U.S. Pastor Terry Jones Burns Quran, Stirs Up Violence

[Sten]

Originally Posted by nousdefions

Bacon Bookmarks -- Classic

Also check-out her web page Ann Barnhardt

I like the bit where she tells fans to not stop by unannounced.

[Sigaba]

Is Senator Graham "backing down" to Islam or has he been brushing up on Clausewitz?

[nousdefions]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

Is Senator Graham "backing down" to Islam or has he been brushing up on Clausewitz?

I don't think Jackass could tell a Clausewitz from a Subordinate Clause

Re: the pink AR-15. Did you notice the inscription on the butt-stock?

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
The Greek phrase Molōn labe! (Μολὼν λαβέ; approximate Ancient Greek pronunciation [molɔ̀ːn labé], Modern Greek [moˈlon laˈve]), meaning "Come and take them" is a classical expression of defiance reportedly by King Leonidas I in response to the Persian army's demand that the Spartans surrender their weapons at the Battle of Thermopylae. It corresponds roughly to the modern equivalent English phrase "over my dead body", "bring it on" or, most closely, "come and get it". It is an exemplary use of a laconic phrase.

[Sigaba]

Originally Posted by nousdefions

I don't think Jackass could tell a Clausewitz from a Subordinate Clause

Please edit this post before QP Richard reads it and resumes with the punishment.

[Tress]

Originally posted by 1stindoor:

I thought this was a good fit in this discussion.

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/20...alitarian.html

Damn!!!!! In horse racing they would call that a trifecta!!!

A woman slapping pork on the Quran and then burning it!!! If this does not push them over the edge nothing will.

[echoes]

Originally Posted by orion5

1stindoor.....normally that would be true! But WOW. This Ann Barnhardt is something else.

As far as I'm concerned, she makes pink look cool!

Agree with you orion.

(Don't know if I could sport "pink,") but damn good nonetheless. ;-)

Holly

[1stindoor]

Originally Posted by nousdefions

I don't think Jackass could tell a Clausewitz from a Subordinate Clause
Re: the pink AR-15. Did you notice the inscription on the butt-stock?

Color coordinating your AR with your outfit is so difficult these days...that's why I stuck with black.

[Richard]

Originally Posted by 1stindoor

Color coordinating your AR with your outfit is so difficult these days...that's why I stuck with black.

Yeah, I thought the same thing...until I retired and had the daily challenge to color coordinate all those shoes, socks, suits, shirts, belts, and ties.

And so it goes...

Richard

[Stras]

Perhaps one should realize that a good portion of the Muslim community world wide is illiterate and while they may own a copy or 2 of the Koran (because its required), they do not possess their own ability to read it, and as such have to rely on other people such as the Imams to tell them what their "good book" says.

Think back to the US in the early 1800s, how many people could read and write?

Anyone want to chip in for airfare for Paster Jones, so he can hold his trial in either Iraq or Afghanistan? I'll use my frequent flyer miles for his trip...

Not sure I want to volunteer my location for the trial though.. then again, it is Hunting Season here.

[Wiseman]

So Ann is going to get a bodyguard after this right? I don't think it was smart to post this online.

[mdpatterson]

Originally Posted by 1stindoor

I'm not sure I can agree with that comment. They may know they are fighting a losing battle...but for them the war is far from over, and while they're waging war they're also going to use every tool in the toolbox. That includes dividing our national will from the inside.

To me, 1stindoor brings up a major issue that seems to be put on the back burner.

As most (if not all) here have heard many times over quoted by then Republican candidate for Senate of Illinois Lincoln, "A house divided against itself cannot stand". This quote was taken from a speech given in 1858........nothing to do with this debate but no less true today.

I won't even attempt to quote battle strategies in a house full of seasoned warriors, but divide and conquer is as basic as it gets.......and that's exactly one tactic our enemies are attempting to use (This thread is proof that it is working).

I'll pose only one question, how many of our enemies does anyone think are having debates like this amongst themselves? I would wager none because they have only one mission and play by their own rules, OUR rules mean nothing to them. If a forum like PS.com (Mostly consisting of like minded individuals from what I have seen) has members debating this, I don't even want to think how many liberals in this country are taking it to a whole other level.

I know this is old news, but still makes me sick when I read the various versions of the article:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,297903,00.html

I understand there are rules of engagement, but maybe it's time for those rules to be "Modified" (Officially) when we are fighting an enemy who has no rules. While we are charging our own men for being "Sneaky Bastards" and saving lives in the process, our enemy is sitting back laughing as they plan their next attack.

IMHO, if we don't come together as a nation, it might be us facing a losing battle soon.

Again, I'm make no claims to be an expert here........just my opinion.

Mike

[Richard]

(This thread is proof that it {divide and conquer} is working).

I disagree - cum hoc ergo propter hoc.

Richard

[mdpatterson]

Originally Posted by Richard

I disagree - cum hoc ergo propter hoc.

Richard

I wasn't trying to say that their tactics were cause for this debate, but I see how my wording could have looked like mistaking correlation for causation.

I have no doubt that members of this forum can debate and discuss an issue without creating a division, but I do not think the nation as a whole can do the same.

I do stand by my opinion that this is a tactic they are using, and believe it is working (At least to some extent) with our policy makers and the general public.

Just my opinion and I could be way off base. I definitely have no desire to debate ANY topic with you Sir as I've read many of your posts and respect your opinion. That's all for me posting on this topic.......I'll go back to what I do know and post some more pics of weapons . I will continue to read more and post less .

Mike

[incarcerated]

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...-paul-marshall

Afghan Blowback

There is no reason to restrict our freedoms at home.
April 8, 2011 4:00 A.M.

Last weekend, there were violent demonstrations in Afghanistan to protest a Koran burning in Florida. The Afghans who incited the demonstrations have delivered on several key Taliban objectives. They scored important points in the battle for hearts and minds when the U.S. president and senior American and NATO military commanders went on the defensive before Afghan audiences. More troubling, powerful American voices expressed doubts about bedrock American freedoms of speech and religion.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid debated holding hearings on Koran desecration. Sen. Lindsey Graham, who boasts of being a chief sponsor of legislation against flag burning, expressed his wish to “hold people accountable” for Koran burnings, since, while “free speech is a great idea,” America is “in a war.” When given a chance to explain, he dug this hole deeper. This isn’t the first time that violence has secured concessions from U.S. officials: Last September, Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer told an interviewer of his desire for a First Amendment exception that would allow those who immolate the Muslim holy book to be punished. These senior American leaders are, in effect, contemplating an Islamic blasphemy law — the first U.S. federal blasphemy law for any religion.

In response to this baleful drama, the first thing to understand is that accusations of apostasy, blasphemy, and insulting Islam are protean. In the Muslim world, blasphemy punishments are not used primarily against religious insult by the intolerant, but against those who express unpopular or dissenting views. International human-rights groups report that in Pakistan, blasphemy charges are also commonly used against neighbors and co-workers to settle personal scores.

Muslim blasphemy has recently been defined to include: denouncing stoning as a human-rights violation (Sudan), opening girls’ schools (Bangladesh), criticizing the Guardianship of the Jurists (Iran), petitioning for a constitution (Saudi Arabia), use of the word “Allah” by Christians (Malaysia), rejecting an order for violent jihad (Sudan), praying at the graves of relatives (Saudi Arabia), translating the Koran into Dari (Afghanistan), accidentally tearing a calendar page containing a Koranic verse (Pakistan), naming a teddy bear after a boy named Mohamed (Sudan), urging that the Koran be understood in its historical and cultural context (Indonesia), teaching Shiism (Egypt), and calling for a ban on child brides (Yemen). Mob violence, intimidation, court trials, and penalties accompany these cases.

And once in place, blasphemy laws are nearly impossible to reform. This year in Pakistan, Gov. Salman Taseer and cabinet minister Shabbaz Bhatti were murdered for opposing such laws.

Second, complaints of blasphemy are politically manipulated, particularly when levelled against someone in a foreign country. While, with political and social turmoil overwhelming many Organization of Islamic Conference members, the Florida Koran-burning case has the potential of going viral, so far it has not caused rioting in Mecca or anywhere else in the Muslim heartland, the Arab world. In fact, it is only rare Western “insults to Islam,” such as the Danish cartoons or the pope’s Regensburg speech (which linked Islam to violence), that become causes célèbres worldwide, and these occur only after concerted political campaigns to foment outrage.

Finally, by their nature, Muslim blasphemy punishments abjectly fail at bringing about social peace. Even aside from the problem of a law to protect only one religion, in the battle of ideas within Islam, blasphemy restrictions empower extremists, who use them to silence alternative voices. Muslim religious and political reformers working to lift their societies out of stunting ideological conformity are the first to be silenced.

As one such Muslim reformer, the late Egyptian scholar Nasr Hamid Abu-Zayd, pointed out: “Having been at the receiving end of such allegations — and driven from my home in Egypt to exile in the Netherlands — I can state with conviction that charges of apostasy and blasphemy are key weapons in the fundamentalists’ arsenal, strategically employed to prevent reform of Muslim societies and instead confine the world’s Muslim population to a bleak, colorless prison of socio-cultural and political conformity.”

The ultimate goal of the Taliban and other radical groups is, of course, to impose strict Islamic rule, which critically hinges on the regulation of speech about and within Islam. If our leaders now entertain proposals for restricting speech about and within Islam, one blowback from Operation Enduring Freedom may be in fact the decrease of freedom — here at home.


— Paul Marshall and Nina Shea are senior fellows at the Hudson Institute and authors of the forthcoming Silenced: How Apostasy and Blasphemy Codes are Choking Freedoms Worldwide.

[Pete]

EDITORIAL: When Muslims burn Korans

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...s-burn-korans/

"Two dissidents, an Iranian and an Afghan, have posted a video to YouTube in which they burn a Koran. In the United States, the act would spark a debate about freedom of speech versus tolerance. In their countries, it is a criminal offense that could bring a death sentence............"

Hmmm, selective riots. Notice at the end of the editorial - the bit about nationalism.