UN staff killed in Afghan protest over Quran burning in US

[pnewton]

Here is a thought experiement. Let a group in America stockpile as many copies of the Koran as can be found, preferably those of historical or religious significance. Then let that group offer an olive branch of peace to donate these books to Muslims in the Middle East at the end of ten years of peace. Then, it can be offered that if a Christian is killed in an act of terrorism by a jihadist, then one Koran will be burned. Does anyone here think this would bring about peace? If not, why not? Finally, what does this say about the true value placed on the Koran as opposed to the the value of hate.

The point is, I do not think this violence is as much about respect for the Koran as it is an inherent hatred that lives in the human heart. As Islam does not provide the solution to this hatred, then violence will always have a greater influence that respect. We must avoid indifferentism that thinks of Islam as a kind of Christianity light. It is a false religion, with some element of truth. It is not however a source of redemption. That still remains totally within the Catholic Church, outside which there is no salvation, not just from Hell, but from hatred.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

Indeed. Catholic Croatians.

 

[Santi2]

:sad_yes:

 

[iamrefreshed]

I love how defenders of Muslim violence shout crusades when Muslim’s kill in 2011.

I hope you all enjoy your dhimmitude.

You won’t even listen to the Dhimmi who posted on this thread!

 

[Mr_Skeptic]

I love how defenders of Muslim violence shout crusades when Muslim’s kill in 2011.

To me, it’s all the same.

Muslims had an over 600 year delay start compared to Christians. So, they’re just now getting caught up to the the point of where Christians were ~ 600-1000 years ago.

 

[GraceDK]

Tell me Grace, how do you think the Poles and Lithuanians became Christian. Baptism by the sword, that’s how. Christian countries ravaged and conquered as much as Muslims did. The Russians and Austrians pushed the Turks back then went on to take over Muslim areas in the Balkans, and after the Reconquista did the Spanish stop conqering? No; they, the French and the Italians would later take over Muslim North Africa, to say nothing of the repeated attempts to take over Palestine and much of Syria during the Crusades. Jihadism is very old, but it was just as much a Christian habit as a Muslim one. Often the Muslims were much better occupiers than Chrisitians were. I’d much rather be an Indian in the Mughal Empir or a Jew in the Moorish empire than a Jew in Catholic Spain up until the nineteenth century.

First of all, I’m not defending the religion of Islam; I’m merely questioning the blanket accusation that a billion people are evil and violent because they call themselves Muslims. What it says in the text is not that important to me, because it’s not my text, I don’t believe in it. I do know that Muslims have gotten along fine with Christians before, through much of the 20th century, and I’ve known enough practicing Muslims who are not evil or violent to avoid these gross generalizations you like to make. And Muslim terrorism as we know it is a ver modern phenomenon. Do you know about the democratic revolution against the Shah of Iran in the 50s? About secular turkey under Kemal Attaturk? Things are very different from the way they were fourty or fifty years ago; it is well known that older generations of Muslims were not as likely to be fanatics as the younger ones today, especially in Turkey. A fourteen hundred year old book simply cannot explain modern terrorism.

You are ignorant mate. Whenever a violent action was carried out in the name of Christ, it was blatantly against the example of Christ.

You wish to close your eyes to the fact that Jihad is precisely an islamic concept for a reason. Because its inherent in the Islam. Read the Koran and Hadith. I think you have as yet to do so.
The Quran is the so-called uncreated word of Allah. its perfect and as relevant now as ever, for any serious Muslim. The Quran says that a Muslim should not befriend Jews and Christians, because if he does he will be like one of them (condemned).
So I dare say that the nice people you know are ignoring parts of their teaching.
I have Muslim friends too by the way. But as a responsible world citizen I know to distinguish the person from the sinful system. In this case the system is a ideological religion, which, if taken seriously does not produce Mother Teresas, but Osama bin Ladens. You can try to get around that fact.

I have seen first hand how women are degraded under the system of Islam. I made that observation inside mulsim homes and from what women told me themselves. There are big studies coming out from the Arabian world about these conditions of women which are due to Islam, according to which a man owns the children , a man may hit a disobedient wife, she has only half the right of a testifier in court, he may have up to four wives etc etc.

I have Polish and Lithuanian friends… I shall ask them to confirm your words about how Christianity came to their countries. All I can say is that it came peacefully to North Europe through a few holy missionaries, and that whether or not it came to other parts of the world through violence, the example of Christ and the New Testament remains the same.
On the New Testament you shall judge our religion, like I shall judge communism on the communist manifesto, Islam by the Quran and Hadith, Nazism on Mein Kamph, and Secular societies by their constitution and laws.

This is not about feelings but about facts.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Here is a thought experiement. Let a group in America stockpile as many copies of the Koran as can be found, preferably those of historical or religious significance. Then let that group offer an olive branch of peace to donate these books to Muslims in the Middle East at the end of ten years of peace. Then, it can be offered that if a Christian is killed in an act of terrorism by a jihadist, then one Koran will be burned. Does anyone here think this would bring about peace? If not, why not? Finally, what does this say about the true value placed on the Koran as opposed to the the value of hate.

The point is, I do not think this violence is as much about respect for the Koran as it is an inherent hatred that lives in the human heart. As Islam does not provide the solution to this hatred, then violence will always have a greater influence that respect. We must avoid indifferentism that thinks of Islam as a kind of Christianity light. It is a false religion, with some element of truth. It is not however a source of redemption. That still remains totally within the Catholic Church, outside which there is no salvation, not just from Hell, but from hatred.

 

[GraceDK]

sole purpose of illiciting a response? I would not feel compelled to do anything for the sole purpose of illiciting a response, violent or non violent. There would have to be much more reason to go ahead with something that might provoke others to violence. I’m not a mind reader and can’t judge what was in Pastor Jone’s heart when he felt compelled to do what he did.

The thing is, it doesn’t take much to provoke a Muslim to violence. I lived in Saudi Arabia, among Wahhabi Muslims, for nigh on 25 years. I also spent 3 years in Beirut and 4 years in Iran. I ‘provoked’ Muslims just be being female and walking down the street.

I suppose I should have taken up the abaya, or just stayed home all the time, modifying my behaviour, accepting their restrictions on my freedom because of the threat of assault. I got very good at spotting which men were going to try to grope me on the street but I wasn’t always successful at avoiding them. Obviously, it was my fault because I didn’t cover myself with an abaya, although I dressed so that only my hands and head were uncovered. My fault for leaving my head exposed in public like that. I was just asking to be groped.

Here I was doing something that might result in violence on the part of Muslims. Anyone who thinks being groped by complete strangers in the middle of the street isn’t violence…

I can’t count how many times I was forced off the sidewalk and made to walk in the gutter like a good dhimmi. That wouldn’t have happened had I stayed home. Again, my fault.

Nothing I do or don’t do has any effect on whether Muslims will resort to violence. I can guarantee they will riot, burn churches and kill Christians again. They don’t need any provocation. If they aren’t provoked by the actions of Christians, they will fabricate a reason to riot, murder and burn.

The muslims are telling to us to modify our behaviour or they will riot, murder, burn and destroy.They threaten violence and mayhem to coerce us and force their beliefs on us.

The same as the abusive husband forces his wife to do what he wants or he will beat her. Yes, she could leave but the abusive husband still reacts violently when his demands are not met, only now, since his wife is not to hand to beat, he beats on the next woman he sees and still blames his wife for his actions.

At the moment, we can leave Muslim lands and no longer be subjected to their demands. However, we are now seeing them reach across the oceans. They are blaming us for their own actions, saying “Look what you made me do. It is all your fault for doing x, y, z, or not doing a, b, c.”

This post is right on. It reminds me of a discussion I had a few years ago with a Muslim woman on CAF.
She told me that indeed also Christians make violent demonstrations like the Muslims do, when they are offended. I asked for an example, and she said. In Denmark someone made Jesus out of chocolate just last week and the Christians went wild. She even send me a fabricated news-story.
I said: thats funny, because I am right here in Denmark and can verify that your story is a fabricatuon.
She then admitted she had lied …

 

[mdrummer5]

His action was irresponsible? maybe but more irrisponsible were the ones who condemned and warned him last year from every political chair, showing the Islamic world the weakness of the West, while wholly neglecting to condemn that hundreds of Bibles tare yearly destroyed and burned in the islamic world, Christians massacred during masses, and church buildings burned and destroyed.

So those who urged him not to knowing that it would generate a violent response were irresponsible?

Yea I totally see your point of view on that

 

[SwizzleStick]

The posts on this thread have been fast and furious and I admit that I have failed to read the last of them just yet. So, if I am posting a duplicate of this short article now, I apologize. The article doesn’t really contain a lot of substance, but some of the comments following the article are interesting.

’400 Death Threats’ Follow Koran-Burning Preacher To OC

SANTA ANA (CBS) — A Florida pastor blamed for inciting unrest in Afghanistan by burning a Koran was in town on Wednesday to appear on Truth TV, an Arabic language Christian network."…

Entire article: losangeles.cbslocal.com/2011/04/06/400-death-threats-follow-koran-burning-preacher-to-oc/

 

[Raskolnikov]

GraceDK:

The Quran is the so-called uncreated word of Allah. its perfect and as relevant now as ever, for any serious Muslim. The Quran says that a Muslim should not befriend Jews and Christians, because if he does he will be like one of them (condemned).
So I dare say that the nice people you know are ignoring parts of their teaching.
I have Muslim friends too by the way. But as a responsible world citizen I know to distinguish the person from the sinful system. In this case the system is a ideological religion, which, if taken seriously does not produce Mother Teresas, but Osama bin Ladens. You can try to get around that fact.

You may believe that, but many other don’t. I’ve read works by a few scholars of Islam who would emphatically disagree, and their arguments I find more convincing. Plenty of Muslims and non-Muslim scholars have interpretations very different from that of the extremists. Are you aware of the various (Sunni) Islamic schools of Jurisprudence? There are four in total. They range from the Hanbali (which might be considered a sort of parallel to biblical literalism) to Hanafi (who are “liberal” or believe in adapting Koranic teaching to modern life) and the Shafi in between. Your view of Islam seems to take th most radically conservative approach to the Koran, ironically, and I’m not about to accept that it is the only or the right interpretation.

The Quran is the so-called uncreated word of Allah. its perfect and as relevant now as ever, for any serious Muslim. The Quran says that a Muslim should not befriend Jews and Christians, because if he does he will be like one of them (condemned).
So I dare say that the nice people you know are ignoring parts of their teaching.
I have Muslim friends too by the way. But as a responsible world citizen I know to distinguish the person from the sinful system. In this case the system is a ideological religion, which, if taken seriously does not produce Mother Teresas, but Osama bin Ladens. You can try to get around that fact.

I’m nowhere near an expert on Islam, and I don’t believe in it, so I don’t see much point in judging whether people practice there heresies accurately. If you ask a Jew which Catholicism was more orthodox, the one of the eighteenth century and the auto de fe or the one that exists in the western world today, he’d most likely say “who cares, I like today’s Catholics better because they don’t murder or persecute us.” People who call themselves Muslims and who observed the rituals of Islam have lived in peace with Christians and Jews in many times and places before. Therefore, I’d much rather we avoid making enemies out of people who needn’t be our enemies and instead focus on the particular Muslims who commit the crimes and the extirpation of their dangerous ideology, which may yet be a feasible task, rather than declaring an ideological war on all Islam, which would be an impossible task. Whether peaceful Muslims are following their book correctly or not is irrelevant to me. I want more Muslims doing what there doing, and fewer doing what the extremists are doing, and I don’t think screaming to the world that peaceful Muslims are heretics is the right way to make that happen. Frankly, I don’t like the idea of my grandchildren (if I should ever have any) dying in some war in some barren desert because the urge of some policymakers to take on the ‘Saracens’ again.

I have Polish and Lithuanian friends… I shall ask them to confirm your words about how Christianity came to their countries. All I can say is that it came peacefully to North Europe through a few holy missionaries, and that whether or not it came to other parts of the world through violence, the example of Christ and the New Testament remains the same.

On this subject I know quite a bit, as I’ve read dozens of books and written long essays about it. Christianity came to the Baltic region during the Northern Crusades orchestrated by the Catholic military-religious order known as the Teutonic Knights. They subjugated various Slavic tribes by force. I suppose I might note that there was a Catholic Poland before they arrived, but all of what is now northern Poland was converted by the Knights. Christianity spread to some regions by missionaries, others by other means. Russia, for example, adopted Eastern Orthodoxy under Vladimir the Great because he wanted to marry the sister of the Eastern Orthodox Byzantine Emperor. Islam also spread both my sword and missionary. Muslim countries were very advanced at sailing during the Middle Ages and Muslim traders brought Islam as far as Spain and India long before troops ever arrived, and often military force wasn’t even necessary.

On the New Testament you shall judge our religion, like I shall judge communism on the communist manifesto, Islam by the Quran and Hadith, Nazism on Mein Kamph, and Secular societies by their constitution and laws.

The New Testament is true, and I judge Christians according to their ability to live by its truth. The followers of false books, I judge more on their behavior and history. How can you practice a falsehood correctly?

 

[Raskolnikov]

iamrefreshed:

I love how defenders of Muslim violence shout crusades when Muslim’s kill in 2011.

I hope you all enjoy your dhimmitude.

You won’t even listen to the Dhimmi who posted on this thread!

I suppose I can’t be too bothered by your point of view. Life is much more exciting with a little paranoia infused into it, isn’t it?

And who exactly is defending Muslim violence on this thread?

 

[John_Paul_Jones]

He had a trial…by what authority? Only he could state his ‘intention’. After what has happened, what do you think his intention would be to hold another trial for their prophet?

By what authority did the early Christian have to topple statues of Greek gods?

Another Jones probably thought he was doing the will of God. His name was Jim. A lot of people died then too.

There has to be more in common than just their last name. Jim Jones was a cult leader, he was a wolf in sheep’s clothing and there is proof of his misdeeds (that came to light afterwards like sexual misconduct & physical abuse to his memebrs) before he lead those who followed him to Johnstown and than ultimately mislead them to mass suicide.

I don’t know who Terry Jones is. He seems like some fundamentalist who paint themselves into a corner on some issues. I’ve heard he has death threats and most of his members left him, he doesn’t seem like a cult leader.

I was curious if you thought those who were responsible for the riots should also be tried. 'Your response was:

They are guilty of sinning, … I saw a poster who stated, “The Quran burning is just an excuse.” Terry Jones gave those prone to violence the excuse.

That doesn’t answer my question to my question* ‘And what about the imams who psyched the crowds to a frenzy?’ * I said that for

I don’t claim to know international law and am serious in asking, can the pastor be charged with inciting a riot? Just wondering…

Why should only he be held for trial? What about the crowds and their leaders that are directly responsible for those deaths? (whoever the leaders are, whether they’re imams or community agitators etc) How can there be justice if the crowd is seen as innocent of what they do but the person they use as an excuse isn’t and is made to look like he directly committed the action of the mob himself.

Would they have ‘reacted’ without the pastor acting first?

That is a good question, you may think they wouldn’t riot or even kill someone if Terry Jones would have not done that. Yes his action are up front and center, but should he be seen as a person who makes them riot, or just an excuse for their rioting. I think the answer lies in what is impetus for killing 42 sufis or shooting up a Hindu temple or killing Christians who were distrusting Bibles, or shooting Christians after mass while leaving church. Did they die because they burned a koran? No. So see there are too many other examples where people are killed without even ever hearing news of a koran burning. And another thing when rioting took place it’s not like they saw the youtube video all at the same time and suddenly out of the blue had a flash mob, (that excuse might fly on the first day but four days later?) - they were incited into rioting.

Imo if you want to find a reason, it lies what is in common with all those situations. It’s not an action that proceeds the violence, it’s a frame of mind of those people, it’s because they believe that have the right to kill whoever they deem as their enemies.

 

[mdrummer5]

The posts on this thread have been fast and furious and I admit that I have failed to read the last of them just yet. So, if I am posting a duplicate of this short article now, I apologize. The article doesn’t really contain a lot of substance, but some of the comments following the article are interesting.

’400 Death Threats’ Follow Koran-Burning Preacher To OC

SANTA ANA (CBS) — A Florida pastor blamed for inciting unrest in Afghanistan by burning a Koran was in town on Wednesday to appear on Truth TV, an Arabic language Christian network."…

Entire article: losangeles.cbslocal.com/2011/04/06/400-death-threats-follow-koran-burning-preacher-to-oc/

From that link…

Rev. Terry Jones told reporters he had no plans to burn any more Korans upon his arrival at LAX on Tuesday night, but that he may hold another mock trial for the Islamic prophet Muhammad.

Ok… the point has been made… we know that insulting Muslims will cause some extremists to become violent. FACT.

So who’s going to defend him when he burns Muhammad in effigy knowing what the reaction will be? Who here is going to watch him do it knowing that it will lead to more violence and say “hey he has the right to do it and it proves a point”? Yes… it proves a point… but at what cost? Is our pride so great that we feel the need to defend the freedom of speech when someone misuses it? Is it so great that it causes us to be ignorant to the impact of this fool’s actions?

I’m not saying he shouldn’t have the right to free speech… I’m saying he should freaking know better than to use it in this manner.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I was curious if you thought those who were responsible for the riots should also be tried. 'Your response was:

That doesn’t answer my question to my question* ‘And what about the imams who psyched the crowds to a frenzy?’ * I said that for

Why should only he be held for trial? What about the crowds and their leaders that are directly responsible for those deaths? (whoever the leaders are, whether they’re imams or community agitators etc) How can there be justice if the crowd is seen as innocent of what they do but the person they use as an excuse isn’t and is made to look like he directly committed the action of the mob himself.

I said I wasn’t going to post on this thread anymore, but apparently need to repeat a few things again.

I never said the pastor should be tried. I did pose a question if there was reasoning that he could be.

I have, repeatedly, stated the end result was a shared responsibility; the pastor, the political leaders, the religious leaders and the rioters.

That is a good question, you may think they wouldn’t riot or even kill someone if Terry Jones would have not done that. Yes his action are up front and center, but should he be seen as a person who makes them riot, or just an excuse for their rioting. I think the answer lies in what is impetus for killing 42 sufis or shooting up a Hindu temple or killing Christians who were distrusting Bibles, or shooting Christians after mass while leaving church. Did they die because they burned a koran? No. So see there are too many other examples where people are killed without even ever hearing news of a koran burning. And another thing when rioting took place it’s not like they saw the youtube video all at the same time and suddenly out of the blue had a flash mob, (that excuse might fly on the first day but four days later?) - they were incited into rioting.

Imo if you want to find a reason, it lies what is in common with all those situations. It’s not an action that proceeds the violence, it’s a frame of mind of those people, it’s because they believe that have the right to kill whoever they deem as their enemies.

Repeating myself again, the extremists/fanatical Muslims are prone to, and commit, many instances of violence. This does not excuse the pastor for inciting another instance of violence. Did those 8 people die because of a riot incited because of the pastor’s actions? Yes, in my honest opinion. It seems you are arguing that those specific 8 people would have died anyway. You cloud this particular issue with other instances of violence. Have those who find some fault with the pastor said there would have been absolutely no instances of violence without the pastor’s actions? No.

We cannot hold an entire people accountable for the violence of extremists/fanatics, just as we cannot hold every ‘non-denominational’ accountable for the actions of one pastor. If we can somehow reasons that all are guilty for the actions of extremists/fanatics, then we ourselves are guilty of violence. Do we need to start naming instances of Americans who committed violence upon other Americans as a reminder? Will there be other Americans to commit violent acts against Americans in the future? That leaves us with the differences between offenders which appear to be ethnics.

 

[iamrefreshed]

From that link…

Ok… the point has been made… we know that insulting Muslims will cause some extremists to become violent. FACT.

It wasn’t “some extremists”. It was hundreds of thousands of Muslim’s.

 

[mdrummer5]

It wasn’t “some extremists”. It was hundreds of thousands of Muslim’s.

Which is not the point. In fact it only strengthens my point. There are enough who will react violently that provoking them isn’t simply a bad idea. It’s stupid and I don’t care what anyone else says give him the book burning as a “freebie” if you want but if he goes through with another mock trial that will undoubtedly end similarly then yes he is absolutely responsible for the violent reaction that it causes.

 

[iamrefreshed]

Which is not the point. In fact it only strengthens my point. There are enough who will react violently that provoking them isn’t simply a bad idea. It’s stupid and I don’t care what anyone else says give him the book burning as a “freebie” if you want but if he goes through with another mock trial that will undoubtedly end similarly then yes he is absolutely responsible for the violent reaction that it causes.

No, if they riot and kill people it will be their fault. Their’s alone.

 

[mdrummer5]

No, if they riot and kill people it will be their fault. Their’s alone.

You are of course entitled to your opinion.

 

[SamH]

From that link…

Ok… the point has been made… we know that insulting Muslims will cause some extremists to become violent. FACT.

The mere fact that I’m Christian and not enslaved is cause enough to make some extremists to become violent. FACT