Whose Qurans Will Terry Jones Burn?

Update: The Dove Center has been denied a permit to build a bonfire. It says it will proceed anyway. Can't they be arrested? Too bad it's not considered arson, then they could be denied bond. The damage they are causing is serious. In Afghanistan, they believe the entire U.S. is behind this:
"We know this is not just the decision of a church. It is the decision of the president and the entire United States," said Abdul Shakoor, an 18-year-old high school student who said he joined the protest after hearing neighborhood gossip about the Quran burning.
There are calls for death to Obama and the U.S.
Protesters, who gathered in front of western Kabul's Milad ul-Nabi mosque, raised placards and flags emblazoned with slogans calling for the death of Obama, while police looked on.
I do not think this is free speech. It's intended to provoke, and capable of provoking, a violent response with resulting injury or death. Terry Jones is not a Christian, he's a hate-monger, a radical and a charlatan. I hope people stop imbuing him with a sense of legitimacy by referring to his group as a church. It's a radical, fundamental sect and there's nothing Christian about it. [More...]

Original Post

The Dove World Outreach Center sounds like a cult and a hate group.

Destruction, Damage, or Vandalism of Property can be a hate crime.

Destruction/Damage/Vandalism of Property— To willfully or maliciously destroy, damage, deface, or otherwise injure real or personal property without the consent of the owner or the person having custody or control of it.

Where is the Terry Jones and his flock getting the Qurans he plans on burning? He's not going to find them in the garbage as abandoned property. Unless he purchases them, they don't belong to him or his church. Can they be charged with hate crimes for destroying them?

Also, the church recently lost part of its tax exempt status for running a for-profit business on its property. Does it owe back taxes? Is there a willful failure to pay or file?

< The Extreme Right's Theocratic Agenda | Wipeout >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    2010... (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 10:58:57 AM EST
    and idiots still wanna burn books...lovely.  I wonder if they realize how much they have in common with those they supposedly despise.

    Hope it isn't considered a hate crime though...if they buy the books they should have the right to burn them, as much as such a right is foolish to excercise.

    Agree (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 11:13:46 AM EST
    He has every right to do it, although I'm worried about what this does to our image in the Muslim world, as well as any repercussions.

    I also wonder whether the same people defending this guy would be supporting his right to burn .... say ....

    ... American flags?


    The "muslim world"... (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 11:47:49 AM EST
    much like these book-burning winners, are gonna believe what they're gonna believe.

    If they think all Americans are like this, then they are no better than these a-holes who think all Muslims burn bibles and hijack planes...at some point you're beyond help and don't wanna be helped...ya know?


    You speak a lot of truth (none / 0) (#26)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 12:08:34 PM EST
    in few words as far as a lot people already have their minds made up in certain ways.  We are currently engaged in a fairly viral media war with the Taliban though and what did Twain say about a lie being halfway around the world?  By the time the Taliban is done with this story we will be spending the winter warming our children's hands over the fires of crackling Qurans.  We can't control people and I don't want to, but I think it is okay kdog to let them know that there are consequences to the crap they do....and I'll leave it up to them if they want to carry on and in what fashion.

    If you mean criticizing... (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 12:36:55 PM EST
    and laughing at the clowns the world over, I agree that is something we should do in response...but outside of that I don't know what else to do that doesn't go to far...like a new federal criminal hate crime law against religous book burning for instance, that would be going too far.

    There is a rather large amount of ugliness you must be willing to accept in a free society, as I'm sure you agree...the alternative is far more ugly.


    What about (none / 0) (#54)
    by jbindc on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 02:17:33 PM EST
    Burning draft cards?

    Interesting issue, ... (none / 0) (#63)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 04:58:19 PM EST
    ... although the SCOTUS said a law prohibiting the willful destruction of draft cards is not protected speech.  Korans and flags differ, of course, in that there is no law prohibiting their destruction, they are not government documents and their destruction does not interfere with an important or substantial government interest unrelated to the suppression of free speech (i.e. "content neutral).

    Actually (none / 0) (#77)
    by jbindc on Wed Sep 08, 2010 at 11:16:21 AM EST
    Even though flag burning is protected speech (also because burning is the proper way to dispose of old flags), it is still illegal to deface or "mutilate" it.  (See 4 USC 1).

    Just a side note.


    Equal Opportunity Burner (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by squeaky on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 11:41:44 AM EST
    They also burn the Talmud... that is when they are out of Korans.


    A Facebook page for the event has accrued thousands of "likes" and Jones has said people have been mailing him Qurans to burn....

    ...As objectionable as the prospect of Jones' Quran burning is, it may not cease with the holy book of the Muslims. I have always maintained that this kind of vitriolic hatred of one religion is a descent on a slippery slope, as no one can say who will be next. I was not surprised, therefore, when I heard Jones recently agree, when asked to do so in an internet podcast interview, to burn "a couple of copies of the Talmud" too.


    yes, it is. (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by cpinva on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 03:15:05 PM EST
    I do not think this is free speech.

    it is exactly the kind of hateful, obnoxious speech, speech that most decent people despise, that was most meant to be protected by the first amendment.

    it is also designed (and is succeeding quite well) at gathering publicity for mr. jones and his group, whatever you want to call them. with publicity the hope is that revenue will follow, just like brother beck.

    And so, (none / 0) (#59)
    by jbindc on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 03:22:48 PM EST
    This guy is getting lots of free air time and discussion on cable news that he shouldn't be getting.  By giving this guy all this free media, this could inform other people about this event, so they will go, turning into a much bigger deal than originally planned.

    Kinda like focusing all our energies on Sarah Palin to divert attention away from real news.


    This comment is interesting (5.00 / 0) (#64)
    by CST on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 04:59:08 PM EST
    I don't recall you saying the same thing about the proposed Mosque.  Is making noise about that a good thing?  Or should everyone sit down and just let them build the mosque, and not divert attention away from real news?

    I have a hard time comparing the two because one is clearly hatefull and the other is not.  But it is interesting to me which one you are at least fine with other people opposing (not sure about your personal views) and which one you think we should be quiet about and just let them go about their business.


    Make all the noise you want (none / 0) (#78)
    by jbindc on Wed Sep 08, 2010 at 11:26:01 AM EST
    My point was this guy, with a very small group of people, is getting worldwide attention for something that, while despicable in my view, is his constitutional right.  We seemed to have lots of discussion around here about the mosque and the First Amendment right to practice religion, but it seems when some nut job wants to exercise his freedom of speech, and many people don't like it, it becomes an internationl incident. The First Amendment doesn't just apply when you agree with the speaker.

    Terry Jones is an attention seeker, and guess what?  He got exactly what he wanted.  Propose to do something outrageous, and you will get lots of attention.  Now, if he violates city ordinances, that is an entirely different matter, but everyone is getting their knickers twisted over something some guy says he is (constitutionally) going to do in the future.

    As far as the mosque is concerned, for me, it was never about "Scary brown people" -  it was about a sensitivity for the community.  I thought it seemed in bad taste, especially as many of the families of the 9/11 victims were not comfortable with it. And since many more people disagree, I thought it was something that everyone involved should have taken a step back on and cooled off for a while.  You may agree or disagree, but even Imam Rauf agrees that it needs to be done to complete the project:

    I am very sensitive to the feelings of the families of victims of 9/11, as are my fellow leaders of many faiths. We will accordingly seek the support of those families, and the support of our vibrant neighborhood, as we consider the ultimate plans for the community center. Our objective has always been to make this a center for unification and healing.

    When some nutjob (none / 0) (#79)
    by CST on Wed Sep 08, 2010 at 11:36:52 AM EST
    wants to exercise his freedom of speech to be an @sshole, I feel it is also my right, in fact duty, to excercise my freedom of speech in condemning it.

    Is he seeking attention?  Probably.  But so are the rest of us, so that the rest of the world will also see that and know that most of us are not ok with it.

    I bring up the Mosque, because you appear to be concerned with wasting precious news space/time opposing something that isn't hurting anyone physically (no mention of the "sensitivity" toward the Muslim community).  And yet you appear to have no problem with all the news and outcry against another "insensitive" development that also isn't hurting anyone.  Seems like a double standard.

    If you think they are both merely in "bad taste", than why are you ok with the loud opposition to one, but not ok with loud opposition to the other?


    I will also say (none / 0) (#80)
    by CST on Wed Sep 08, 2010 at 11:42:59 AM EST
    I don't think it's the liberal outcry which has garnered this guy media attention.

    I think it's the media attention which has caused the outcry.

    It's a response, not the source.  I'm with Hillary on this one.  The rest of the world is already watching, now is the time to stand up against it.

    "Secretary of State Hillary Clinton used a foreign policy talk to weigh in on hot button political issues Wednesday, slamming a Florida pastor for his "disgraceful" plan to burn the Quran"

    "Clinton noted that Terry Jones, the Florida pastor, is the head of a small congregation, and said she wished his plans to burn the Quran on the anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks hadn't attracted so much media attention. But sadly, "that's the world we live in right now," she said."


    Bad Taste? (none / 0) (#81)
    by squeaky on Wed Sep 08, 2010 at 12:41:46 PM EST
    Wow, that is outright bigotry.

    What do the Park51 community have to do with the criminals who blew up the WTC?



    Honestly (none / 0) (#60)
    by nyjets on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 04:07:56 PM EST
    If someone is saying something you hate, the majority of the time the best thing to do is to ignore them. The only bad publicity is no publicity.

    I agree. (none / 0) (#67)
    by lentinel on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 05:14:49 PM EST
    It's nutty and grandstanding behavior - but it is purely symbolic.
    Like burning the flag to protest the war.

    It's not as if there were no copies left - or that they are burning someone else's property.

    But I also think that the government can't have it both ways.
    They can't be on the fence about being tolerant of Islam, and at the same time go about using predator drones and conventional forces to maim and slaughter Muslims.

    It also doesn't help for Obama to pronounce Bush's motives in his savage assault on the Iraqi people as patriotic.

    If the wars are allowed to continue, (yes, wars), I'm afraid that we will be seeing a lot more of this kind of activity.


    I saw this guy talk on cable (none / 0) (#1)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 10:44:48 AM EST
    he is surprisingly articulate.  sort of frighteningly so.   I did not expect that.  he is more dangerous than your typical hater.

    And everyone like him (none / 0) (#14)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 11:40:11 AM EST
    with such talents using them in such a fashion loves the money.  I can't believe all the money available to such people too simply for the asking.  It's pretty sick.

    There is a gentleman (none / 0) (#19)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 11:56:09 AM EST
    (sort of loosely using that term) who really hates Muslims, and he makes Joshua's braces.  I don't exactly know what to do with him in our lives, but he doesn't make money off of his hate.  I'm very torn about supporting the guy.  He has two children and they are home schooled.  This guy is an extreme Christian, and he was thrilled knowing that my spouse was in Afghanistan and in his words "killing Muslims".  My son's P.T. says that the braces he makes though are the most amazing braces she has seen in her life and Joshua's feet remaining as plantar as possible is vital.  I drive six hours to his place of business, and this guy is so fricken intelligent on orthopedic issues.  I do actually have to meditate for a few days before and after we go because being around the guy is so conflicting.  He is openly so supportive of my family and every Muslim we enable the killing of...it is like a season in hell being around someone so gifted and needing his talents, while he is delusional literally to the point of being insane IMO.

    I'd be interested in Joshua's take (none / 0) (#32)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 12:50:09 PM EST
    on this man.

    I shield Joshua from him (5.00 / 3) (#36)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 12:57:43 PM EST
    I never leave them in the room alone together.  When the conversation begins to venture into certain offroad areas, I steer it back onto a road that can be recognized.  It is hard having your dad gone on a deployment to Afghanistan, and that makes for some real furtile ground to plant weeds in so I guard the Joshua noodle about patriotism and whatnot.  It is just a job.

    And on the ride home we TALK about this guy.  I'd doubt Joshua has his own opinion of this guy because his mother is way too much in the way here.  But I get to be that way, I'm his mom :)  


    He is just concerned (none / 0) (#3)
    by CST on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 10:59:22 AM EST
    about the economy.  And providing more jobs for Quran publishers.

    Increasing demand.

    I hope he buys 1000 books to burn.  The money raised through his hate will just go back to the people he hates.

    Terry Jones (none / 0) (#6)
    by jbindc on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 11:16:59 AM EST
    Has a small "church" of about 30 people.  Even the rightie blogs are calling this guy out and labeling him "a nutjob".

    think that is going to make (none / 0) (#7)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 11:19:25 AM EST
    the Islamic world happier about the news coverage this guy is getting?

    Maybe that's the point (none / 0) (#9)
    by jbindc on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 11:24:02 AM EST
    Why is some nut with a few crazy followers getting all this media attention?  Is what they're doing hateful?  Yes - but every week there are small groups of people doing dumb and hateful things.  Is it just becaus. It's fashionable nowadays to cover a story like this?

    you could make this same case (none / 0) (#10)
    by CST on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 11:29:49 AM EST
    about the media covering terrorists as well.

    "Why is some nut with a few crazy followers getting all this media attention?  Is what they're doing hateful?  Yes - but every week there are small groups of people doing dumb and hateful things."


    Ultimately (5.00 / 3) (#13)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 11:39:57 AM EST
    this is a very neocon-friendly story. The Bill Kristols of the world want Muslims to be enraged, want more attacks and deaths -- and, most importantly, want "the clash of civilizations" to continue..

    This, imo, is at least part of the reason why a story about the demagoguery of a pissant pastor in Florida is garnering so much attention.


    Well, except for the small fact (none / 0) (#29)
    by jbindc on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 12:31:46 PM EST
    That terrorists, generally, you know, kill and injure people.

    When Terry Jones kills or injures someone from his craziness, then your example will be the same.  If he actually intimidates someone by his actions, then it's possibly a crime.  But so far all we have is someone saying they are going to exercise their First Amendment rights and burn Kurans.  Do I like it??  No way, but as any good criminal defense attorney on this site will argue - you can't go after someone for thinking about doing something like this.


    not terrorists then (none / 0) (#31)
    by CST on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 12:42:01 PM EST
    how about the mosque?

    should that be national news? (FWIW I think no, since they are not crazy or mean, just trying to worship in a place that's not stacked like sardines)

    Or shoot - what about all those failed terrorist plots, the ones that don't kill or injure anyone?

    Should the news have covered those dancing in the street after 9/11?  After all they weren't hurting anyone.

    Your original comment was not about "going after" these people it was about talking about them, since it's not really "news" in your view that there are crazy/mean people in the world.


    I agree with 2 minor quibbles (none / 0) (#34)
    by nyjets on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 12:52:28 PM EST
    If he is buring Korans that he has stolen from someone else, that is a crime (and honestly, probably a hate crime).

    If he is setting a bonefire without a permit (even if he bought the Korans), that is in all likelyhood a crime (arson). I would agree that is would not be a hate crime (just a stupid crime).

    I am not trying to be picky, I just think that the point should be fleshed out.


    A bonfire... (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 12:58:05 PM EST
    might be a crime...but to use some lame local law that prohibits a backyard bonfire as the "weapon" to get this group for the real crime of offending muslims would be wrong, so very wrong. IMO.

    an illegal bonfire is dangerous (none / 0) (#38)
    by nyjets on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 01:01:41 PM EST
    A bonfire without a permit is dangerous. God forbidit should get out of control, it can cause a lot of damage. It is not a 'lame local law' and everyone who breaks it should be punished.

    It is a lame local law... (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 01:16:13 PM EST
    if is only dusted off to prosecute somebody who adds korans to the fire, while the guy with a regular campfire is left alone.

    in all fairness (none / 0) (#42)
    by nyjets on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 01:27:26 PM EST
    There is a big difference between a campfire and a bonfire.

    I bet they'd (none / 0) (#43)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 01:29:20 PM EST
    find reasons to dust it off for other things, besides burning Korans. The Klan used to have a lot of uses for bonfires also, as I recall..

    And you know some of them long hair types like to do around bonfires..


    I've been burning wood... (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 01:46:57 PM EST
    up a storm all spring and summer...best way I know to get rid of all these dead limbs and keep the property nice for my landlady.

    I'm sure it's technically "illegal" to do so in my non-town approved makeshift fire pit, but it's one of those laws that isn't enforced...aka "lame law", because if it wasn't lame it would be enforced regularly.  

    And when lame unenforced laws are brought to the forefront, as nyjets suggested as the loophole to get our muslim-hating friends here...that's a classic case of the weaponization of criminal law to "get" undesireables, when there are no "legit" options for John Law via regularly enforced criminal law.  I can't stand such shadyness, even for kumbaya reasons.


    "When Terry Jones . . . (none / 0) (#44)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 01:36:04 PM EST
    . . . kills or injures someone from his craziness"

    does this count?  or will this be all them muslims fault?

    Already, the planned Quran burning has incited large protests in Afghanistan. "Several hundred Afghans rallied outside a Kabul mosque, burning American flags  and an effigy of Dove World's pastor and chanting `death to America.' Members of the crowd briefly pelted a passing U.S. military convoy with stones, but were ordered to stop by rally organizers."

    On Saturday, 3,000 Muslims marched through Indonesia's capital and five other cities to protest in front of the U.S. embassy, carrying signs saying, "Jihad to protect Koran" and "You burn Qu'ran you burn in hell."

    not that anyone was killed or (none / 0) (#45)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 01:37:17 PM EST
    injured in those particular events, though may have been, but that certainly seem a logical next step.

    Someone needs to remind (none / 0) (#47)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 01:48:09 PM EST
    them that the map isn't the territory, the name not the thing named, the menu isn't the food etc

    But then, it sounds like Jones has the same problem.


    no kidding (none / 0) (#48)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 01:55:11 PM EST
    if you think that is just an Islamic thing try hosting a public bible burning.

    Fred Phelps (none / 0) (#8)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 11:20:08 AM EST
    "church" is fewer people than that and he has certainly made a contribution to the national discourse.

    comment by observed deleted (none / 0) (#11)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 11:35:38 AM EST
    for defamatory comments. If he/she does it again, he/she will be banned from the site.

    I have no idea what the defamatory (none / 0) (#51)
    by observed on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 02:04:27 PM EST
    comment was.
    Let me try again.
    I don't approve of Jones; however, it is outrageous to blame him for possible deaths halfway around the world due to his bonfire in Florida. I cannot believe that a defense attorney would even entertain that thought, let alone present it as a reason. Look, the bonfire and any hazards related to that are smokescreens for the true issue.
    If the man said they were all going to pray for Mohammed's punishment in hell to be as intense as possible, for example, the response would be the same. Face it, ANY public criticism of Islam is met with death threats. The same is not true, at least not to any comparable extent, for Judaism or Christianity. This is not an idle discussion. As everyone here knows, innocent people all over the world have been killed solely because of "offenses" against Islam. In the case of the Hard Rock cafe bombing in South Africa, the "offense" occurred in Hollywood, thousands of miles away.

    I absolutely 100% respect the right of anyone to say anything about Mohammed, or Jesus, or Moses, etc. This is a fundamental free speech issue.
    The fact you cannot properly frame the issue is far more embarrassing than your trivial but rather entertaining obsession with Palin.

    Please ban me, because the fact you will not allow historical facts to be discussed---such as the fact that Islam is a religion spread by creating rivers of blood--- is not acceptable in this context.

    I would like this comment retained, however, since I see nothing which violates site policy.
    Finally, if you think that offending religious belief is a hate crime, if no specific person is tolerated, then the category of hate crime is being abused.


    Turn about (none / 0) (#12)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 11:38:42 AM EST
    If Muslims are going to be acceptable neighbors around the world then they are going to have to learn "tolerance."

    If they want respect for their beliefs then they are going to have to give respect for the beliefs of others.

    Now I recognize that not ALL Muslims do this, and I am not speaking of ALL Muslims. But in too many countries they are not exercising tolerance.

    Simply put, the moderate Muslims must step up and take control. It is not the "world's" place to not insult Muslims.

    I am tired of watching our "leadership," and I use that term loosely, quake in their boots when some Muslims threaten us because they claim to have been "insulted."

    That's what we have police and military for. We cannot allow ourselves to be intimidated into following Sharia law.

    Is burning any book wrong? Yes. Is burning a Koran my cup of tea? Nope. But I defend the rights of others to do so.

    The U.S (none / 0) (#17)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 11:50:06 AM EST
    and most of the rest of the world is never going to be "intimidated into following Sharia law". To even hold that up as a possibility is ludicrous, rw paranoia mongering..Clash of Civilizations bs. Beloved by the Kristols and Krauthammers, though.

    Just three non-Islamic countries: the U.S, China and Russia have enough weaponry between them to make an entire planet of militant Islamists glow for a thousand years..  


    You need to pay attention (none / 0) (#21)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 11:59:38 AM EST
    to Europe where Sharia law is now recognized in certain situations.

    off-topic (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 12:04:03 PM EST
    and I've written about sharia law many times. Stop using the comments here to promote bigotry, last warning. The subject is whether Terry Jones is violating any laws.

    I don't see my comment as off (none / 0) (#27)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 12:10:20 PM EST
    topic, but it is your call.

    And I also don't see a discussion of what some Muslims do in reaction to what some of our nut cases do "bigotry."

    I see that as a problem that must be solved.

    But I will drop the subject. I have always tried to be a good guest.


    primarily by Muslims, I bet.. (none / 0) (#24)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 12:04:15 PM EST
    you need to pay attention to certain pockets in this country where Voodoo, Zoroastrianism and Tea Bagging are practiced..

    There's trouble my friend, right here in River City..you need to heed the tell tale signs of corruption..


    Hilarious (none / 0) (#18)
    by squeaky on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 11:52:34 AM EST
    If Muslims are going to be acceptable neighbors around the world then they are going to have to learn "tolerance."

    Extremists like you are the ones who need a "tolerance" lesson, not the 1.5 billion tolerant Muslims...  In fact you should sign up for a few sessions at your local Mosque..


    careful Jim, you are descending (none / 0) (#20)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 11:57:40 AM EST
    into bigotry and bigoted comments are not allowed here, see the comment rules. I suggest you take your views on this to another site that finds them acceptable.

    I was very careful (none / 0) (#22)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 12:03:19 PM EST
    and I hope everyone read, to note that my comments were not about ALL Muslims. And I closed by condemning book burning.

    No difference (none / 0) (#25)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 12:06:41 PM EST
    Please refrain from further comments in this thread.

    So applying that logic to ... (none / 0) (#28)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 12:15:43 PM EST
    If Muslims are going to be acceptable neighbors around the world then they are going to have to "learn tolerance."

    If they want respect for their beliefs then they are going to have to give respect for the beliefs of others.

    ... those that oppose the NY Muslim Community Center, you would say that those who oppose the center have to "learn tolerance" for those who wish to build the center, right?  And those opposed to flag burning should "learn tolerance" for those that wish to burn the American flag, right?


    Oh no. That 18-year old will provoke (none / 0) (#33)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 12:51:25 PM EST
    Pres. Obama into making a statement on the Koran-burning.

    I'm pretty sure (none / 0) (#35)
    by cawaltz on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 12:55:57 PM EST
    there were calls for death to the US and Obama prior to Brooks' event.

    Most of the Mid East doesn't particularly care for us. Haven't for a long while.

    Flags or books (none / 0) (#39)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 01:03:06 PM EST

    I do not think this is free speech. It's intended to provoke, and capable of provoking, a violent response with resulting injury or death.

    Are you talking about flag burning or book burning? Or there different rules for each?

    There shouldn't be IMO (none / 0) (#40)
    by cawaltz on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 01:08:04 PM EST
    If a nutball and his followers want to peaceably assemble to demonstrate their bigotry, I say have at it.  The key words being peaceable. Then again I like the 1st amendment and I found the idea of a flag burning amendment absurd.

    I have seen no one (none / 0) (#49)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 01:56:59 PM EST
    say they do not have the right.  only that it might be nice if they considered the troops they will be putting in even more danger.

    You mean the troops (none / 0) (#50)
    by cawaltz on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 02:02:09 PM EST
    being shot at by the Taliban? Seriously, what do you think they're doing over there, holding tea parties?

    I can't wait until the next Republican gains office and uses a military member so I can come back and see how many hypocrites there are howling about military members being used as props.


    like I said (none / 0) (#52)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 02:07:54 PM EST
    the difference is that would be idiotic and made up.
    this is not.

    What's made up? (none / 0) (#56)
    by cawaltz on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 03:09:22 PM EST
    The fact that Bush used military members welfare as a reason to stifle discussion on Iraq or the fact that the left side of the aisle is using military members welfare to stifle discussion on religious tolerance? Or do you seriously believe if they don't meet publicly to burn Qurans  that everything will be hunky dory?

    Why is the left afraid of debate with a bunch of intolerant lunatic hypocrites?


    "Can't they be arrested" (none / 0) (#57)
    by me only on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 03:12:35 PM EST
    The Gainseville city ordinance makes open burning without a permit a civil offense subject to a fine, not a crime, so that's the short answer to why he can't be arrested for violating the city's seemingly content neutral  open burning ordinance.

    I am curious, though, why Jeralyn thinks burning a Q'ran should be treated different under the first amendment from burning a U.S. flag. Content neutral open burning fire prevention laws should raise no constitutional concerns, but a content based ban on burning a Q'ran should be just as unconstitutional as content based bans on burning the flag.

    I think you are correct (none / 0) (#55)
    by nyjets on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 02:27:56 PM EST
    Assuming that the koran that are burnt belong to him, and no one gets hurt with the unauthorized fire, there is nothing that the authorities can do. Except fine him for the fire.

    There are crazies in every religion. (none / 0) (#61)
    by mexboy on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 04:41:26 PM EST
    I personally find it insulting to burn anyone's Holy Book, but the freedom of speech cannot be trampled on simply because we disagree with the methods or speech someone else uses.

    I don't think the law should be twisted in order to stop this minister from burning the Quran. It is the responsibility of other Christian leaders to counsel, guide, pressure or do whatever they need to do to help this minister change his plans.

    There seem to be a lot of oversensitivity to discussing  faith and race, so let me be very clear. I condemn the Quaran burning. But that doesn't mean I do not want to hear why these people think it is okay to burn the Quaran or that I would object to reading comments from posters who disagree with my position. Maybe I just have a curious mind that isn't threatened by other's ideas and maybe I'm bothered by what is beginning to feel like censorship at this site. People are branded bigots too easily IMO.

    What Others Think (none / 0) (#62)
    by squeaky on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 04:53:32 PM EST
    The German poet Heinrich Heine (d. 1856), in his play lamenting the forced conversion of Spain's Muslims to Christianity, "Almansor," wrote, "Wherever they burn books, in the end they will burn human beings." (When the Nazis burned books in 1933, Heine's were among those set afire, and his prediction was borne out).

    Juan Cole


    Obama (none / 0) (#65)
    by lentinel on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 05:06:02 PM EST
    could help the situation by stating clearly and emphatically that the 9/11 hijackers were not representatives of any religion. They were terrorists.

    Of course what he can't say, is that they no more represent Islam than George Bush represented Christianity when he slaughtered and displaced hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. But he has already summed up Bush as a "patriot".

    I am pretty sure (none / 0) (#66)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 05:07:37 PM EST
    he has said that.

    I (none / 0) (#69)
    by lentinel on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 05:18:08 PM EST
    think he kinda said something like that regarding the Mosque in NYC - but then he said he wouldn't comment on the wisdom of building it...  Not the kind of strong statement we need to quell the anti-Muslim fever cultivated by the former administration and its adherents.

    Regarding (none / 0) (#70)
    by lentinel on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 05:23:34 PM EST
    the quote above - we have already burned hundreds of thousands of human beings. This book-burning is merely symbolic. Compared to "shock and awe", this is trivial indeed.

    Trivial? (none / 0) (#76)
    by squeaky on Wed Sep 08, 2010 at 01:15:40 AM EST
    Do you think that Jewish deaths were rare before the 1933 book burning?

    Anti-semitism and targeted killing of Jews had been going on for some time.

    The Heine quote is quite apt, imo. Brushing it off as passé seems like a bad idea to me.


    where are the moderates? (none / 0) (#71)
    by diogenes on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 08:49:02 PM EST
    Where are the "majority" moderate Islamic imams preaching that a response of murder to a person who burns a Koran is unIslamic?  Has the NY City cultural center builder stepped forward to say that "I personally condemn burning a Koran but in the interests of tolerance people should not be murdered over it (or over drawing cartoons of the prophet)?"

    If Terry Jones is not a Christian, (none / 0) (#73)
    by Jim on Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 10:24:54 PM EST
    why don't the Christian Churches speak up and say so?

    cartoons instead, perhaps (none / 0) (#82)
    by diogenes on Wed Sep 08, 2010 at 11:29:14 PM EST
    I agree--burning Korans is really offensive.  How about some light-hearted humor, like editorial cartoons, instead?  I'm sure that the majority of tolerant, moderate Moslems will have no problem with those.

    And as a further experiment in tolerance (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by jondee on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 01:16:30 AM EST
    maybe throw in a few prominently displayed "editorial cartoons" which explore the working relationship in the U.S between in-bred, swamp running, Rapture invokers and their just-slightly-more articulate brethren in the chickenhawk, neocon intelligensia..



    ad hominem gotcha (none / 0) (#84)
    by diogenes on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 10:56:50 AM EST
    I think that you get my point, since you have no meaningful response.

    it's meaningful in the sense (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by jondee on Thu Sep 09, 2010 at 11:08:56 AM EST
    that it points to a related on-going reality in the U.S that no editorial cartoon in the U.S will ever tackle..

    And, "gotcha.." would pretty much cover every post you've ever made here, wouldn't it?