At least seven foreigners killed in attack on U.N. compound in northern Afghanistan

I don't hold Terry Jones responsible (though it's tempting)
IMO he was being an ass but the reaction makes these people double asses. No cancel that word - try backward, unenlightened, deranged, evil.
I would make all those who participated but particularly those who took part in the two beheadings - live in a pig sty WITH pigs for the rest of their lives. They could eat pork or starve - no loss.
Intolerant? Moi? It's more than they deserve.

reply to post by starchild10


And I'll say it to you as well... make a public announcement and then go burn a KJV on the lawn of the Dove Outreach down in Florida.

I'm sure you'll get to see some good old Christian intolerance as well. It's incitement to violence and, as far as I'm concerned, exactly the reason why these kind of religions are doomed. All they do is create divisiveness.

Do the ends justify the means?Is a book worth one life let alone seven?Ive heard some utter tripe in my time from limp wristed kumbaya lets all learn to live and tolerate liberals.Deary me im flabbegasted how many in the west are totally mesmorised by PC even at the behest of life im aghast.I really didnt know which post to reply to but with regards to one posters limp argument that somehow the koran burning pastor CAUSED death no he inflamed a whole bunch of brainwashed psycho's which admittedly isnt the smartest trick in the book(ie dont allow a serial killer to give you a cut throat shave).But with regards to this massivly overhyped overused word TOLERATION let me suggest something........cast our minds back to banned bibles banned crucifix's worn by 6 year old because it may cause offence to olther faiths(the erosian of faith by proxy)jihadists protesting at the funeral proccession of british soldiers chanting death to all kaffirs on the v ery streets of uk,the country that they claim benefits from and the grieving families and mothers liosten to this and they stand overcome with thier own grief and TOLERATE british asian lord who tries to ameliorate the offences of brit born asians who have been cruising the streets of uk for years abusing 12 year olds peadophiles (the asian lord says the young asian men arer frustrated by arranged marraqiges and it affects them this in britain 2010 a shocking show of lack of respect and hideous misuse of liberty because they abuse and misuse the human rights agenda)OK LETS TALK ABOUT TOLERANCE..........Burn my bible ill be very angry but im n ot medieval im democratic boy ill be angry but not in the remotest parts of my contemplation would i consider murder!!!!!!.BASICALLY JIHADISTS ARE HOLDING US TO RANSOM THIS IS THE WEST THIS IS DEMOCRACY FREEDOM OD SPEECH WHAT OUR NATIONS ARE BUILT UPON,IF YOU HERE OR SEE SOMETHING YOU TAKE OFFENCE WITH FROM YOUR MIDDLE EAST IVORY TOWERS THEN LEAVE IT THIER DONT IMPINGE UPON OUR LAWS WITH YOUR LAWS.THIS IS SPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARTA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! FOR 30 YEARS IVE SAID THIS ITS ALWAYS BEEN A FAITH ISSUE NOT SOCIO POLITICAL IDEALS,OUR FAITHS ARE IRRECONCILABLE ONE IS TOLERANT OF OTHERS ONE IS NOT.........................ONE DIES FOR GOD/ONE KILLS FOR GOD THE TIME IS UPON US

Every UN worker not killed in the murder is going to quickly leave Afganistan and never return...

reply to post by masqua


The word was made FLESH no one can obliterarte the word so im pretty sure most christians are smart enough to discern thier burnt kjv bible would NOT constitute revenge in the most hideopus form we have seen,if i snapped your dream catcher you would be angry human nature but there has to be perspective here

Purposely angering people shouldn't be condoned. While yes, Terry Jones's actions were constitutionally protected under the 1st Amendment, his actions set in motion events that resulted in the deaths of innocent people.

The UN Staffers did not deserve to die. The people were angry because of what Terry Jones did, and they turned that anger on innocent people.

Two wrongs don't make a right. Terry Jones is in deed an accomplice to those murders.

An enemy shouldn't remain an enemy, the ultimate goal of a free and tolerant society should be to encourage other societies to become free and tolerant themselves.

At the minimum, Terry Jones's actions are Reckless Endangerment.

Reckless endangerment is a crime consisting of acts that create a substantial risk of serious physical injury to another person. The accused person isn't required to intend the resulting or potential harm, but must have acted in a way that showed a disregard for the foreseeable consequences of the actions. The charge may occur in various contexts, such as, among others, domestic cases, car accidents, construction site accidents, testing sites, domestic/child abuse situations, and hospital abuse. State laws and penalties vary, so local laws should be consulted.

I hope, that the UN, and the families of the victims of this tragedy seek legal remedies for Terry Jones's actions which (metaphorically) put the guns in those protesters hands. He should be held accountable for the deaths of those innocent UN workers.

Books of all major religions should be burned regularly. It would serve both to expose the extremists, and to desensitise their adherents to such burnings, ultimately increasing their tolerance. Also, it is a great opportunity to exercise freedom of expression, because when someone disagrees or is offended by your expression and you do not back down, thats when this freedom is truly upheld and strenghtened.

reply to post by Maslo


I can agree with you that some Muslims need to really calm down about their religion, and far too often they take things WAY too seriously.

I however don't think the right approach is to continuously "poke the bear" (as the saying goes).

I still don't think that intolerance should be encouraged in any form.

reply to post by whatukno


yes aka pakistan condemming to death a man on his freedom to choose what he believes .Yes we should lead by example not be lead back 300 years,Put yourself in pontious pilates position "What will you have me do with FREEDOM OF CHOICE?even if at times some of those choices made by people are unpallatable"?Shall i crack down on any more koran burning sessions how l,ong is an inciting race hatred piece of string.This would be no more than kowtowing and appeasing mad jihadists because they object and it saves lots of sh**.To sum up we sacrifice liberty for fear of recrimination.I tell you live in the uk be a catholic and then come back and tell me what it is like to be the least tolerated most castigated faith in uk.

this is why i said in my initial post all faiths atre irreconcilable .But i do have to say this on the balance of power i would say the west is waaaaaaaaaaaay more tolerant my faith tells me dont hide your light(walk tall and exhault your belief) if io do this in saudi arabia i am commiting a serious offence see how far toleration works thier?The ancient christian churches that remain in syria iraq egypt etc are decreasing in numbers at an alarming rate because of sectarian violence bombings shootings trumped up blasphemy charges on and on........in uk for example islam is increasing rapidly TOLERATION?

READ WALID SHOEBATS EX PALISTINAN TERRORIST BOOK,IF ANYONE KNOWS THE REAL DEAL THEN HE DOES

reply to post by cuchullainuk777

yes aka pakistan condemming to death a man on his freedom to choose what he believes.

Pakistan is not the United States. We shouldn't stoop to the level of those that we disagree with.

Yes we should lead by example not be lead back 300 years,Put yourself in pontious pilates position "What will you have me do with FREEDOM OF CHOICE?

I would hope that you would be wise enough to know the right choice for yourself, my suggestion would be to not degrade yourself to intolerance and bigotry.

Pontius Pilātus knowing full well that Jesus was innocent of treason against Rome, still decided to put him to death. The reasons were political because the temple hierarchy of Judaea saw Jesus as a threat to the temple.

Were his actions correct? Of course they weren't. Had I been in Pontius Pilātus's position, I wouldn't have put Jesus to death, thus creating a martyr. Instead, because of political pressure and to keep Roman control over Judaea, I would have put Jesus into prison until such a time that the Priests of the temple had forgotten about him.

Had I been there, Jesus wouldn't have died a martyr, and thus birthed a new religion, he would have probably died a poor, penniless carpenter, forgotten in the record of history.

even if at times some of those choices made by people are unpallatable"?Shall i crack down on any more koran burning sessions how l,ong is an inciting race hatred piece of string.

Would you have wanted to stand by while the Nazi's burned books? While I don't personally agree with the Koran, nor do I subscribe to it's teachings, I personally feel no threat by it, nor do I feel threatened by Muslims.

I work in a hotel near the Detroit airport, I often have customers that come in who are Muslim. Last night in fact, I had a customer come in who presented me with his Jordan identification. I didn't feel threatened by him, I wasn't afraid. In fact, if you have ever seen the third Indiana Jones movie, you are aware of a very interesting piece of Jordan's architecture, The Treasury at Petra is the temple in the movie.

This would be no more than kowtowing and appeasing mad jihadists because they object and it saves lots of sh**.

Actually no, I disagree, this wouldn't be kowtowing to mad jihadists, this would be more along the lines of taking the venom out of their strike.

Terrorists rely on reprisal in order to continue to recruit members. They WANT you to hate them. This is how they justify their Jihad. Instead of reacting the way they want, why not realize that the majority of the people don't believe the way the Jihadist does, and take the venom out of their strike? What this would do is send a message to the people that we are better than the Jihadists. And that it's ok for them to be Muslim, and we would rather be their friends and allies than enemies.

What you would see is that the people would turn against the Jihadists. They would realize that we aren't their enemy, and they can continue to be Muslim. Sure, I don't agree with the teachings of the Koran, but who am I to tell another what religion they should believe in?

To sum up we sacrifice liberty for fear of recrimination.

But the actions of Terry Jones sacrifices more than our liberty. His actions empowers our enemies, and gave them venom in which to strike.

I tell you live in the uk be a catholic and then come back and tell me what it is like to be the least tolerated most castigated faith in uk.

I have actually visited the UK, it's a beautiful country with a deep rich history. I went to York Minster, and walked to the top and looked out, and walked the walls of the city. I visited Stonehenge and Avebury on the Salisbury plain.

I have nothing against the Catholic church. I even met the last pope once in a monastery near my hometown. I even got absolutely plastered with a Catholic priest on my second trip to England. (he was actually a really cool guy).

I myself am not religious, however, I understand that some people find religion fulfilling. I feel that people should be entitled to believe what they will.

I don't think that any religion should be condemned for the actions of a few. I don't blame the whole of the Catholic church for the actions of a few priests, and I don't blame the whole of Islam for the actions of a few Jihadists.

That in my opinion is the meaning of tolerance. Politics are fine, religions are fine, when you mix the two, that is when you create poison.

Originally posted by whatukno
Two wrongs don't make a right. Terry Jones is in deed an accomplice to those murders.

At the minimum, Terry Jones's actions are Reckless Endangerment.

You are as much a moron of the law as you are of morality.

I am not even going to comment on your "accomplice to murder" idiocy.

Reckless endangerment has to with with an act that you commit that leads directly to the harm of another individual...that is, for example, you are horsing around in your car, it jumps the curb and injures someone...even though your horseplay itself was not intended to cause harm to anyone.

It has nothing to do with someone saying or doing something that "causes" another person to lose control and then injure innocent third parties.

This is like saying that if a wife refuses to have sex with her husband, for any reason, and her husband then flies into a rage and kills the kids, rapes the neigbour, then starts stabbing people to death on the corner (because his "honour" as a man was challenged...or something)...that the wife should be held accountable for her actions that lead to her obviously deranged husband to go on a murderous spree.

The American Pastor did nothing illegal...he did something offensive. The nutjobs in Afghanistan went ballistic and hunted down...and butchered...innocent people.

You morality barometer is way, way off.

Your thread, and your point of view quite frankly, is nonsensical.

reply to post by mobiusmale


Actually, I have linked to the legal definition of Reckless Endangerment.

And Terry Jones's actions do constitute Reckless Endangerment, because his actions did create a substantial risk of physical injury (in this case death of at least seven people)

The accused person isn't required to intend the resulting or potential harm, but must have acted in a way that showed a disregard for the foreseeable consequences of the actions.

He did so knowing that Muslim extremists would be angered by his actions, he showed a disregard for the foreseeable consequences of burning the Koran publicly.

I believe that the Federal Government should Arrest Terry Jones for the crime of Reckless Endangerment. As he obviously would know that his actions could cause such a reprisal. He should also be sued by the families of the victims of this horrific event for wrongful death because as a result of his actions their family members died.

This man might as well have went over there and killed those seven innocent people himself.

His actions in burning the Koran may be protected under the 1st Amendment, the result of his actions are not.

reply to post by whatukno

He did so knowing that Muslim extremists would be angered by his actions, he showed a disregard for the foreseeable consequences of burning the Koran publicly.

Angering someone is not against the law, he has full right to do it. Muslims killing innocent people, that surely does not fall under foreseeable consequences. Noone in their right mind would do something like that.

Anyway, your entire post and line of tought is ridiculous. Freedom of speech and expression are obviously unknown words for you.

reply to post by Maslo

Muslims killing innocent people, that surely does not fall under foreseeable consequences.

Had he done this in private without internet or media attention, I would agree with you, if you want to go outside right now and burn a Koran in your backyard, who am I to tell you different? That's free speech.

But when you do so and have media attention drawn to it, this does have foreseeable consequences, and those consequences were that seven innocent people died because of the actions taken by Terry Jones.

Noone in their right mind would do something like that.

You are right, no one in their right mind would do something like that, but Muslim extremists aren't in their right mind are they? They are incited by things like this, and Terry Jones knew this, and did this because he knew something like this would happen.

He might as well loaded their guns for them.

Originally posted by Maslo
Muslims killing innocent people, that surely does not fall under foreseeable consequences. Noone in their right mind would do something like that.

Remember the fuss over the Dutch cartoons? Riots round the world and over 100 dead. I think only too many of us were aware of the likely consequences.
Oh I think maybe you were being ironic! Whatever, you have hit the nail on the head. They are not in their right mind. They are backward, bigotted, bloodthirsty and evil.
No doubt that preacher is an intolerant idiot, but let's not use that to excuse these killings.

reply to post by starchild10


I wouldn't burn a bible for the same reason.

I wouldn't publish coupons in the Army of God's newsletter letting people know that I was giving out abortions.

I wouldn't tell the Westboro Baptist Church that I was having a military funeral.

Why? Because that incites people. And in reality, I could be held liable for reckless endangerment.

Do you go around handing out fully loaded guns to crackheads out front of liquor stores? If not why? You aren't holding up the liquor store yourself. Is it your fault that they held up the liquor store and possibly killed the clerk inside? Would they have done it if you hadn't gave them a gun in the first place?

Same thing here, he basically armed these nutjobs, they killed because of the actions he took.

reply to post by whatukno

But when you do so and have media attention drawn to it, this does have foreseeable consequences, and those consequences were that seven innocent people died because of the actions taken by Terry Jones.
He might as well loaded their guns for them.

They technically died because of his actions. But he does NOT have legal responsibility fot their deaths. Thats why this motion would fail in every court, and would not be considered reckless disregard, or any other crime. He is no more responsible than gun manufacturers are responsible for the victims their weapons kill, in the eyes of the law.

reply to post by whatukno


As I said, freedom of speech and expression are unknown words for you. You would not be liable for anything if you burn bible or Quran. Only people who do something that is actually against the law would.