Petraeus Says Florida Church Koran Burning Threatens Troops

[Procrustes Stretched]

If it were I wanting to stage a protest would I yield to the good General's request (implied or otherwise)? This is the real question people should be asking and answering.

The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan said...

Who are you going to believe, General Petraeus or this dumbass pastor?

mani..................

While I like the good General, I do not think his speaking in public about military matters carries any weight in interpreting the US Constitution and the civil rights we are all guaranteed.

When Generals/Military get involved in political arenas I hesitate to agree with them, even when I would. We have a specific role for the military. Things we do at home can make their jobs tougher, there is no denying that, but if they are fighting to protect our freedoms do they have the right to ask us to give up freedoms in order to save others?

these are some of the questions a quick perusal of this issue raise for me.

My opinion of the asshole religious people involved is irrelevant.

Would I agree to temporarily give up some of my own freedoms in order to make life easier for highly paid and trained troops or Americans living in war torn countries? Would you?

Speculating what might happen as a reason to give up my rights?

Would I like to see things made simple instead of being complex as it is in real life, minus
Sean Hannity and Kieth Olberman yelling simple bullcrap in my ears?

If it were I wanting to stage a protest would I yield to the good General's request (implied or otherwise)? This is the real question people should be asking and answering.

How have you or I personally acted before, when Presidents or people we disagree or agree with have appealed to us to surrender our rights temporarily or otherwise?

maybe this is another thread?

yes it is, bit I'm scared to start a new one.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

If it were I wanting to stage a protest would I yield to the good General's request (implied or otherwise)? This is the real question people should be asking and answering.

The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan said...

Who are you going to believe, General Petraeus or this dumbass pastor?

mani..................

While I like the good General, I do not think his speaking in public about military matters carries any weight in interpreting the US Constitution and the civil rights we are all guaranteed.

When Generals/Military get involved in political arenas I hesitate to agree with them, even when I would. We have a specific role for the military. Things we do at home can make their jobs tougher, there is no denying that, but if they are fighting to protect our freedoms do they have the right to ask us to give up freedoms in order to save others?

these are some of the questions a quick perusal of this issue raise for me.

My opinion of the asshole religious people involved is irrelevant.

Would I agree to temporarily give up some of my own freedoms in order to make life easier for highly paid and trained troops or Americans living in war torn countries? Would you?

Speculating what might happen as a reason to give up my rights?

Would I like to see things made simple instead of being complex as it is in real life, minus
Sean Hannity and Kieth Olberman yelling simple bullcrap in my ears?

If it were I wanting to stage a protest would I yield to the good General's request (implied or otherwise)? This is the real question people should be asking and answering.

How have you or I personally acted before, when Presidents or people we disagree or agree with have appealed to us to surrender our rights temporarily or otherwise?

maybe this is another thread?

yes it is, bit I'm scared to start a new one.

poor po boys have It all wrong

 

[manifold]

Now Ravi says burning a book is an act of violence...





bwhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

 

[Valerie]

Offensive speech is the kind of speech that needs protection to most. If this kind of expression should be publicly-bullied into suppression under the guise of "protecting the troops and their families", then maybe women should stop wearing mini-skirts and tank tops since that probably has a few fundies out in the streets of Tehran shouting "death to American crusaders".

Please vociferously standing up and publicly denouncing irrational acts of hatred is not bullying nor does it suppress his freedom of speech rights in any way whatsoever...And those soldiers aren't living in theory over there, there is no "guise" to protect them.



The only guise here is this delusional man's supposedly Christian ministry.

 

[Valerie]

Now Ravi says burning a book is an act of violence...





bwhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

It is a violent thing to do.

 

[mal]

Now Ravi says burning a book is an act of violence...





bwhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

It is a violent thing to do.

Military burns Bibles sent to troops in Afghanistan - Louisville Christian | Examiner.com



peace...

 

[mal]

[Yes, they can do what they want...burn Korans every day until the end of time. But please don't compare it with wearing miniskirts, allowing gays in the military, etc. All are exercising freedom, but only the one is using violence.

Beating a Muslim with a burning Qur'an would be violent--a hate crime, too--but I don't see book burning as any more of a violent act than burning the flag, and I don't see flag-burning as violent.

No, I don't either though it really depends on motivation. IMO this pastor by his words and actions is committing an act of violence. Which would be fine if he were only committing it against terrorists...but that's not how I understand it.

Military burns Bibles sent to troops in Afghanistan - Louisville Christian | Examiner.com

Is Pleasing the Terrorists by Burning the Bible an Act of Violence?...



peace...

 

[manifold]

Now Ravi says burning a book is an act of violence...





bwhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

It is a violent thing to do.

ummm, no it isn't.


PS: Only a dipshit or a liar would say that it is. No offense.

 

[Valerie]

Now Ravi says burning a book is an act of violence...





bwhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

It is a violent thing to do.

ummm, no it isn't.


PS: Only a dipshit or a liar would say that it is. No offense.

Well, gee I guess you got me then.

 

[Valerie]

vi·o·lence
noun \ˈvī-lən(t)s, ˈvī-ə-\
Definition of VIOLENCE
1
a : exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse (as in warfare effecting illegal entry into a house) b : an instance of violent treatment or procedure
2
: injury by or as if by distortion, infringement, or profanation : outrage
3
a : intense, turbulent, or furious and often destructive action or force <the violence of the storm> b : vehement feeling or expression : fervor; also : an instance of such action or feeling c : a clashing or jarring quality : discordance
4
: undue alteration (as of wording or sense in editing a text)

 

[manifold]

Well, gee I guess you got me then.

and then some I guess

 

[Valerie]

and then some I guess

Only a dipshit or a liar would think so.

 

[manifold]

It's still not an act of violence, unless of course all of these things are also acts of violence:

burning a flag
smoking a cigarette
burning some charcoal
burning a bra
burning some firewood
smoking a joint
beating an egg
cracking a walnut
dropping a crucifix in a glass of urine

do I need to go on or do you recognize the absurdity of claiming that burning a book = violence?

 

[Capitalist]

(CNN) May 22, 2009 — Military personnel threw away, and ultimately burned, confiscated Bibles that were printed in the two most common Afghan languages amid concern they would be used to try to convert Afghans, a Defense Department spokesman said Tuesday.
The unsolicited Bibles sent by a church in the United States were confiscated about a year ago at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan because military rules forbid troops of any religion from proselytizing while deployed there, Lt. Col. Mark Wright said.
Such religious outreach can endanger American troops and civilians in the devoutly Muslim nation, Wright said.
“The decision was made that it was a ‘force protection’ measure to throw them away, because, if they did get out, it could be perceived by Afghans that the U.S. government or the U.S. military was trying to convert Muslims,” Wright told CNN on Tuesday.
Troops at posts in war zones are required to burn their trash, Wright said.
The Bibles were written in the languages Pashto and Dari.
​

 

[Valerie]

It's still not an act of violence, unless of course all of these things are also acts of violence:

burning a flag
smoking a cigarette
burning some charcoal
burning a bra
burning some firewood
smoking a joint
beating an egg
cracking a walnut
dropping a crucifix in a glass of urine

do I need to go on or do you recognize the absurdity of claiming that burning a book = violence?

I don't agree that it's absurd at all...Of all the things you list, I would say in some instances burning of the flag is a violent act unless it's just time for a new flag...The rest of your list, not so much, at least not in the bare context, so you can try to go on, but I doubt you'll come up with anything to convince me that this phony holy man's actions are not a violent affront to peaceful Muslims and peaceful people in general.





vi·o·lence
&#8194; &#8194;/&#712;va&#618;&#601;l&#601;ns/ Show Spelled[vahy-uh-luhns] Show IPA
&#8211;noun
1.
swift and intense force: the violence of a storm.
2.
rough or injurious physical force, action, or treatment: to die by violence.
3.
an unjust or unwarranted exertion of force or power, as against rights or laws: to take over a government by violence.
4.
a violent act or proceeding.
5.
rough or immoderate vehemence, as of feeling or language: the violence of his hatred
6.
damage through distortion or unwarranted alteration: to do editorial violence to a text.

Violence | Define Violence at Dictionary.com

 

[Mr Natural]

Wouldn't it be nice if all the religious whack jobs all got together and had it out once and for all preferably in a place far away from me.

And may the better god win.

 

[Ravi]

It's still not an act of violence, unless of course all of these things are also acts of violence:

burning a flag
smoking a cigarette
burning some charcoal
burning a bra
burning some firewood
smoking a joint
beating an egg
cracking a walnut
dropping a crucifix in a glass of urine

do I need to go on or do you recognize the absurdity of claiming that burning a book = violence?

Beating an egg!

Considering the pastor's rhetoric and actions what he is doing is akin to mal burning a cross on a black person's lawn. It may not be an act of violence to you...fine. But it is an act of intimidation.

Therefore it is silly to compare it to wearing a miniskirt. Or as some bozo did, allowing gays to serve in the military...that is just RGS retarded.

 

[Sheldon]

Beating an egg!

Considering the pastor's rhetoric and actions what he is doing is akin to mal burning a cross on a black person's lawn. It may not be an act of violence to you...fine. But it is an act of intimidation.

Therefore it is silly to compare it to wearing a miniskirt. Or as some bozo did, allowing gays to serve in the military...that is just RGS retarded.

Okay hold on. I wasn't saying that wearing a miniskirt is morally equivalent to burning the Qur'an. What I was saying, or trying to say, was that both actions would be used by fundies as an "example" of the West's immorality and anti-Islam behavior.

I think the breed of fuckwad that would use book-burning as a reason to kill American soldiers is the same breed of fuckwad that would use miniskirts as a reason to kill American soldiers. That was my point there. Hopefully it's clear now.

 

[Ravi]

Beating an egg!

Considering the pastor's rhetoric and actions what he is doing is akin to mal burning a cross on a black person's lawn. It may not be an act of violence to you...fine. But it is an act of intimidation.

Therefore it is silly to compare it to wearing a miniskirt. Or as some bozo did, allowing gays to serve in the military...that is just RGS retarded.

Okay hold on. I wasn't saying that wearing a miniskirt is morally equivalent to burning the Qur'an. What I was saying, or trying to say, was that both actions would be used by fundies as an "example" of the West's immorality and anti-Islam behavior.

I think the breed of fuckwad that would use book-burning as a reason to kill American soldiers is the same breed of fuckwad that would use miniskirts as a reason to kill American soldiers. That was my point there. Hopefully it's clear now.

I get what you are saying. I just don't think it is a matter of pissing off those that would use any excuse to begin with in this instance.

I think it is wrong, though legal, to do what this guy is doing.

But I'm kind of wavering on the hate crime thing now that I've compared it to burning crosses.

 

[manifold]

It's still not an act of violence, unless of course all of these things are also acts of violence:

burning a flag
smoking a cigarette
burning some charcoal
burning a bra
burning some firewood
smoking a joint
beating an egg
cracking a walnut
dropping a crucifix in a glass of urine

do I need to go on or do you recognize the absurdity of claiming that burning a book = violence?

Beating an egg!

Considering the pastor's rhetoric and actions what he is doing is akin to mal burning a cross on a black person's lawn. It may not be an act of violence to you...fine. But it is an act of intimidation.

Therefore it is silly to compare it to wearing a miniskirt. Or as some bozo did, allowing gays to serve in the military...that is just RGS retarded.

Fail.

You might have a point if he was burning it on a muslim's lawn. But that's not the case.