to think what I want...BUT it is not legal or acceptable for you kill me because of my thoughts or words....Once I get physical and effect your survival though damaging of property or person - YOU are entitled to protect yourself any way you can to ensure your comfort and survival...Muslims consider the book - the Koran as property..their property. They live in their minds in that book..to burn their book is akin to the first step in the burning of their actual home.

Those less than moderte Muslims that are of more common intelligence..react quickly to any threat...For instance - years ago I was playing a small club - and there was a crazed and jealous bass player...we were in the alley during a break...He opened his mouth and uttered a threat "I am going to rip your face off"..............before he could utter the last word of this threat - my fist was firmly impacted on the jerks forehead. He shut up and never threatened again. This Pastor if he had balls...would not threaten...Street wise rule number one - Never threaten or posture...either do or do not do. The guy is a coward who threatens from a distance and the safe confines of supposed civil rights.

[Oleg Bach]

This issue is settled. You have the right of freedom of speech but not the freedom of phyical action - if that action brings about harm to others. I can say all the vile things to you that I want - I can insult you. I am free to think what I want...BUT it is not legal or acceptable for you kill me because of my thoughts or words....Once I get physical and effect your survival though damaging of property or person - YOU are entitled to protect yourself any way you can to ensure your comfort and survival...Muslims consider the book - the Koran as property..their property. They live in their minds in that book..to burn their book is akin to the first step in the burning of their actual home.

Those less than moderte Muslims that are of more common intelligence..react quickly to any threat...For instance - years ago I was playing a small club - and there was a crazed and jealous bass player...we were in the alley during a break...He opened his mouth and uttered a threat "I am going to rip your face off"..............before he could utter the last word of this threat - my fist was firmly impacted on the jerks forehead. He shut up and never threatened again. This Pastor if he had balls...would not threaten...Street wise rule number one - Never threaten or posture...either do or do not do. The guy is a coward who threatens from a distance and the safe confines of supposed civil rights.

The post seems a bit hypocritical seein I booped the threatening person in the forehead...I was young and came from a hood where a pre-emptive strike was the wisest thing to do during such a moment - Perhaps culturally speaking common Muslims are from rough neighbourhoods also - and they do not tolerate a threat and quash it quickly.

[bush_cheney2004]

It's easy to understand why the Middle-East hates America, you all seem to look down your noses at them as if they're inferior to you.

They have hated the UK far longer.

Infact you seem to look down upon all non-americans, I mean c'mon, I'm a patriot and everything and believe my country is the best thing to grace this planet since sliced bread but I don't pretend were better than anyone else or look at others as if they're less of a man than I am. Get real.

Sure your country does....can a Catholic become Queen or King?

[bush_cheney2004]

Were there any Muslims rioting in America?

No.

And if there were no Americans serving in Afghanistan, would it have even made the news that 7 UN staff members were killed by a mob in Afghanistan?

Yes...murdered UN workers will make headlines most anyplace and time....from Rwanda to Lebanon to Afghanistan.

The only reason why this is even a news event is because U.S. troops have been put in greater danger, and the unrealistic mission of nation-building in Afghanistan is now clearly a futile effort.

False...previous protests over the issues were also news events without any murdered UN workers.

And many Canadians are not concerned about U.S. conservatives sudden newfound embrace of freedom of speech, but the danger it places our soldiers in as well.

Then don't send them on life and death missions in Iltis jeeps.

[Oleg Bach]

They have hated the UK far longer.

Sure your country does....can a Catholic become Queen or King?

No way....Catholics are not big on protecting their children - they sacrafice the kids on the alter of submission though sodomy. nope! We need truely Christian Queens and Kings - who remember the words of the king of kings...."anyone who harms one of these little ones will wish that they were never born - and have a millstone tied to their neck and tossed into the sea" (The only reference to capital punishment in the NT)

GOOD MORNING AMERICA! Remember your war cry during the great and glorious revolution ----------"No King but Jesus" - This man - attempted to ensure that all men were Kings and all woman were Queens - and all children were treated like a prince or princess...THAT is the base of America........................I feel like singing....later BC - busy this morning - hope all is well.

[Guest American Woman]

Were there any Muslims rioting in America?

No, there weren't. Not sure what you're getting at, but as I already pointed out, if you know you can't get away with it, you tend not to do it. If any extremist Muslims in America had killed anyone, they would be the ones being held responsible.

And if there were no Americans serving in Afghanistan, would it have even made the news that 7 UN staff members were killed by a mob in Afghanistan?

Of course it would have. You really believe otherwise? It wasn't just the American media reporting about it. Not by a long shot.

The only reason why this is even a news event is because U.S. troops have been put in greater danger, and the unrealistic mission of nation-building in Afghanistan is now clearly a futile effort.

You really believe the world at large cares more about American troops than they do the UN members who were killed? I would have to strongly disagree.

And many Canadians are not concerned about U.S. conservatives sudden newfound embrace of freedom of speech, but the danger it places our soldiers in as well.

your soldiers are there fighting to protect our nations, our way of life, too. Does it make sense to you that as they are over there fighting extremists we at home are willingly giving up our freedoms to appease the extremists? As I said before, if we are going to do that, we should have never sent troops there in the first place. We should have just surrendered our freedoms, our way of life, to the extremists.

[Guest American Woman]

American Woman: The answer was actually 'no, but the result of appeasement will be a greater number of deaths.' It isn't "using common sense" to act in a way that ultimately ends with more deaths.

Common sense is not doing anything that will cause you to lose any control of a situation that you may have.

That's your version of common sense. My version is not doing anything that will empower the extremists, and I believe that's exactly what appeasing them will result in and I believe empowering them will result in new recruits and an even greater number of deaths.

So here's the thing. I believe that all of the people who are blaming the pastor, condemning him instead of pointing out that we have freedoms in our nation, putting so much focus on him instead of the killers, as if they couldn't help themselves under the circumstances, are empowering the extremists. I think it's sending the message that we are the ones who are wrong, that we are the ones who need to change our ways, that we should not be doing anything to piss them off because their threats/murderous actions have been effective, and it's our fault if they kill.

I believe that attitude will result in a stronger force against us and more innocent deaths. Therefore, to use your line of thought, people should not be saying those things because they know it may result in more innocent deaths and by exercising their right to speak out anyway, they are responsible for any future deaths.

I'm glad you don't have anyone close to you working at the UN mission in Kandahar.

If you think I don't have anyone close to me whose lives are in danger because of this war, the action of extremists, think again. But whether or not I have anyone close to me working at the UN mission in Kandahar is irrelevant to the facts.

Edited April 6, 2011 by American Woman

[jbg]

This wasn't policy, it was a nutbar poking a stick at a rottweiler. Unfortunately the dog attacked someone else.

But to take your analogy, do we gear our dog ownership laws to owners of vicious rottweilers or normal dog owners? Or to the even more dangerous Golden Retrievers?

[Wilber]

That's your version of common sense. My version is not doing anything that will empower the extremists, and I believe that's exactly what appeasing them will result in and I believe empowering them will result in new recruits and an even greater number of deaths.

Who said anything about appeasing anyone? Going out of your way to antagonize someone for no purpose other than your own personal gratification is selfish and irresponsible, especially if it impacts others. If you want your or someone you love's epitaph to be "This person is dead because some crackpot wanted to burn a book just to piss someone else off", fill your boots, but for me, no thanks.

I agree with your freedoms. I think you have got it right. But respecting a freedom is not the same as respecting an action or condemning it. This is especially important in your country because public condemnation is the only thing you have to curb this kind of behavior.

[jbg]

Good point - all was fine when he "spoke" about the burning - all turned to shit when he DID the burning. There is a differnce between free speech and free conduct.

The murderous raving lunatics of Kandahar are not the U.S. Federal or State government.

[Wilber]

But to take your analogy, do we gear our dog ownership laws to owners of vicious rottweilers or normal dog owners? Or to the even more dangerous Golden Retrievers?

No, you just don't poke dogs with a stick.

[bush_cheney2004]

....I agree with your freedoms. I think you have got it right. But respecting a freedom is not the same as respecting an action or condemning it. This is especially important in your country because public condemnation is the only thing you have to curb this kind of behavior.

What?! "Curb this kind of behavior"...are you serious? Curb flag burning? Curb blacks sitting at whites only restaurants? Curb women burning bras? Curb the burning of draft cards?

Stop while you were ahead...America does have it right.

[DogOnPorch]

No, you just don't poke dogs with a stick.

With a certain percentage of the Islamic "world", giving a Teddy bear a certain warrior prophet's name* equals poking a dog with a stick. More than one Muslim country routinely has mass gatherings where...I assume...radicals chant for our collective death. When was the last time you gathered to chant death to anything?

* Better not say his name...lol. Just in case.

Edited April 6, 2011 by DogOnPorch

[Wilber]

What?! "Curb this kind of behavior"...are you serious? Curb flag burning? Curb blacks sitting at whites only restaurants? Curb women burning bras? Curb the burning of draft cards?

Stop while you were ahead...America does have it right.

So you are saying you approve of anything a person does that doesn't violate the law, not the right to do anything but everything they actually may do.

[Wilber]

With a certain percentage of the Islamic "world", giving a Teddy bear a certain warrior prophet's name* equals poking a dog with a stick. More than one Muslim country routinely has mass gatherings where...I assume...radicals chant for our collective death. When was the last time you gathered to chant death to anything?

* Better not say his name...lol. Just in case.

We can't control what they do, only what we do.

[Guest American Woman]

Who said anything about appeasing anyone?

Basing one's actions on the threats and murders of extremists, not doing what one normally would do, not exercising one's freedom of expression because of the threats and murders of extremists, IS appeasing them.

Going out of your way to antagonize someone for no purpose other than your own personal gratification is selfish and irresponsible, especially if it impacts others.

Everything everyone has protested, fought for, has 'impacted others.' If we based all of our actions on whether or not it impacts others, we'd be frozen in inaction. Furthermore, all of our rights are based on what we personally want. You think your actions aren't based on what YOU want? This pastor believes Islam is evil, and quite frankly the deliberate murders did nothing to dispel that, and he acted on his own beliefs, for his own personal gratification, and that doesn't make what he did selfish and irresponsible. People act for their own personal gratification all the time!

If you want your or someone you love's epitaph to be "This person is dead because some crackpot wanted to burn a book just to piss someone else off", fill your boots, but for me, no thanks.

I don't want my or someone I love's epitaph to read "this person is dead because no one had the guts to stand up to extremism, so it was emboldened and grew to the point where more murders took place." If you want that, fill your boots, but for me, no thanks.

I am in no way defending this pastor, I've made it clear what I think of him and his beliefs, but he was acting on HIS beliefs, he burned the Koran because he believes it is evil, and he wanted to get that message out there." He didn't do it "to piss them off."

I agree with your freedoms. I think you have got it right. But respecting a freedom is not the same as respecting an action or condemning it. This is especially important in your country because public condemnation is the only thing you have to curb this kind of behavior.

We don't have to respect the action to respect the freedom. I in no way respect this pastor's actions, but I do respect the freedoms he acted upon; take away his right to act on that freedom, and the freedom is gone. Freedoms don't exist only when we approve of the actions; they exist even when we don't.

[bush_cheney2004]

So you are saying you approve of anything a person does that doesn't violate the law, not the right to do anything but everything they actually may do.

No, I am saying that the historical and legal behavior of burning objects in protest is firmly established in the United States...and many other nations....including Islamic nations. It doesn't matter what I approve of....rights are rights....and I approve of them!

[DogOnPorch]

We can't control what they do, only what we do.

But, these Imams were looking for an excuse. Any excuse. So it ultimately won't matter what we do...we'll ALWAYS somehow piss them off and the mobs will go all "Rage Boy" and start burning and killing.

As Hitchins said in the caption:

If taken to its logical conclusion, this would mean living at the pleasure of Rage Boy and that I'm not prepared to do.

[jbg]

Gee...seems to me that more people in the "world" get pissed off by Canadians clubbing baby seals or braining them with a hakapik!

I used to go to demonstrations aimed at the Saskatchewan seal slaughter. We never killed anyone though. Edited April 6, 2011 by jbg

[DogOnPorch]

Saskatchewan?

[bloodyminded]

I used to go to demonstrations aimed at the Saskatchewan seal slaughter. We never killed anyone though.

Assuming the Sask thing is a wink, you should have used violence; you should have killed the seals, then blamed it on the sealers, thus inciting everyone to rise up against them.

Waj: I don't know what we should bomb, man.

Barry: I do: we'll bomb a mosque.

Waj: .......what?

Barry: you 'eard me.

Omar: Why the hell would we bomb a mosque, Barry?

Barry: Because--

Omar: You think that's a pretty good idea, do you, Barry?

Barry: Fuck yes!

Omar: Let' 'ear it, then Barry. Can't wait. Blow up the mosque, yes? And then?

Barry: Because we'll blame the infidels, see, and the moderates'll rise up!

Four Lions

Edited April 6, 2011 by bloodyminded