Conquer Club

I read some crazy guy in Florida burned the Koran, so the crazy's in Afghanistan killed like 15 people.

I don't think the response is appropriate. They should have just protested and yelled and screamed. What about you? Do you think their response is proper?

How about when pictures of Muhammad are created? Should people be killed for that? What's the appropriate response?

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/0402/ ... o-violence

Officials in Kandahar, Afghanistan, reported that nine people were killed and scores injured when a protest turned violent. This followed by one day the attack on a United Nations compound in Mazar-e Sharif in which five demonstrators and seven UN employees were killed.

RELATED: 11 countries speaking out against Quran burning in Florida

WTF? How about 11 countries speaking out against slaughter of people in Afghanistan.

EDIT: I've changed the poll to provide other options. I've given two options per user...I expect everybody to vote for the last option.

When you see a hornet's nest, do you run up to it, go "Nyeh nyeh!" and then kick it?

There should be a third option in the poll: THEY'RE ALL IDIOTS.

Here's the story the Times ran yesterday. I didn't post it because I didn't want it to be mistaken as a joke.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/02/world ... ml?_r=2&hp

And here's the story the Times has up right now.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/03/world ... an.html?hp

It's basically a win win situation for the extremists. Radical Muslims want to portray the West as trying to destroy Islam. Radical Christians want to portray Muslims as a barbarian horde fundamentally opposed to Western society.

PD is right- there should be an option to disagree with both. Neither side really cares which side you take. They just want polarisation and then the destruction of the other side.

so what you propose when NATO(US) airplane bombard and kill 30-40 civilian in afghanistan-what can they do then? Its so funny that nobody responisbile for these crime? If afgan people dont like NATO-US-UN, then i think that best option its to move away from this country ,instead to provoke people, burning curan, and killing civilians.

Symmetry wrote:It's basically a win win situation for the extremists. Radical Muslims want to portray the West as trying to destroy Islam. Radical Christians want to portray Muslims as a barbarian horde fundamentally opposed to Western society.

PD is right- there should be an option to disagree with both. Neither side really cares which side you take. They just want polarization and then the destruction of the other side.

Well said. Bravo.


Someone should burn that idiot in Florida alive. He's an attention whore who pulled this shit without any regard to the consequences. Is there any doubt that he knew this would not be used as an excuse to retaliate by extremists from the "other side" ?

I especially love his quote, in which he denounced responsibility, but stated it proved Islams radical side. Like the killers represent the majority of Islam.....fucking Idiot.....I'm ashamed that examples of his behavior may make people of other religions think Terry Jones is a fine example of a typical Christian.

The poll should read:

What is worse?

1) An attention whore who's selfish act of grandstanding triggers the murder of innocents?

2) The slaughter of said innocents.

no object is not more precious than human life the Koran, Bible and Torah all teach that.

What amazes me is both sides do it in the name of religion.

That's why religion is bullshit.

I am pretty sure that burning the American Flag or the Bible and even, dare I say, the Koran, are all expressions of free speech. Those acts should not be infringed upon, whether you personally agree or disagree.

Killing a bunch of people around you because of someone exercising free speech somewhere else is pretty messed up to say the least.

Comparing the two acts is pretty stupid as well.

What's horrible is that one group of people would use the free speech of another group to justify their acts of violence. An act of violence is still violence, no matter when anyone else said or did prior.

What's horrible is a religious man would deliberately incite violence knowing full well that the consequences could be innocent people being killed by an angry, poorly educated mob of people, in another land that have completely different customs. To add insult to injury the man claims to be doing it in the name of jesus and god, while he knows the potential for violence is almost a certainty. This sickens me and is a disgusting act. He should be strung up and skinned alive by an angry mob in a third world nation.

notyou2 wrote:What's horrible is a religious man would deliberately incite violence knowing full well that the consequences could be innocent people being killed by an angry, poorly educated mob of people, in another land that have completely different customs. To add insult to injury the man claims to be doing it in the name of jesus and god, while he knows the potential for violence is almost a certainty. This sickens me and is a disgusting act. He should be strung up and skinned alive by an angry mob in a third world nation.

Wow...just wow. So you blame some nobody preacher man practicing free speech instead of the murdering people who actually committed an atrocity.

I suppose it was Theo van Gogh's fault as well, for practicing his free speech and being murdered for it?

You do not limit free speech just because some people are going to flip out. To do so you end up being cowed into submission.

Do we drop bombs of a bunch of anti-american dip shits for burning the American flag? Hell no. Let em burn the flag, it is an expression of free speech. Burn effigies, bibles, koran's, newspapers, toilet paper, what ever it is that one wishes to symbolize and practice their God given right to speak their mind. Just don't burn people, don't destroy another's property and certainly don't kill anyone.

Don't give in one inch to barbarians who try to force others to "keep your mouth shut or else!" BS. That is what this is.

Blame the murdering, psychotic bastards that were chopping people's heads off. Those people were going to find an excuse whether or not the idiot preacher guy burned this or that. Said this or that. Place the blame to the proper culprits please.

"I was just practicing free speech" is not, and has never been, an excuse for avoiding the consequences of what you say. "Fire!" in a crowded theatre comes to mind as the classic example. Terry Jones knew what would happen. In fact there were deaths when he threatened to burn the Koran a few months earlier. He certainly knew that there would be more if he went through with it.

I'd really like to emphasise this point. He knew that if he did this then people would die. He'd been warned, and he'd knew what happened when he'd threatened to burn it. He absolutely knew that if he took that action people would be killed.

I don't excuse the killers at all. They're brutal, and deeply ignorant and all in the name of causing a divide between Christians and Muslims. What they want is also what Pastor Jones wants.

Free speech is great, but let's just emphasise one more time that he knew that doing this would lead to people being killed.

Symmetry wrote:"I was just practicing free speech" is not, and has never been, an excuse for avoiding the consequences of what you say. "Fire!" in a crowded theatre comes to mind as the classic example. Terry Jones knew what would happen. In fact there were deaths when he threatened to burn the Koran a few months earlier. He certainly knew that there would be more if he went through with it.

I'd really like to emphasise this point. He knew that if he did this then people would die. He'd been warned, and he'd knew what happened when he'd threatened to burn it. He absolutely knew that if he took that action people would be killed.

I don't excuse the killers at all. They're brutal, and deeply ignorant and all in the name of causing a divide between Christians and Muslims. What they want is also what Pastor Jones wants.

Free speech is great, but let's just emphasise one more time that he knew that doing this would lead to people being killed.

The US Supreme Court just agreed with those crazy's at the west baptist church and their right to "protest" at fallen soldiers funerals. These two examples don't compare with yelling Fire in a crowded theater. Me burning a book doesn't have anything to do with you killing people.

bedub1 wrote:

Symmetry wrote:"I was just practicing free speech" is not, and has never been, an excuse for avoiding the consequences of what you say. "Fire!" in a crowded theatre comes to mind as the classic example. Terry Jones knew what would happen. In fact there were deaths when he threatened to burn the Koran a few months earlier. He certainly knew that there would be more if he went through with it.

I'd really like to emphasise this point. He knew that if he did this then people would die. He'd been warned, and he'd knew what happened when he'd threatened to burn it. He absolutely knew that if he took that action people would be killed.

I don't excuse the killers at all. They're brutal, and deeply ignorant and all in the name of causing a divide between Christians and Muslims. What they want is also what Pastor Jones wants.

Free speech is great, but let's just emphasise one more time that he knew that doing this would lead to people being killed.

The US Supreme Court just agreed with those crazy's at the west baptist church and their right to "protest" at fallen soldiers funerals. These two examples don't compare with yelling Fire in a crowded theater. Me burning a book doesn't have anything to do with you killing people.

Pastor Jones is not going to be prosecuted under US law. But I would like to emphasise again that he knew that what he was doing would result in people being killed. His burning of the Koran has a direct link to those deaths. Legally, you're right. In reality, of course, his burning of the book got a lot of people killed and set off waves of protest against foreign intervention in the middle east.

I'd love to think that expressing freedom of speech is entirely unrelated to what people do with your words or actions, but it simply isn't true. Pastor Jones threatened to burn the Koran, and people died. He was warned that this would happen. World leaders told him that it would happen. It happened.

His church then did it anyway. People died again. He knew what he was doing.

Symmetry wrote:"I was just practicing free speech" is not, and has never been, an excuse for avoiding the consequences of what you say. "Fire!" in a crowded theatre comes to mind as the classic example. Terry Jones knew what would happen. In fact there were deaths when he threatened to burn the Koran a few months earlier. He certainly knew that there would be more if he went through with it.

I'd really like to emphasise this point. He knew that if he did this then people would die. He'd been warned, and he'd knew what happened when he'd threatened to burn it. He absolutely knew that if he took that action people would be killed.

I don't excuse the killers at all. They're brutal, and deeply ignorant and all in the name of causing a divide between Christians and Muslims. What they want is also what Pastor Jones wants.

Free speech is great, but let's just emphasise one more time that he knew that doing this would lead to people being killed.

If you can't see that burning a Koran is an exercise in free speech then there is no hope for you. It is nothing at all like yelling "fire" (when there isn't a fire) in a theater.

Burning the Koran is exactly the same as burning a Bible or burning a flag in protest.

You are saying, in effect, is that if people protest something, or use free speech that may lead to violence being committed, then that protest or free speech should be outlawed or limited. When people marched for civil rights they knew well that it was going to incite violence, AND IT DID. Should they have not marched? Of course they should have. When they did some people didn't like it and were moved to violence. The people committing the violence are at fault, not the protester.

If you wanted to burn the flag in protest and I as your neighbor said "The Flag is sacred to me, if you burn it I will harm you."
-Will you then not go through with your protest?
-If you go through with the protest and are harmed for it, would you then accept blame for it? After all, you knew before hand that someone was going to be pissed enough to be moved to violence.
-If you abandon your plan to protest, then I have effectively shut you up.

People should not be limited in free speech simply because someone else is going to be offended to the point of violence.

patches won this thread long ago

If I cut the wires of an elevator...and it falls to the ground and kills people....you are right...I caused it.
If I yell fire in a crowded place, and people run out trampling each other...you are right..I caused it.
If I burn a book, and YOU cut the wires of an elevator....and it falls tot eh ground and kills people...YOU did it. If YOU did it cause you were pissed I burned the book, that doesn't excuse your actions, and doesn't make me responsible. YOU need to control YOUR actions.

(and I don't mean you and i specifically....we don't do stupid shit like that crazy pastor, nor the terrorists that killed all the people)

It doesn't matter. His speech was not saying he would go kill people or telling other people to go kill people, so it's legal. Just because some extreme Muslims can't take criticism of their religion doesn't mean all of the rest of us have to placate to them. THEY'RE EXTREMISTS!! We don't have to change our ways simply because they don't like it.

patches70 wrote:

Symmetry wrote:"I was just practicing free speech" is not, and has never been, an excuse for avoiding the consequences of what you say. "Fire!" in a crowded theatre comes to mind as the classic example. Terry Jones knew what would happen. In fact there were deaths when he threatened to burn the Koran a few months earlier. He certainly knew that there would be more if he went through with it.

I'd really like to emphasise this point. He knew that if he did this then people would die. He'd been warned, and he'd knew what happened when he'd threatened to burn it. He absolutely knew that if he took that action people would be killed.

I don't excuse the killers at all. They're brutal, and deeply ignorant and all in the name of causing a divide between Christians and Muslims. What they want is also what Pastor Jones wants.

Free speech is great, but let's just emphasise one more time that he knew that doing this would lead to people being killed.

If you can't see that burning a Koran is an exercise in free speech then there is no hope for you. It is nothing at all like yelling "fire" (when there isn't a fire) in a theater.

Burning the Koran is exactly the same as burning a Bible or burning a flag in protest.

You are saying, in effect, is that if people protest something, or use free speech that may lead to violence being committed, then that protest or free speech should be outlawed or limited. When people marched for civil rights they knew well that it was going to incite violence, AND IT DID. Should they have not marched? Of course they should have. When they did some people didn't like it and were moved to violence. The people committing the violence are at fault, not the protester.

If you wanted to burn the flag in protest and I as your neighbor said "The Flag is sacred to me, if you burn it I will harm you."
-Will you then not go through with your protest?
-If you go through with the protest and are harmed for it, would you then accept blame for it? After all, you knew before hand that someone was going to be pissed enough to be moved to violence.
-If you abandon your plan to protest, then I have effectively shut you up.

People should not be limited in free speech simply because someone else is going to be offended to the point of violence.

I'm saying that that the "fire" analogy is fair because he knew that exercising free speech in that way would result in deaths. He knew that and it did.

Night Strike wrote:It doesn't matter. His speech was not saying he would go kill people or telling other people to go kill people, so it's legal. Just because some extreme Muslims can't take criticism of their religion doesn't mean all of the rest of us have to placate to them. THEY'RE EXTREMISTS!! We don't have to change our ways simply because they don't like it.

Way to turn the other cheek, Christian.

Night Strike wrote:It doesn't matter. His speech was not saying he would go kill people or telling other people to go kill people, so it's legal. Just because some extreme Muslims can't take criticism of their religion doesn't mean all of the rest of us have to placate to them. THEY'RE EXTREMISTS!! We don't have to change our ways simply because they don't like it.

No- but he knew that his speech would cause the deaths of other people. I don't think anyone has seriously questioned that. We all know that his expression of free speech would cause people to be killed.

Symmetry wrote:

Night Strike wrote:It doesn't matter. His speech was not saying he would go kill people or telling other people to go kill people, so it's legal. Just because some extreme Muslims can't take criticism of their religion doesn't mean all of the rest of us have to placate to them. THEY'RE EXTREMISTS!! We don't have to change our ways simply because they don't like it.

No- but he knew that his speech would cause the deaths of other people. I don't think anyone has seriously questioned that. We all know that his expression of free speech would cause people to be killed.

Muslims are perfectly capable of taking criticism of their religion. Suggesting that they can't is pure bigotry.

I clearly said "extreme Muslims", so obviously no bigotry involved.

Night Strike wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

Night Strike wrote:It doesn't matter. His speech was not saying he would go kill people or telling other people to go kill people, so it's legal. Just because some extreme Muslims can't take criticism of their religion doesn't mean all of the rest of us have to placate to them. THEY'RE EXTREMISTS!! We don't have to change our ways simply because they don't like it.

No- but he knew that his speech would cause the deaths of other people. I don't think anyone has seriously questioned that. We all know that his expression of free speech would cause people to be killed.

Muslims are perfectly capable of taking criticism of their religion. Suggesting that they can't is pure bigotry.

I clearly said "extreme Muslims", so obviously no bigotry involved.

Apologies- I misread that part of your post. I'll edit.