Florida Pastor Arrested Before He Could Burn 2,998 Qurans On Anniversary Of 9-11

[rdean]

Republicans hoping for more Americans killed overseas they could blame on Obama. The more the better.

Don't worry. They'll think of something. If it's dirty, Republicans will think of it.

name one republican hoping for more americans to be killed overseas.

you won't, because deep down you know you're lying.

rdean has capitulated his constitutional rights to radical muslims. not surprised.

no surprise rdean could not name one republican

proof rdean is a liar

Hardly. Republicans don't admit to anything. Ask who tricked us into Iraq and Republicans say it's the Democrats fault for believing the lies. Ask who took down Bin Laden and a fifth of Republicans will say it was Mitt Romney, the rest will say "anyone but Obama".
When Hawaii finally passed special legislation to release Obama "long form", still Republicans called it a lie. Republicans won't even admit they used reconciliation three times under Bush and won't admit what they used it on. Republicans won't admit they blocked Obama from investigating BP. They won't admit they caused the downgrade.

In fact, you have Republicans saying they are the party of Lincoln and have always been against slavery. So ask them if Lincoln was a "confederate" and they will pretend they didn't even hear the question.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Yes. Its called a permit. Everyone needs one in certain defined circumstances. In this case he was doing it where a permit was required. Did you not read the story?

I did read the article. I have read the Constitution a few times as well and I guess I continually miss the part about getting a permit to speak or assemble. Could you link the passage that seems to be missing from my copy?

If you read the Constitution you would know it is a framework for laws. The Constitution does not say I cant stalk someone either but somehow there is a law against it. Are you saying stalking your ex should be a protected act since its not in the Constitution?

Unless you can point out where the Constitution says you can stalk people you don't have a point.

 

[Kooshdakhaa]

First of all, this story has nothing to do with President Obama. Do some of you know how ridiculous you sound when you turn every incident into an excuse to bash the President?

Secondly, the military has implored this guy not to burn the Kuran. It gets people killed when he does it. It endangers our troops in the Middle East.

And for any of you who happen to call yourself Christians, and as far as I can tell there are very few actual Christians on this board, what do you think Jesus would say about the actions of these "men of God"? Hmmm?

Bottom line, I think this is kind of like yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Yes, we have the right of free speech. But not when it puts others' lives in danger.

How about a little common sense and decency, is that too much to ask?

 

[Kooshdakhaa]

Right on, aaronleland!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

First of all, this story has nothing to do with President Obama. Do some of you know how ridiluous you sound when you turn every incident into an excuse to bash the President?

Secondly, the military has implored this guy not to burn the Kuran. It gets people killed when he does it. It endangers our troops in the Middle East.

And for any of you who happen to call yourself Christians, and as far as I can tell there are very few actual Christians on this board, what do you think Jesus would say about the actions of these "men of God"? Hmmm?

Bottom line, I think this is kind of like yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Yes, we have the right of free speech. But not when it puts others' lives in danger.

How about a little common sense and decency, is that too much to ask?

Obama called the Pentagon to ask them to find someone to call this guy, and they did, and now you want to tell me it has nothing to do with Obama?

 

[YWN666]

I did read the article. I have read the Constitution a few times as well and I guess I continually miss the part about getting a permit to speak or assemble. Could you link the passage that seems to be missing from my copy?

If you read the Constitution you would know it is a framework for laws. The Constitution does not say I cant stalk someone either but somehow there is a law against it. Are you saying stalking your ex should be a protected act since its not in the Constitution?

Unless you can point out where the Constitution says you can stalk people you don't have a point.

Well, that one went right over your head. The OP was saying that the Constitution does not address every specific situation that it governs. It says nothing specifically about a right to privacy and yet we do have that right under the Constitution.

 

[Kooshdakhaa]

First of all, this story has nothing to do with President Obama. Do some of you know how ridiluous you sound when you turn every incident into an excuse to bash the President?

Secondly, the military has implored this guy not to burn the Kuran. It gets people killed when he does it. It endangers our troops in the Middle East.

And for any of you who happen to call yourself Christians, and as far as I can tell there are very few actual Christians on this board, what do you think Jesus would say about the actions of these "men of God"? Hmmm?

Bottom line, I think this is kind of like yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Yes, we have the right of free speech. But not when it puts others' lives in danger.

How about a little common sense and decency, is that too much to ask?

Obama called the Pentagon to ask them to find someone to call this guy, and they did, and now you want to tell me it has nothing to do with Obama?

Was that for this incident? Because when I Google I only get references to past incidents where President Obama got involved. If someone has a link handy I would appreciate it, I don't really have time to search right now.

But I will say this...if President Obama asked the Pentagon to contact this guy, how was that a bad thing? Hmmm? If he is trying to prevent people getting killed, either here or Americans overseas, how is that a bad thing?

Once again, please show me a link that President Obama was involved in this particular incident, because I can't find that.

 

[longknife]

The Raghead lovers will do anything to stop anyone from "insulting" their beloved!!!

Sheriff's deputies in Mulberry, Florida, arrested Terry Jones, 61, and his associate pastor, Marvin Sapp Jr, 44, on felony charges of unlawful conveyance of fuel as they travelled in a pickup truck towing a large barbecue-style grill filled with Qur'ans soaked in kerosene.

What crap - trumped up charges anyone?

 

[aaronleland]

The Raghead lovers will do anything to stop anyone from "insulting" their beloved!!!

Sheriff's deputies in Mulberry, Florida, arrested Terry Jones, 61, and his associate pastor, Marvin Sapp Jr, 44, on felony charges of unlawful conveyance of fuel as they travelled in a pickup truck towing a large barbecue-style grill filled with Qur'ans soaked in kerosene.

What crap - trumped up charges anyone?

Trumped up charges? I already posted this, but here we go again for the willfully ignorant.

(1) It is unlawful for any person to maintain, or possess any conveyance or vehicle that is equipped with, fuel tanks, bladders, drums, or other containers that do not conform to 49 C.F.R. or have not been approved by the United States Department of Transportation for the purpose of hauling, transporting, or conveying motor or diesel fuel over any public highway. Any person who violates any provision of this subsection commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084, and, in addition, is subject to the revocation of driver license privileges as provided in s. 322.26.

This is exactly what Terry Jones was doing when the police stopped him.

 

[Asclepias]

Your attempt to claim kerosene soaked Qurans could be construed as a terroristic bomb threat was either incredibly stupid or an outright lie. I find either offensive.

The Sheriff said almost the same exact thing. You must be incredibly stupid to not realize it could be construed as a terrorist act.

I bet you believe that YouTube video caused Behghazi.

I bet you dont know what you are talking about.

 

[Asclepias]

So in your world you need permission from the State to exercise your rights? I thought freedom of speech kind of gave one tacit approval to speak out.

Yes. Its called a permit. Everyone needs one in certain defined circumstances. In this case he was doing it where a permit was required. Did you not read the story?

Which explains why he wasn't arrested for not having a permit if you are an idiot.

I'm guessing youre speed reading and just missing the point of my statement.

 

[laughinReaper]

Now I'm all for burning a shit load of Korans and if he was just hauling Korans I'd say he was stopped for BS reasons. But hauling that many Kersones soaked Korans has to be dangerous and a fire hazzard. If a car rear ends the trailer and causes a spark that puppies going up like a roman candle. NOt the smartest move on his part.

If he really wanted to piss off Islam he would have saved up a years worth of bacon fat from his congregation, Heated it up in a pot in his back yard, drop them in the bacon fat and one by one burn them in a fire pit all day and make it live Via the internet like the yule log burning at Christmas. It's safe, it's probably legal, smells good and provides a day long rememberence.

 

[YWN666]

I'd be willing to bet that Rev. Jones never read the Koran. Hell, I bet he's never read the bible.

 

[Misty]

Did little o obama order Bin Laden killed or was he too dithered to give the order and just took credit for it later?

Putin probably told Obama to order it. Lol.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If you read the Constitution you would know it is a framework for laws. The Constitution does not say I cant stalk someone either but somehow there is a law against it. Are you saying stalking your ex should be a protected act since its not in the Constitution?

Unless you can point out where the Constitution says you can stalk people you don't have a point.

Well, that one went right over your head. The OP was saying that the Constitution does not address every specific situation that it governs. It says nothing specifically about a right to privacy and yet we do have that right under the Constitution.

The OP was addressing no such thing, it was taking pleasure in the arrest of a man who enjoys making people like him squirm. I keep telling you that using bold font rots your brain, you keep proving me right.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

First of all, this story has nothing to do with President Obama. Do some of you know how ridiluous you sound when you turn every incident into an excuse to bash the President?

Secondly, the military has implored this guy not to burn the Kuran. It gets people killed when he does it. It endangers our troops in the Middle East.

And for any of you who happen to call yourself Christians, and as far as I can tell there are very few actual Christians on this board, what do you think Jesus would say about the actions of these "men of God"? Hmmm?

Bottom line, I think this is kind of like yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Yes, we have the right of free speech. But not when it puts others' lives in danger.

How about a little common sense and decency, is that too much to ask?

Obama called the Pentagon to ask them to find someone to call this guy, and they did, and now you want to tell me it has nothing to do with Obama?

Was that for this incident? Because when I Google I only get references to past incidents where President Obama got involved. If someone has a link handy I would appreciate it, I don't really have time to search right now.

But I will say this...if President Obama asked the Pentagon to contact this guy, how was that a bad thing? Hmmm? If he is trying to prevent people getting killed, either here or Americans overseas, how is that a bad thing?

Once again, please show me a link that President Obama was involved in this particular incident, because I can't find that.

you are the one that argued that this has nothing to do with Obama, even though you brought up something that was the direct result of Obama sticking his nose into it.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

So in your world you need permission from the State to exercise your rights? I thought freedom of speech kind of gave one tacit approval to speak out.

Yes. Its called a permit. Everyone needs one in certain defined circumstances. In this case he was doing it where a permit was required. Did you not read the story?

I did read the article. I have read the Constitution a few times as well and I guess I continually miss the part about getting a permit to speak or assemble. Could you link the passage that seems to be missing from my copy?

You don’t understand.

Jones wasn’t required to obtain a permit to speak or assemble, he could have burned his books in any private venue absent a permit. A permit was required to burn items in a public venue, having nothing to do with the message Jones wished to express.

Remember also that the Constitution exists only in the context of its case law, one needs to read and understand the case law to understand the meaning of the Constitution.

Moreover, the rights enshrined in the First Amendment are not absolute, and are subject to reasonable restrictions by the government.

Consequently, government is at liberty to restrict certain types of expression provided it has a compelling interest and the restriction is content neutral, where no particular type of speech is singled-out for exclusion.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Yes. Its called a permit. Everyone needs one in certain defined circumstances. In this case he was doing it where a permit was required. Did you not read the story?

Which explains why he wasn't arrested for not having a permit if you are an idiot.

I'm guessing youre speed reading and just missing the point of my statement.

Mocking the point of your post is missing it?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Yes. Its called a permit. Everyone needs one in certain defined circumstances. In this case he was doing it where a permit was required. Did you not read the story?

I did read the article. I have read the Constitution a few times as well and I guess I continually miss the part about getting a permit to speak or assemble. Could you link the passage that seems to be missing from my copy?

You don’t understand.

Jones wasn’t required to obtain a permit to speak or assemble, he could have burned his books in any private venue absent a permit. A permit was required to burn items in a public venue, having nothing to do with the message Jones wished to express.

Remember also that the Constitution exists only in the context of its case law, one needs to read and understand the case law to understand the meaning of the Constitution.

Moreover, the rights enshrined in the First Amendment are not absolute, and are subject to reasonable restrictions by the government.

Consequently, government is at liberty to restrict certain types of expression provided it has a compelling interest and the restriction is content neutral, where no particular type of speech is singled-out for exclusion.

Once again he was not arrested for not having a permit, which means you are blowing smoke.

In other words, shut the fuck up.

 

[Asclepias]

Which explains why he wasn't arrested for not having a permit if you are an idiot.

I'm guessing youre speed reading and just missing the point of my statement.

Mocking the point of your post is missing it?

If you were mocking it you look about as witty as a dead kitten. If I were you i would stick with missing it because now you look like you cant read at all.