Terry Jones burns a Koran and dozens of innocent people die

Loading

Yes, it’s reckless of him to do it, but still, it seems if they didn’t have a Terry Jones they would have to make up something, ie. cartoons, to get their panties twisted in a knot. Burning the Koran is bad but killing innocent human beings is good…What kind of thought process is this?

Friday’s incident began when three mullahs, addressing worshippers at Friday prayers inside the Blue Mosque here, one of Afghanistan’s holiest places, urged people to take to the streets to agitate for the arrest of Terry Jones, the Florida pastor who oversaw the burning of a Koran on March 20. Otherwise, said the most prominent of them, Mullah Mohammed Shah Adeli, Afghanistan should cut off relations with the United States. “Burning the Koran is an insult to Islam and those who committed it should be punished,” he said.

The crowd — some carrying signs reading “Down with America” and “Death to Obama” — poured into the streets and swelled — the governor of Balkh Province, Atta Mohammad Noor, later put the number at 20,000…

The mob also burned down part of the United Nations compound, toppled guard towers and heaved blocks of cement down from the walls. The victims were killed by weapons that the demonstrators had wrestled away from the United Nations guards, according to Mr. Noor…

A prominent Afghan cleric, Mullah Qyamudin Kashaf, acting head of the Ulema Council of Afghanistan (and a Karzai appointee), also called for American authorities to arrest and try Mr. Jones for the Koran burning.

The Ulema Council recently met to discuss the Koran burning, he said in a telephone interview. “We expressed our deep concerns about this act and we were expecting the violence that we are witnessing now,” Mullah Kashaf said. “Unless they try him and give him the highest possible punishment, we will witness violence and protests not only in Afghanistan but in the entire world.”

The governor of the town blamed the Taliban:

The governor of Balkh province said insurgents had used the march as cover to attack the compound, in a battle that raged for several hours and raises serious questions about plans to make the city a pilot for security transfer to national forces.

“The insurgents have taken advantage of the situation to attack the U.N. compound,” said Governor Ata Mohammad Noor.

But as Allah notes, this doesn’t jive with the report that the compound was overrun by a huge crowd and that they were killed with their own weapons. I’m thinking the Taliban would of brought their own. Overrunning a compound and wresting away the weapons is a sign of a violent riot….not a coordinated attack.

Jones is a moron but no one should defend these fanatics by blaming him. I have a feeling our MSM will do just that tho…as they have done in the past. It is shear lunacy to be held hostage by the followers of Islam. We can burn our flag, a bible, and pretty much anything else but if someone burns a Koran we should shake in fear.

THAT is terrorism and we shouldn’t cave to it.

The killers are responsible for these murders and THEY should be brought trial, not Terry Jones.

Exit quote from the Taliban English language website: (h/t The Jawa Report)

Though the American rulers say, the burning of the Holy Quran falls under the category of freedom of speech but the question arises if a Muslim reacts to the bestial step of Terry Jones in a self-same manner, then would the American rulers and media tolerate it under the rules of the freedom of speech and would they remain silent? Or rather that the Americans including the rulers, politicians, religious followers and media of the West will simultaneously, run a mock and refer the case to the Security Council and the United Nations?

You gotta be kidding me.

More here

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
106 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Nan G, thank you, I will certainly look into it, and the book also, thank’s
for those link too.

@retire05:

“3,000 rioters do not represent 1.5 billion Muslims all across the globe.”

This was wordsmith’s statement to show to me that the opinions of the rioting Afghans is not the same as the rest of the Muslims all across the globe. You see, according to wordsmith, who knows nothing about me, I am illiterate in the ways of Islam so he intends to educate me.

I don’t believe you are illiterate “in the ways of Islam”. What I do assume, based upon your comments, is that you are over-educated in a lopsided manner, partisanly gravitating toward anything and everything that supports what you have already decided in regards to Islam.

But it is not just the 3,000 rioters in Afghanistan, it is the 3,000 rioters in Egypt that are now willing to accept the “morality” police of the Muslim Brotherhood, the 3,000 rioters in Palestine, who put AK-47s in the hands of their children teaching them to shout “Death to Israel, Death to America”, it is the 3,000 rioters in Jordan, Syria, Tunisia, and all nations across the Middle East that are willing to be driven to violence due to any perceived insult, be it real, or bogus.

And what I am saying is that much of that would still be going on even in the absence of a religion known as “Islam”. That it is more than just “kill infidels” “hate Jews and Christians” over religious differences. The conflicts are magnified and intensified by religious loyalties/identities and those who manipulate using religion. And yes, Islam does have troubling issues inherent within it that “moderates” need to accept and come to terms with rather than ignore/pretend they don’t exist.

Wordsmith’s excuses are exactly the same excuse that other panderers have used in the past (You don’t understand what it is like to be Black because you are not black, you can’t understand what it is like to be an illegal immigrant from Honduras because you are not Hispanic, yada, yada, yada.)

Perhaps. But there is also truth in that perspective. You don’t really know what it’s like to be living life outside of your own skin and perspective. That’s what empathy is for. Putting yourself in another’s shoes does not mean in the end you agree with the validity of the other person’s perspective. It just deepens your understanding of where that person is coming from. Of what drives and motivates. Saying it is simply all due to the teachings of the Koran is something I find too simplistic and broad-brushing.

Wordsmith then goes on to say that ObL and Zawahiri thank me as I am part of the problem. This is the same excuse the left has used for a decade. You know, how if there was no Gitmo, there would be no new terrorists because Gitmo creates more terrorists.

This is where I think you epic fail to understand my point. It’s easier for you to simply dismiss my position (and the insult of implying that you are doing Zawahiri’s bidding) as a leftist position. And your Gitmo comparison supports the fact that you dont’ get the point, since the analogy you’re using is way off the bullseye.

bin Laden and Zawahiri wished to convince the Muslim world that they are at war with the West. Or more specifically, that their problems and dysfunctions are due to western influence, persecution of Muslims, past colonialism, and support of corrupt, non-Islamic (secularized/non-Islamic enough) regimes.

They failed in rallying most Muslims to Jihad. Sure, many Muslims sympathize because they feel the same anger and criticism of American foreign policy as Howard Zinn and Ward Churchill liberals do; and they do so from a perspective of identifying with those who share their religious, ethnic, and/or cultural identity. But anti-Americanism alone is not a crime and does not make Muslims into terrorists. They are no different than European anti-Americans and some liberals in this country.

There are also those Muslims who are fundamentalists, whose lifestyle and beliefs we want no part of. Doesn’t make them terrorists. Some have even publicly rejected jihadism as counter-productive to the spread of Islam. This is why Zawahiri had harsh words for, say, the Muslim Brotherhood, and vice versa. Zawahiri believes that violent jihad is the route to go; someone like Sayyid Imam al-Sharif thinks it’s brought harm to Islam (it has) and rejects it. Neither’s vision is palatable to us. But I can live in a world of religious differences so long as those differences aren’t forced upon me; especially through violence.

The puritanical strain of Islamic fundamentalists (such as wahhabis, salafists, and the Taliban and the Iranian regime) are who we should be worried about, along with those who take up the romanticized notions of jihadism and martyrdom.

This is not the way most Muslims live their lives. They don’t go around trying to convert or kill infidels and kaffirs. And they practice their Islamic faith peacefully.

Sorry, wordsmith, that dog won’t hunt.

*woof* *woof*

There have been Islamic terrorists since the days of the prophet. And it was not due to anything done by the United States, or even the European nations.

Islam has a violent past, but I’m thinking your views on its history are partisanly lopsided. Because I’m “so windy”, I’m pretty sure you didn’t even bother to click on this. You’re so entrenched, you are bringing strawman points to the table better reserved to those you’re used to arguing with- pc- liberals and apologists for Islamic terror.

Yes, bin Laden and Zawahiri would find excuses for fueling anti-American resentment even if we were not occupying the Arabian penninsula, supporting Israel, invading Muslim lands, etc. Everything is propagandized to breed anti-American feelings and garner support for their desire to establish and pan-Islamic caliphate. But for some of their foot-soldiers, it really is about Israel-Palestine, protection of their lands and ethnic ties, politics, etc. moreso than because they want to “spread Islam by the sword”.

Terrorism is a tactic, a method to get your enemy to cave to your demands. Nothing more, nothing less. Did Mohammed Atta organize his band of faithful because someone burned a Qu’ran? Did the Islamists blow up the Marine barracks because of a cartoon?

In a sense, yes. Their political activism into embracing jihadism didn’t begin in a vacuum.

I’m a strong believer in American exceptionalism and an advocate of America exercising her influence abroad and flexing a muscular foreign policy. However, not everyone is going to feel positive vibes and warm fuzzies over our influence and positioning in world affairs.

Mohammed Atta, for example, seethed over perceived slights- the 1st Gulf War, our support of Israel when so many in the Muslim world see the issue as an injustice against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims. It was a 1996 Israeli attack in Lebanon that “radicalized” him into signing his life away to martyrdom.

What we have from radicalized Muslims is (mis)perceived injuries and attacks against fellow Muslims. I do agree that if it weren’t Israel, however, there’d still be problems arising from the Islamic faith; but it’d come from the same fundamentalists who are wrecking havoc today in the world we live.

Here is the bottom line, wordsmith. Terry Jones burned a copy of a Qu’ran on his own property that he had paid for with his own money. It was his to do with as he wished. Do I agree with his actions? No. As I said, I would not burn any book, even Bill Clinton’s fairy tale biography. But do I stand by his right to do it? You betcha.

So where in anything I’ve written have I shown disagreement with that position? I haven’t. You’ve been projecting onto me the argument you choose to hear and shoot down. A straw man. This is why I’ve stated that I don’t believe you are actually understanding my points and position.

And I am NOT going to make excuses for the cretins that were riled up by a bunch of self-serving Imams in Afghanistan who, after Karzi’s speech that told of Jones’ actions, went on to tell the faithful there that “hundreds” of Qu’rans were burned in the U.S.

This is part of the deeper point: Jones’ irresponsible act had predictable results. Namely, that such a small, “insignificant” act participated in by 30-5o people, with enough media attention, becomes overblown and propagandized by our enemies. And the readily gullible, many who already are angry at the U.S. over drone attacks killing innocents and carry misperceptions over U.S. and NATO forces killing innocent Afghans (even though 2/3rds are being killed by the Taliban), are whipped up into a frenzy. Mobs turn violent. It is all a predictable pattern. It’s why President Obama and General Petraeus publicly condemned the act; it’s why the U.S. government has tried to prevent the release of photos and stories of atrocities committed by our side. bin Laden has said that 90% of the war is fought on the information front.

Those who practice the religion of perpetual rage don’t need a Terry Jones event to find something to hate us for. But Terry Jones does no favors by throwing gasoline onto the fire.

I understand that Islam is not just a religion. It is a political, social, religious belief system that encompases every aspect of a Muslim’s life. And I also understand that it is NOT the “religion of peace” that so many want us to believe it is. And Jasser is correct that until there is a reformation of Islam, until the political is separated from the religious, there will be no peace within the faithful.

Agreed. Unfortunately, wahhabism was one form of reformation that Islam underwent. Certainly not the type of reformation it needs to get along with the rest of civilization in the 21st century.

So you can rant all you want

Oh, was I “ranting”? 😀 I thought you were the one sounding awfully huffy and indignant. I’m the one who wanted to engage with you in civil disagreement. You sounded impatient to move along, yet just couldn’t resist following up and replying, could ya? 😉 I do thank you for your time. Respectfully and honestly, I do.

about how buring a Qu’ran is so much more insulting than burning a Bible, but you will remain wrong. It only seems that way because Christians don’ become violent when Bibles are burned.

I’m not saying it is. And for me, personally, both are just material objects.

I said earlier that it’s to the credit of a “more mature” religion that Christians don’t go about rioting and going all violent crusadist over Bible-burning or a Piss Christ, or an irreverent South Park episode poking fun at Christians. Most Christians can laugh at themselves and lighten up; or protest and express their displeasure peaceably.

But I also stand by my earlier point: That the Books are perceived differently by each of the respective faiths. They don’t have the same equivalence.

And the Qu’ran is no more the word of God than the Bible is as there are those who believe that Jesus was the human form of God, and the words of Jesus are contained, many times, in the New Testament. If they are not the words of God, then what are they? Nor is the Qu’ran the word of God, as God never spoke to Mohammed. Mohammed never even claimed God spoke to him, but rather the words of God were given to him by an angel.

Yes, the words of God transmitted through Gabriel, revealed to Mohammed, recited to his followers who eventually wrote them down (with majority Muslim view believing they were remembered and written faithfully close to the time they were revealed, although others say a century after Mohammed’s death). For Muslims, the Koran in the original classic Arabic is the very literal word of God, written in 1st person narrative, containing the actual words spoken by God. Not just divinely inspired words, but divine words.

For better or for worse, I just don’t see Christians projecting this same level of reverence and regard over the Bible. And that’s not a put down or to imply Christians don’t take their Holy Book or their faith less seriously.

Wordsmith, the difference is that the MUSLIMS HAVE RADICAL PERSONALITY INGRAINED IN THEM BY CENTURY O F OPRESSION AND HATE SPEECHS AGAINST THE ONES THAT HAS EVOLVED.
they look at their books like it dictate to them and leave no alternative.
on this side is a people without being dictated to read the BIBLE BUT ARE DOING IT FREELY TAKING THE BEST IN IT INTO THEIR EVERYDAY LIFE AND FINDING RESOURCES WORDS TO TEACH LOVE AND BUILDING THEIR CHILDREN’S JUDGEMENT AS A SOLID BASE FOR THEIR FUTURE TESTING TIME,
BUT THE BIBLE is revered by CHRISTIANS AS WELL BUT THEY HAVE THE TOLERANCE
INGRAINED IN THEIR CORE BELIEF THAT THE 10 COMMANDMENTS HAS TEACHED THEM
IN THE BIBLE. WHICH IS; THOU SHALL NOT KILL

@Wordsmith: For better or for worse, I just don’t see Christians projecting this same level of reverence and regard over the Bible. And that’s not a put down or to imply Christians don’t take their Holy Book or their faith less seriously.

LOL!
Christians are dying for their faith, reverence and regard for the Bible all over the world, Wordsmith.

But as to killing because someone burned a book?
No way!
Christians are warned not to fall into any form of idolatry.
In Acts (17:29) we are told that God is not like any creation at the hands of a human.
In 1 Corinthians 10:14 we are warned to flee from idolatry. (Also at 1 John 5:21)
Jesus is quoted by John (at John 4) as teaching that God’s approved form to be worshiped is in spirit and truth, not at a certain mountain, not at a certain place.

~~~~~~~~
I argue, over and over again, that although Muslims claim they worship the same god as the one for the Jews and the Christians, they are wrong in that.

The God of the Bible said, ”Test me out….” (Mal 3:10)
He also said to make sure of all the things his followers are told, to only hold to what is fine. (1 Thess 5:21)
He encouraged adherents to test expressions to see if they originate with god or not. (1 John 4:1)
He wants people to draw close to him. (James 4:8)

The Muslim god (Allah) demands they not get to know him, they never test or question his words, they obey.
Allah as unknowable. In Islam, it is considered blasphemous to “presume” that one can know Allah intimately or claim any sort of close, personal fellowship with him. This theological view developed early in Islam, and became an important feature of Islamic theology, being espoused by Muslim thinkers such as al-Ghazali.
Shehadi summarizes this:

“The end result of the knowledge of the `arifin [ed. note – a term denoting “the knowers”] is their inability to know Him, and their knowledge is, in truth, that they do not know Him and that it is absolutely impossible for them to know Him.”
F. Shehadi, Ghazali’s Unique Unknowable God, p. 37

This view is also understood among modern Islamic scholarship, where the statement of al-Faruqi is representative,

“He [God] does not reveal Himself to anyone in any way.
God reveals only His will.
Remember one of the prophets asked God to reveal Himself and God told him, ‘No, it is not possible for Me to reveal Myself to anyone’….
This is God’s will and that is all we have, and we have it in perfection in the Qur’an.
But Islam does not equate the Qur’an with the nature or essence of God.
God does not reveal Himself to anyone.”
I. al-Faruqi, Christian Mission and Islamic Da`wah: Proceedings of the Chambsy Dialogue Consultation, pp. 47-48

@Randy: Thanks; good point!