To what extent are we encouraging these little spells by playing along with them? By treating the Koran as scared, most of the time, to what extent are we writing our own tragic ending when some stupid book gets burned?

Maybe they're afraid that if they burn the Koran, the Muslims will get mad and commit violent acts.

They should have pissed on those burning Korans and put them out.

Also,

I'm not saying Sandra Fluke is ugly, but when your vibrator dies and the coroner rules it a suicide, stop by Sephora or something.

You're spot on, my furry friend. We're enabling this type of behavior by acknowledging it and treating it seriously when what we should be saying is to get a grip.

That's been my problem with succumbing to the Islamic Rage People. I understand the fear of beheading, but this shit is getting ridiculous. It's way past time to tell this group to join the modern world and stop being so angry all the time. If they can't come to grips with the modern world, then that's their fault, not ours.

We should treat them as the immature little children they are.

My point is this: To what extent have we played into and exacerbated this absurd Muslim psychopathy over the Koran?

Well...a lot more than if we answered every Muslim riot over some perceived offense with an air convoy of C-130s and Daisy Cutters.  I say we try it in Gaza 5-6 times and then send them a nice letter begging them to riot some more.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at March 02, 2012 06:57 PM (DiqH3)

Sandra Fluke= Sandy Kooch

The irony is that in our culture, burning a bible or a flag is the acceptable way of disposing of it.

Fuckitall

 Well.. yeah, that's it exactly.  It all started with "Islam is a peaceful religion".  Shoulda, woulda, coulda... kind of too late now.  We dug our own grave with this shit.  No one has any backbone to tell these fucks to go pound sand. 

Exactly how long did it take us to go from "But IÂ’m pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you fuck with me, IÂ’ll kill you all" to "Oh, we're so sorry your panties are in a wad, here let us fall on our swords?" <<<

Gen. Mattis should be theater commander or Chairman of the JCS.

Posted by: sTevo at March 02, 2012 06:55 PM (VMcEw

Soldiers are being prosecuted for burning Frank Marshall Davis's books? 

Oh wait you meant one of Obama's other mentors.

No immunity from prosecution = good reason to leave Iraq.

But...

No immunity from prosecution = okay in Afghanistan, let it happen.

This really pisses me off. ....We should not let our people be put on trial, in a foreign country, for simply following orders.

"It wasn't that long, was it?"

Nope, not long at all. In fact, I can remember gentlemen warriors from my childhood who held such beliefs. Fortunately for us, there are still men of that type around today, just not in Washington.

Our society has been so feminized that real men who understand the nature of evil and what it takes to eradicate it don't rise to prominence anymore. Case in point: The SCOAMF. However, a few more years of this will swing the pendulum back towards reality. We will not survive otherwise.

I fear for my country during that time of transition. That time is now.

"Hua-lalala-laa! We kill people because they anger us!" - protest guy

"That's not unreasonable." - President Skidmark

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at March 02, 2012 06:50 PM (DiqH3)

Wait.....EOJ know about Sephora and what they sell?!

Please tell me your wife was standing over your shoulder and suggested that store to you.

Well hell yes we exacerbate the situation by playing all nicey nicey to these savages.  We should show absolutely no respect for a culture that thinks it's justified to kill people over a f'n book, that stone women if they get raped, or throw acid in the faces of women that somehow break some BS tribal taboo, that play judge, jury, and executioner if some poor sap is suspected of spying,  or hang people because they're gay.  For fuck's sake, what is there  to respect?

Isn't their some basic standard of human behavior that should apply to people the world over? 

78 .
We are not going to let them be put on trial, either in Afghanistan or here. They might lose rank however, which I think is also wrong.

I thought after NATO agreed to trials, that they were going to let it happen. .....If not, then that's great. .....And I agree, they shouldn't lose rank or be punished in any way for this.

Please tell me your wife was standing over your shoulder and suggested that store to you.<<<

Half the time I sit down to my laptop, she has a page open to that store. 

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at March 02, 2012 07:12 PM (DiqH3)

Phew.....image restored.

Posted by: thirtyandseven at March 02, 2012 07:14 PM (HJRI7)

--Actually, according to my Catholic friends, burning is a proper way to dispose of a bible.  As with other sacred or blessed relics, the proper disposal is supposed to be returning to the elements, whether burning or observed burial or some similar means.

Anything an infidel does will piss off a muzzie. They are trained litterally from birth to despise anyone who's not one of them. And there is nothing in their so-called "religion" that teaches anyone how to become a better person: nothing about developing patience with your fellows, or kindness, or compassion or sympathy towards others.

Nothing.

Why we are even listening to a word they have to say is beyond me. They are savage sub-humans and deserve whatever fate befalls them. I know how that sounds, I really do, but I'm past the point of caring these days. If we don't stand up to them, we are in deep, deep trouble as a civilization. It's our job and our duty as Americans to point out what's wrong with islam, but for some strange reason, we can't or won't.

Sandra Fluke isn't a slut.  "Cock Enthusiast" would be more accurate.

Posted by: Sandra Fluke, Amateur DNA Collector And No I'm Not A Fan of CSI \

Sandy, stop being such a pu$$y, it's just a joke.

Oh, wait..

"To what extent are we encouraging these little spells by playing along with them?"

To a large extent, Ace. A very large extent. ....It's called 'rewarding bad behavior'.

If we have learned anything, we have learned that they only respect strength. And weakness is viewed as an invitation to aggression. .....We should, as you suggested, just say "Get over it. We are infidels. Don't fuck with us. You will not like what happens next."

Oh, BTW, I'm filling in with a band on bass tomorrow afternoon at a gig south of town. The name of the band is (drumroll please)...

The Infidels.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at March 02, 2012 07:19 PM (DiqH3) 

Connoisseur of the Cock

Expert of Erections

Slatherer of the Shaft

Lover of the Load

Pusher of the Prostate

It goes on...

>>>I don't know if that would help, necessarily.

But our current policy also seems to not help, and is furthermore repellent.

Our current policy of holding our breath and hoping they don't kill us, then admitting we are wrong when they do is a definite loser. Respect *has* to be mutual. It doesn't seem like some Muslims *respect* our beliefs. Why should we give a F* what they think of what we do? Because they might kill us? That is the attitude of a conquered people.

Posted by: Sandra Fluke, Slut-Mouthed Rent-a-Cooch From Whoreville at March 02, 2012 06:54 PM (nj1bB)

Didn't I see you on CSPAN?  http://tiny.cc/CSPAN-Fluke

Posted by: Dang at March 02, 2012 07:29 PM (BbX1b)

164...???? Maybe because I am such a disturbed bastard but nothing comes to mind that I would find disturbing?

Pig bombs? .....Hmm, from what altitude would a hog explode upon impact...

BTH, I doubt it. It's a classic rock band, pre-80's. The lead guy is a conservative. I had to break the news of AB's passing to him last night.

I got the gig thanks to the criminal justice system: their regular bass player got busted for a second DUI while on a suspended license from the first one. He obviously got the Bail Nazi for a judge: No bail for you!

The soldiers who burned the Koran did something very evil, vicious and wrong... ...if they are Muslims.

.

If they aren't Muslims, it's just another book.

Posted by: Dang at March 02, 2012 07:35 PM (BbX1b)"

Jesus, can't those goats catch a break?!

179.....why waste good bacon?

That...would be the 'disturbing' part.

"You cannot force freedom upon a people."
.

Wanna bet?

Posted by: BackwardsBoy at March 02, 2012 07:35 PM (d0Tfm)

.

Another bass playing moron? Pleased to meetcha...

.

Warming up my '67 Ampeg B-15 as we speak. You know how the tubey goodness just gets better they longer the little baby is on.

1To what extent are we encouraging these little spells by playing along with them?

A whole fucking lot, but to even comprehend such a question, one has to be capable of thinking like an adult American instead of a liberal ever-child.  So don't count on an answer from Prince Barry Yerhedup.

Personaly? If I was President?

I'd pull all patrols back in the wires... go on high Alert, and start burning a F'n Koran in the Whitehouse BBQ Pit, on National TV... EVERYDAY...

Saying, "This is America... this is what we do... don't like it? Too F'n Bad... get civilized."

Let em riot and kill each other to their hearts content.... just keep our Men in the bases, on Alert, with orders to shoot to kill anyone coming anywhere near them.... oh... and EXPEL all the Afgan forces from inside the Wire... they are part of the problem.

Be Americans... don't cower!

"Just pull all troops out...."
.

Plenty of room at my place!

Dear Lord... grant these, my descendents, the courage to face their enemies... and the intestinal fortitude to do what must be done, and act like the Men and Warriors they should be...

Or let me go back and kick them in the Ass...

The President called me!

(I think he's coming over)

Posted by: Ima Fluke at March 02, 2012 07:54 PM (Usk3+)

Wear the blue dress

Apparently there are provisions in Islam requiring that Korans be "interred" in designated storage sites in the event that they are damaged, worn out, etc. Not that these strictures are consistently observed by all Muslims everywhere, but the principle is there and the practice is a real-world one.

This "interment" pretty much replicates what Orthodox Judaism requires. Damaged or worn-out Torah scrolls (or Torah scrolls where a significant scribal mistake has been discovered) have the Jewish legal status of an actual deceased Jewish person, and so they must receive something amounting to a "proper burial." (Not just Torah scrolls, but also any Hebrew-printed Biblical/Talmudic/Legal/Liturgical book or similar publication -- all are deemed as requiring "interment" in the event of damage, desecration, etc.)  So Jewish communities have what are basically "crypts" set aside for Holy Writings -- usually these sites are simple spare rooms, attics, or what have you at synagogues.  The specific term for such a "crypt" is (in Hebrew) "Geniza" (sounds almost like "geezer").  An especially old Geniza stumbled across in Cairo many decades ago, for example, turned out to be the "last resting place" of ancient versions of a number of Jewish scriptural resources that have been of huge importance in validating what the near-original format and content was of canonical works.

So as I say, the Muslims saw fit to ape this Jewish ordinance and practice -- and I've seen reports/remarks out there that the problematic Korans in this case ought to have been placed in the Islamic equivalent to a Geniza or crypt as opposed to burning them.

(Jews are definitely not supposed to burn Holy Writings, nor to allow non-Jews to burn them, even if the scrolls/volumes in question are quite damaged.)

Having said all the above, the issue comes down to this:  if US/NATO troops did indeed determine that a representative sample of the Korans were being inscribed with various Taliban/Haqqani messages (no matter how pedestrian the content), should they still have gone ahead and burned the volumes?  I say definitely yes.

But the PR should have been handled with much greater skill and vigor. We should have said explicitly that:

a) we recognize what the in-principle Muslim practice is (i.e., the "interment" of damaged/defaced Korans) -- but

b) enemy cynicism and intended entrapment leave/left us no choice but to burn these particular Korans -- it is not our SOP with just any Korans.

and

c) Simply "interring" the dangerous Korans in an Islamically "appropriate" site might still have risked the surreptitious entry into that site in order to access, view, copy, and disseminate the messages that we found intolerably dangerous.

The only obstacle preventing the US for adopting and advocating for the above is the fact that the CinC has made the US forces afraid of their own shadows in this kind of domain.  The sensible thing to do, then, is remove this obstacle.

Posted by: RamonAllones at March 02, 2012 07:58 PM (ha+6S)

The problem is that there is nothing in the US Legal Code, or UCMJ, that prohibits the burning of books of any type.

And we, as Americans, are bound by OUR Laws and Regulations... your dissertation on Jewish Law, while interesting, really has nothing to do with the issue.

But then, this Administration has been doing all it can to destroy the idea that we are a Nation of Laws... ie a Republic... and the Rights its people have.

The Koran mobs are the Muslim equivalent of OWS protesters. 

People with no purpose in life making themselves seem relevant.

Posted by: sTevo at March 02, 2012 08:17 PM (VMcEw)

Sewage is honored in Pakistan.  They love to let their left hands lie in it for hours.  Then they touch the korans with those hands - even though they wouldn't shake a left hand.  Yeah ...

There's a reason their religion is "submission" and not "respect".

"Isn't it dangerous to feed the delusions of the deluded? Isn't the right course of action to insist on a more grounded view of reality?"

Yes, and yes, if all you are dealing with is deluded people.  The problem comes when you are dealing with people who are so certifiably insane that they honestly believe that if you insult their "god" or a book that contains what they think to be Holy Writ, and they get killed trying to kill you for it, they're guaranteed to go to heaven where they'll get to fuck everything that moves and get drunk for eternity. 

Then, the answer is to build a dome over their countries and slowly reduce the atmospheric pressure inside to vacuum. 

Or nuke the countries from orbit, just to make sure.

Romeo13

What I've written has entirely to do with the issue.  Of course our troops should be following our field regulations, and if they call for burning Korans found to contain Taliban/Haqqani scribblings, absolutely burn away.  Even if the Taliban/Haqqani scribblings were made in Jewish volumes, again, as a matter of US field SOP with the aim of protecting troops' lives, burn the Jewish texts too.

But tell the world forcefully and proactively the *why* and *wherefore* (i.e., such Taliban/Haqqani scribblings constitute clear and present endangerment to our troops, ergo SOP is burn the texts) -- don't just walk into a trap.

On US soil, my Jewish law "dissertation" is wholly relevant and not merely interesting if a Jewish scriptural text gets burnt deliberately by a non-military person in a non-military location in a manner intended for public exposure of the burning.  (I.e., you can burn a Torah scroll in the privacy of your home or in the setting of a voluntary private association/grouping [assuming you don't upload video of it on the Internet] -- but otherwise forget it.)  US laws cover that kind of public burning as a potential hate crime and the FBI rightly keeps stats on things like that.  

(And asshat judicial rulings to the contrary, I would classify burning the US flag as a crime comparable to a religious/ethnically-targeted hate crime -- I disagree with flag-burning as 1st-Amendment-protected "free speech".  Same with burning religious texts be they Jewish or whatever.)

Prick.

re239 really...

Your assessment of hate crime laws seems totally contingent.

For instance, Al Sharpton probably should have been prosecuted under hate crime laws for instigating the 1991 Crown Heights anti-Jewish rioting (i.e., pogrom).  Would you bar such prosecution because on principle you deem the applicable law(s) "insidious and dangerous," or would a contigent case targeting an Al Sharpton be OK by you?

Stay away from blanket condemnation of hate crime laws unless you're prepared to offer some really compelling empirical specifics connected to the adjectives you fling around.  Otherwise you and Romeo13 just read like bullies.

Posted by: RamonAllones at March 02, 2012 08:43 PM (ha+6S)

Wow... funny, but under US code burning a book IS protected speech, just like burning a flag is.  It is NOT a hate crime... and if the FBI is keeping track of them, as they ARE protected Free Speech, they are wasting their time.

But hey... I'm just a Prick... what the heck does my opinion matter.... especially as one of those pricks who spent his young adulthood defending these exact same Rights...

Posted by: RamonAllones at March 02, 2012 09:01 PM (ha+6S)

Wow.... I'm a bully for standing up for Free Speech??? How... interesting...

A bully is someone who DEFENDS the actions of soldiers who burn some Paper????

I think we must use different dictionaries...

Posted by: PJ at March 02, 2012 09:17 PM (DQHjw)

IMO the US Government is sending a very dangerous messege... to both foreigners and our own populace...

They will bow to the threat of violence, and change behaviour... they support the violent overthrow of Governments in Libya, Egypt, and Syria... but when Millions of TEA party folks Protest Peacefully??? nothing... no change....

Very... very... dangerous....

Posted by: bergerbilder at March 02, 2012 09:08 PM (j+Izh)

The five soldiers who were following orders to burn the fucking books, have been sent home for their safety.  Now the UN wants them to stand trial in Afghanistan and be punished.

You just know Barry would love nothing better, if he could get away with it.  He hates the military, and trust me, they know it.

re 240 Boulder Toilet Hobo

Here's another "Jewish law (or rather law and lore) dissertation," relevant to your anti-Federalist papers comment.

As you likely know, In Jewish scriptural tradition, the "Old Testament" consists of the 5 Books of Moses, the books of the Prophets, and additional "Writings" such as Psalms.  The total number of "books" under the "Old Testament" umbrella is 24.

The inclusion and exclusion of books that led to the 24 we have as canonically accepted was based on a deliberative process by a Second-Temple-era grouping of Prophets and Sages referred to as The Men of the Great Assembly.  What they declared as canonized -- and therefore as a binding source of textual reference for future Jewish legal deliberations -- is therefore clearly established and known, and similarly there is a variety of texts that never "made it into" canonically-included status but whose contents are just as ancient and known as the 24.  In other words, there are Jewish "apocrypha."  Jews are free to pore over them all they want, without fear of being deemed heretical or whatever -- they just can't make Jewish religious-legal rulings from them.

(That said, the apocrypha typically have the Hebrew name for God written all throughout, so burning them is still a no-no.)

re249 Romeo13

Standing up for free speech?

Good.

Dismissing the serious Constitutional violation of intimidating an American in their free practice of their religion?

Bad.

Unloading on someone who points out the above violation's seriousness?

Bullying.

As our host continues to demonstrate an unreasonable amount of clarity, for a Friday evening/night, I shall be forced to borrow a phrase from another time. Right On! We should never respect a religion, by itself. It is way too hard, for the ordinary guy, to hug that high-minded vapor. On the other hand I might be inclined, if their deeds on this plane of existence warrant it, to respect the practitioners of a religion and avoid hurting their feelings out of meanness. These boys though, these Islamic freaks, have piled way too many corpses onto the fires to make me feel bad about the burning of a few books that they hold to be important or sacred.

"Do you have a Condem?"

"No, but I got a board across my ass so I don't fall in Sandy"

Burning Coptic Christians in their Churchs=OK

Burning a Pre-Desicrated Corant=Bad?

And Border Agent Terrys' parents await an apology still? WTF

Posted by: Jane D'oh at March 02, 2012 09:14 PM

I was the 3rd generation to serve. I will NOT let my sons enlist untill this bullshit is stopped.

Bend over all you want for yourself barry, but not for us, or our ppl in uniform!

And since he has so much practice lying to us, why couldn't he just lie to them?

"We uhm, were, ahg,  burning bibles, uhmkay".

re264 really...

Romeo13's arguments as I understood them included the contention that US law (I'm leaving out the UCMJ) allows burning religious texts, and linked that to the rules our troops should be following.

That our troops should be following our rules is, indeed yes of course, "trivially true" -- I am in total agreement with both of you there.

But the rules our troops follow don't trace backward into any legality afforded to US civilians on US soil in the burning of religious texts. 

Romeo13 said "The problem is that there is there is nothing in the US legal code, or UCMJ, that prohibits the burning of books of any type."

To say so is surely complete fantasy -- that's why I invoked the hate-crime law issue.  When a Jew who as a matter of religious obligation cares about the physical treatment of Jewish holy texts is made aware (in a proverbial public-square setting) that someone has burned one of these texts, strong potential is there that the burner has committed a hate crime.  

Once we got into the territory of discussing hate-crime laws, you classified them as insidious and dangerous. I think I understand your objection(s) particularly pertaining to the "offense" aspect, but are you really going to say that there's no tripwire?  No group's historical experience with repeated instances of behaviors expressly intended to both intimidate *and* incite (i.e., book burnings can incite mobs to commit other more grievous forms of harm) points to the way to gauge when free-speech protections no longer apply given that they have been used as bad-faith cover for free-exercise-of-religion intimidation/persecution?

Anyway -- again, I'm saying we're all 3 of us (you, Romeo13, and I) in total agreement that US troops follow US rules -- the justification for this is our sovereignty, which again I totally agree with.

But it's a strongly misleading thing to *also* say that the justification for US troops following US rules traces back to US code for what US citizens can do.  No -- US troops follow US rules strictly for reasons of state (i.e., our sovereignty), period.  An appended argument that "US citizenship is grounded in such freedoms as Free Speech which includes being protected under Free-Speech doctrine/1st-Amendment rights" (and here you can include book-burning, singing Bach cantatas, or anything, it doesn't matter) is irrelevant (again, the only consideration about US-troops-follow-US-rules is the sovereignty/reasons-of-state one).

What I find particularly amusing is the way the media cover Islam. The same international left that sneers and jeers at Catholics, Christains, etc. makes a feeble attempt to be, dare I say, reverend when they talk about the Jihadi religion. The references to the holy Koran, the holy book, the great prophet. Front page articles in the New York Times on what led to the destruction of these books, attention usually reserved for things like Katrina and nuclear facility meltdowns.

Also, the New York Times always seem to be looking for a trial of US servicemen for annoying their Jihadi masters. The one trial I want to see is a treason trial for the New York Times editors for their crimes of releasing classified information.  And that would be covered by American law.

Of course, They will not observe and take note how civilized peoples deal with such 'crimes'.  I recall the American flag buring legislation a years back and how Defenders of the Flag would become very upset and sternly advocate to the agitators "Hey, I really wish you wouldn't do that..."  but I don't recall and murders, fatwas or beheadings. 

Nope. No murders.

I remember juvenille Doonesbury cartoons featuring American flags "daring" me to throw away the Sunday comics.

There was anger and heated rhetoric.  But, again, no murders.

And I would submit there are people who cherish representations of the American Flag as much as many muslims feel about the Koran.  And it will be cute when the Left whines..."Hey, Man!  One of these situations deals with Religion...You have to respect.....wait a second...no....yeah, but still!"

This sums it up nicely.