Oh, boo hoo. A simple Google search will confirm that Muslims have been burning bibles for years.
Admittedly, they’re usually inside a church at the time.
Oh, boo hoo. A simple Google search will confirm that Muslims have been burning bibles for years.
Admittedly, they’re usually inside a church at the time.
Is “pistol-packing” supposed to be bad?
Kind of sicko to read that when the Royal Bank of Canada sees that someone is doing anything threatening against the islamists they call their loan. I guess that’s a political stance the Royal Bank is comfortable with. I’m not ok with the Royal Bank doing this.
Here’s my take:
I’m sure most of us have encountered the “send the troops in, take no prisoners, be just as vicious as the enemy is” rhetoric of war that is usually countered by “we are not barbarians, we don’t kill women and children on purpose, etc.” and “maybe it’s harder and more dangerous for our soldiers to do the job when they can’t take the uncivilized shortcuts that the enemy takes, but that’s the price we pay for living in a civilized society”.
And so, we go through great efforts to minimize collateral damage, draw up rules of engagement to avoid accidentally killing innocent civilians, treat prisoners humanely, and generally prosecute war according to the Geneva Conventions, and so on — while the enemy cares not a whit, and deliberately flaunts our circumspection. But we do it anyway. despite the costs, *because that’s who we are*.
Well, we’re not only civilized, but we are civilized democracies, whose citizens have rights.
Now, if the western militaries are seemingly willing to take all of those extra (and often times fatal ) risks of a civilized society going to war, why all of a sudden is it not so willing to accept the risks that surface due to democracy and rights?
The military in Afghanistan believe that if that guy in Florida goes ahead with his Koran burning, that the soldiers will be in increased danger. That may be so, at least for the short term, I don’t dispute that — whether or not there is increased danger for the soldiers is not the point. The point is *why* there is increased danger. If our western militaries are not willing to accept the increased danger caused by those back home exercising the rights that they, the military, are sworn to protect, then what the blue blazes are they even doing over there?
If western values are of so little importance, then just nuke the place, plant a flag in the glowing rubble, and be done with it.
I’m surprised to see that Petraeus doesn’t get this.
It was the following paragraph that caught my attention:
Mr. Jones has already publicly complained that his anti-Islam stance has led a bank – the Royal Bank of Canada – to call in the outstanding $140,000 balance on the church earlier this year. Insuring the building, he says, has become all but impossible.
It is interesting to speculate whether or not The Royal Bank of Canada will be getting a visit from the CHRC. It doesn’t take much to figure out that RBC is making a public statement about its expectation of violence from some Muslims. Same thing for the insurance companies.
A 50-person church in a country of 300 million.
Anyway, burning books is just dumb. Want to piss of an Islamist, enjoy your other freedoms.
To transpose something very wise Dennis Miller said about the Ground Zero Mosque: “Can they burn the Korans? Of course. Should they? Of course not!”
The #1 thing I’m going to be looking out for in the days leading up to Sept. 11th is whether Leftist Americans will support the right of the Florida Church to carry out their plans as much as they’ve supported the building of the Ground Zero Mosque. Failure to be consistent will show their rampant hypocrisy!
Warning. The link is to the Gob and Mule site and the comments section there is to make one vomit.
Ah, yes, the burn bibles , while the bibles are in the church along with the people !
Part of me says this is a bad idea, but another part says this:
The Islamic world has refused to talk to the rest of us in good faith for many years. There are clearly some issues that need to be discussed so that the international community can move on. Yet we get nothing but obvious bafflegab and lies.
Maybe we need to get their attention in different ways. Burning the Koran says, “we have had it with you jerks, there’s just no talking to you is there? So go to hell.” And that’s the message we should be sending, followed up by something along the Israeli standard of 100-1 retaliation for each further terrorist attack. Whatever they do as a group (a group which refuses to take any responsibility) then we select similar targets on that 100-1 scale and keep doing it until the relevant governments start doing what we can’t, finding and disarming the terrorists. I think they know where to find them.
And we lose nothing, because they are going to keep this up until they can’t do any more, so we might as well start fighting back (I don’t mean regime changes, because that just changes the identities of the liars at the negotiation tables of the future).
I don’t agree with burning (or urinating on) bibles because it’s disrespectful.
I don’t agree with burning or trampling on flags because it’s disrespectful.
I don’t agree with the building of the mosque at Ground Zero because it’s disrespectful.
And for exactly the same reason is why I don’t agree with the burning of any Korans.
Time to wake up Canada, the best of Islam is for Islam. If you are not Islamic,you are shit.
There are 57 Islamic countries. Can anyone name one where a woman,gay,or child would be comfortable?
C’mon,just one,I’m waiting.
C’mon now,there must be a cbc’er that has an answer,h’mmm like maybe Sudan,oh never mind,how about Saudi,oh no not that one,Iran maybe,well maybe not.I got it Yemen,no,that is wrong.Oh yeah,Iraq before Bush,well maybe not…….
There is not one islamic country out of 57 that is livable for anyone that is not islamic.
ALL BIKERS ARE NOT THE SAME.
And neither are all religions.
Of course they have the right to do it, people have the right to do all kinds of stupid things.
So I dont think it is a wise idea. But nothing except breaking fire codes can stop them.
Now, Petraeus’s comments actually arent helpful. Because the reason for not doing it is because of potential threat and harm. So this just reinforces the point for the Islamists, and others, that Islam needs to maintain respect by fear and that it works. After Petraeus’ comments I would almost say that the burning, as dumb and pointless as it is, needs to go forward.
I would be more impressed with this Florida preacher if he had said he is going to a Muslim country to burn a Koran.
Close all borders to Islam, pull troops out of thier countries, build big fences and no one will worry about burning each others stuff.
Nor can they bomb, harrass our citizens and threaten our polititions in our streets.
They in turn cannot feel margenialized and and justified to do violence in western countries, because they are not here. Very simple.
..or, Nicola, how about if he carried a Bible openly in a Muslim country?
Perhaps, instead, he should put a koran into a container of urine and call it ‘Piss Koran’. Then it would be considered a work of art and displayed in a gallery, to the ooohs and aaahs of the latte sippers.
… and frequently inside the hands of a living (not for much monger) Christian who is inside that burning church.
“C’mon,just one,I’m waiting. ”
France?
Yup.
Burn away gentlemen! And leave a few pages in the out house for later!
I am sick and fuggin tired of the terrorism, the crap going on in Europe and the stuff going on here at home. I am sick of moslems, their monkey god, their pedophile prophet and all the rest of the BS that goes along with their stupid religion.
Bring on the jihad, already. There will be no peace with these morons and we are better off taking them on now than later.
islam threw the first punch. It is thier right to burn the koran, and if it pisses the muslims off, that is just too bad. I think it is our duty to offend muslims at every given chance.islam offends me and the only thing I can do about it, is bitch and complain. Let’s see if the same rules apply to the offended muslims as it does to us.
“I don’t agree with burning (or urinating on) bibles because it’s disrespectful.”
What’s even more disrespectful is calling Islam a religion of peace with deliberate lies.
Mohammad had a 9 year old wife molested her age 6 talks about mounting virgin boys kept slaves tortured people in the most inhuman way.Commanded his followers to kill the infidel. Thats anyone with other views than his. We shouldn’t be burning this book, but banning it from publication.
we did so with Hitlers book why not this one.
Oh thats right it might offend some terrorist in Pakistan.
By burning the Koran in the US this pastor will cost Christians their lives in Muslim countries. They will just take out their anger in them. They already know if they burn churches and Bibles [and killing Christians] that the Western countries will not even report it. I suggest looking at following link to know what I mean:
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com
As long as it does not happen in Canada and the USA, it will not matter what they do and eventually we will have the same problems as Europe.
If a person wants to burn or desecrate the Koran as they feel, then it should be in private. The Muslims already control the police – in demonstrations – by calling it racist if they get arrested for openly breaking the law in Canada. The police would rather block streets and freeways rather than face them head on for demonstrating without a permit – as the rest of Canadians have to. They can get arrested and charged with planning a terrorist attack, but our court system does nothing.
(Sarcasm on: My suggestion is to take all the alleged bombers and let them stay in LIEberal and Non Democratic Party MP’s homes for two years. In particular Biffy (I’d throw in DeYawn also) and Taliban Jack – they should both get the leaders of the group. … Sarcasm off.)
Seriously though, they live in Canada and should live by our laws and social standards. If they think they have more freedoms than us, then go back to original country.
“Can anyone name one where a woman,gay,or child would be comfortable?”
wallyj: France.
Double standards never make a lot of sense…
Burn baby burn!
Burning the Koran for me is the same as burning the Bible. I support burning neither. It punishes those that are not the enemy. The guys with the guns and the bombs are not necessarily religious.
Burning terrorists, now that’s different.
Muslims burn other holy books for sport, they rampage and riot when offended, they demand we submit to their inferior cultural norms and regularly spouse “Free Speech go to hell”. Thus frankly I just don’t care if burning their holy book offends them globally, when Islam stops treating women and children as sex slaves to abuse at will then and only then shall I care if something offends them because their religion offends me to the core of my soul.
“Well, we’re not only civilized, but we are civilized democracies, whose citizens have rights.”
Absolutely. We have a right to do as we please and we should protect those rights. However, since I am a devil’s advocate, I must presume that you do, on the same grounds, support the building of a mosque at Ground Zero. I am sure that all of the people questioning the moral and ethical grounds behind the exercising of those rights will do the same here. Or not.
“But we do it anyway. despite the costs, *because that’s who we are”
Well, terrorists are generally defined by the indiscriminate nature of their attacks. Random attacks on random segments of the population inevitably cause terror. Democratic states and armies tend to avoid that these days.
“If our western militaries are not willing to accept the increased danger caused by those back home exercising the rights that they, the military, are sworn to protect, then what the blue blazes are they even doing over there?”
Short Answer: Protecting and promoting US interests. NOT protecting individual Americans’ rights.
Long Answer:I was beginning to think that entitlement was a characteristic limited to the left. Don’t get me wrong – this is terrific rhetoric, but it is short on fact.
Let me put it this way:
The US (or any other) military is tasked simply with protecting the national interest. It is NOT tasked with protecting freedom and democracy and the rights of some individual citizen in wherever. What do I mean? In short, if the US government were to suspend certain freedoms and rights under the guise of the national interest (think War Measures Act during wartime), you can bet your last dollar that the military won’t be interested in opposing it. They certainly won’t jump and yell bloody murder about citizens being denied their rights. The military is NOT mandated with protecting western freedoms and rights. They are tasked with protecting the national interest. Freedoms and rights are generally compatible with the national interest, but there have been several occasions when they are not.
Those boys in Afghanistan are NOT there to protect your rights. They are there to protect the US national interest. You are NOT entitled to their protection and subsequently you should not expect them to take casualties for your decision to do whatever you want. They are out their doing their job – namely promoting US interests. They are not out there to protect individual Americans’ freedoms and you can bet your last dollar that they aren’t interested in losing men for the sake of some individual’s freedom.
Nuking them, whatever its merits, is not an option because this world has too many players, many of whom do not want a nuclear bomb dropped in their backyard. The Chinese, Indians, Russians etc might not like it very much. Sadly, the US has to operate within the system, not above it.
“I’m surprised to see that Petraeus doesn’t get this.”
Petraeus is leading a deployment that has many objectives. None of them involve protecting US values and freedoms. Idealistic jargon like that is best left with politicians. The military deals with realities. It wheels and deals and gets the job done. At some level, he relies on local support and intelligence networks to make sure that he can get the job done and send his boys home alive. As a general, he is not interested in knowing whether you have a right to go around making his job more difficult. The military is always run with a modicum of pragmatism and he is absolutely correct in saying that the actions of this pastor run counter to the pragmatism of the US approach towards the war on terror.
Any military officer (especially those who have commanded men in war) will tell you that the most important thing on their mind is to make sure they can get the job done with minimum casualties. No military officer, regardless of rank, wants his charges to face unnecessary risks. Petraeus is no different that way.
I would humbly suggest that you, and others who criticize Petraeus for taking this stand, go serve in the military in Afghanistan and Iraq, instead of crying long and hard over your lack of freedom to burn a book.
“Now, Petraeus’s comments actually arent helpful. Because the reason for not doing it is because of potential threat and harm.”
Petraeus actually has a job to do and a mandate, which is more than we can say for most of his critics. The last thing he wants is to unnecessarily lose trained and experienced men following an outburst of anger caused by some individual’s decision to show the world what he thinks. Makes it a lot harder to do his job.
Burning of that book is not the best way.
It is without a doubt most effective. It gets the islamists attention.
What is needed now is to expect that the islamists will burn The Bible, has happened, will happen.
Gen. Petraeus is right. However a soldier has got a gun. A very effective deterrent to those that would like to harm him.
The American soldier is at a disadvantage in Afghanistan, he has got to phone the white house occupant to ask for permission to shoot, therein lies the dilemma.
It is interesting to note that the mass media is all upset about the act of the guy in Florida, they actually are ok with burning of American flag.
Everyone should buy and burn a Koran this Sept 11/10.
Really it’ll make you feel better whether you have media coverage or not. Why let some obscure church in Florida have all the honours?
For any Muslims out there please know that regardless of whether this church goes ahead with it or not, many others will be. Look on the bright side, you’ll sell allot of them each and every fall.
Freedom of religious expression 🙂
Burning Koran endanger troops?.. so does the reading
On a side note: Fighting Taliban with PowerPoint
I am for anything which will demonstrate that the Muslim world and all it’s insanities are NOT welcome in America.
Burn baby burn and keep on burning until they get the message. We don’t like them, we don’t want them here.
That goes for the alleged moderate Muzzies too. We know enough about Islam now to not be fooled anymore … they are all in it together.
Continue to let our leaders know that we don’t want to become like France where they will spend the rest of this century watching their culture and heritage being destroyed by cave-men and their idiotic sac wearing women.
Posted by: Clown Party>
“By burning the Koran in the US this pastor will cost Christians their lives in Muslim countries”
Yea, like when has not burning the Koran stopped Muslims from killing westerners, here or abroad? The last time I checked there was not allot of Koran burning inciting the natives prior to this media announcement. Same goes for Obambas plea through his generals about it costing US service men’s lives. “If we promise to NOT burn a Koran this Sept 11 do you promise not to kill anymore American service men, please”.
What a simple solution to all hostilities we have now before us, no burn book we no kill you no more. Hilarious.
@Cerdip…
Petraeus isn’t allowed to GET IT.!
He must preach the Obama line or lose his job.!
Whether they burn the Koran or not makes no difference simply because the imams will SAY they did. A lot like the cartoons that were inserted into the originals.
Now I understand whats with the crescent moon traditionally sawn into the outhouse door, ,got to add the star though.
Seems pretty simple to me, every conflict on this planet right now consists of Islam against everybody else.
I will be burning a Koran this friday nite, while enjoying my favorite adult beverage and having an illegal cuban cigar.
,
I was conflicted about this but then I remembered the medical charity workers who were murdered in August. They weren’t preaching the Gospel, although that is the claim made by the Taliban to justify the killings. The spokesman also said they found bibles translated into Dari, which is denied by the International Assistance Mission executive director. The group had been working in Afghanistan for 33 yrs. and were there to assist.
I went on the website for the pastor who is advocating the burn the Koran for 9/11 at http://www.doveworld.org/ and watched the video he has put together using video clips of Muslims saying Death to the U.K., Death to America, Islam will reign over all the world.
The pastor was a missionary for 30 yrs and sees what everyone on here does: that Britain and Europe have lost a battle they didn’t even fight. He wants America to begin to stand up, and maybe he’s right.
As Knight99 says in his post: they kill us even when we don’t burn the Koran.
Sung like the tune “Disco Inferno”
“Burn Baby Burn!!! Koran Inferno! Burn Baby Burn!”
The Bible has been burned for millenniums because it is the living and active “Sword” of truth that sets men free from tyranny of darkness, sin and sinful leaders. The great fear is that, given the opportunity the masses may choose life! The religion of (the sword) peace demands that all humankind respect it’s holy book, on pain of death; the same pain of death that apparently comes from the reading and understanding of their book.(I’m thinking Wilders and Van Gogh.) We should not be in favor of burning their book, but understanding and exposing the content of it.
I’m deeply conflicted.
On the one hand, book-burning has very bad associations for all freedom-loving people.
On the other hand, “dialogue” and “bridge building” is a black joke.
AND, when communicating with the enemy you probably need to use the enemy’s language.
As for respecting the Koran, why? Lets not be hypocrites. There’s nothing in the Koran to respect if you understand the earlier nice Meccan passages are abrogated by later violent Medina passages, and this abrogation principle itself is explained therein. Islam contains no real spirituality and no golden rule.
Moreover, as Bill Warner explains, about 60%+ of the words of the Koran are concerned with the subjugation and/or slaughter of infidels.
But I’d rather see a refined definition of religion and a removal of all tax deductions for Islam. Italy, for example, which gives money to many different religions (not an idea I like) refuses to give any to Islam.
NATO turns against its own citizens.
TEA Party R’us.
Down with the “NATO chief”.
…-
“NATO chief condemns Florida church’s plans to burn Koran Reuters”
Its called old men being old ignorant and stubborn men…nothing new. Funny how people criticize others for their uncivilized practices by mimicking those same uncivilized practices. ‘Hypocritical’, I believe thats the appropriate word.
Old fools like ‘doctor’ Jones will only be on this earth for so much longer…I hope the baby-boomers will serve as a better generation of ‘wise elders’.
What’s the point of this? Is this “preacher” trying to alienate any moderatec Muslims (I do believe some exist)? Is he tying to invoke Nazism – which is what I think when I hear “book burning”? Is he trying to demonstrate that we are not the civilized ones, not the good guys?
This is ugly and the guy’s a kook.
“It punishes those that are not the enemy”
Sorry Speedy, it actually punishes nobody. Furthermore, the actions of someone Stateside doesn’t make anyone do anything somewhere else. Individuals are responsible for their own actions!! Burning a Koran might accelerate violence in the short-term, but those that commit these acts will lash out regardless of the provocation or timing.
I agree with Stephan, we appear to be “pot committed” and not going forward will have graver long-term consequences in my opinion.
DA
You’re Obamosque analogy is not valid for two reasons(off the top):
a) the objection to the mosque is with respect to the location; where as, those that oppose the book burning oppose it anywhere.
b) there is no threat of violence for those that oppose the Obamosque; where as, violence is bound to occur with the book burning being cited as the cause( as I stated above, the violence is inevitable regardless of the tasteless book burning)
I’ve long advocated for attacking Islam in such a manner. Our enemies have shown themselves to be much more susceptible to intellectual attacks as opposed to martial attacks. These people are warriors bred through and through, and like Star Trek’s Klingons, they see honor in dieing on the battle field.
It seems to me that we’ve, on too many an occasion, have brought a gun to a book fight. It’s time we call them out, and humiliate them for their humiliating behavior.
This morning on “The Current” quote -“A Pastor in Florida calls for “Burn A Koran Day.” A man in New York City stabs a cab driver after learning he’s a Muslim. We ask if current anti-Islamic sentiment fits a chilling, historical pattern of persecution”
Please gag me before I puke. When I heard this my first question was “Why does the leftist media think this way?” Then it hit me, marxists always look for the class struggle. They see the ‘plight of islamists’ as a class struggle. Through the filter of their leftist view they see the poor oppressed islamists in a class struggle. Their reasoning suggests that if we were only nice to them, they (the islamists) would quit hating us. And everyone would live happily everafter.
I really don’t see the big deal. The preacher wants to a burn a few Korans – good for him.
Hopefully he throws in a few copies of “O” magazine while he’s at it.
Mamba
I’m not sure how burning a book is a commentary on if someone is “civilized” or not.
This guy is doing EXACTLY what Matt Stone and Trey Parker did. Both are tasteless, and necessary.
Perhaps the dude should burn one of each holy book, then it would be fair; and, we could gauge and compare the reactions from the so called “afflicted”.
Homez says: “Perhaps the dude should burn one of each holy book, then it would be fair; and, we could gauge and compare the reactions from the so called “afflicted”.”
Homez you are right on the money with that point.
I suspect the Quakers for example will really kick up a stink and go on a mad rampage.