Petraeus: Burning Koran Puts American Lives 'in Jeopardy'

[Billnew]

FOXNews.com - Petraeus: Burning Koran Puts American Lives 'in Jeopardy'

Images of the burning of a Koran would undoubtedly be used by extremists in Afghanistan -- and around the world -- to inflame public opinion and incite violence ," Gen. David Petraeus said. "Were the actual burning to take place, the safety of our soldiers and civilians would be put in jeopardy and accomplishment of the mission would be made more difficult."

If we were at war with Islam, this would be appropriate. But we are not.
If we were at war with Islam, we could says we burn 3000 Quran while they burned 3000 people alive on that day. But we are not.

We all must keep in focus the real enemy. It is not a religion we fight. It is a people that hide behind a religion, to get desperate/insane people to do things to harm the world, with the promise that god will bless them in the afterlife.
We can not restrict this church's right to do this.(as long as they meet all fire codes and safety.) But we can try to pursuade them that this is the wrong way to protest.
We must show the world that every person has the right to protest legally. That no group can threaten or intimidate our protests. We do not ask this church to stop the protest because we fear the violence. We ask them to protest in other ways, for comon decency.
The extremists are people hiding/hijacking a religion, hiding behind the peaceful followers of that religion.

 

[fieldy]

We do not ask this church to stop the protest because we fear the violence. We ask them to protest in other ways, for comon decency.

Why not also ask them to stop because it might incite violence? Isn't that needlessly putting your troops in more danger?

 

[mpok1519]

I believe that a court order could effectively put an end to this; with enough speculative evidence, it could be determined that this exhibition crosses the line of freedom of speech into endangermnt of others.

You can't shout fire in a crowded room bc that could be dangerous; I believe the same could be applied here.

 

[CyberPaladin]

Whether they do or don't do this book burning really isn't going to change the amount of danger we are in if it isn't this they'll spin or make up something else Americans did or didn't to offend them to justify it to there actions.

 

[JustMeSee]

I would think that people would know that burning a religious text would elicit a great deal of anger. Maybe that is their goal.

 

[craigerNY]

I believe that a court order could effectively put an end to this; with enough speculative evidence, it could be determined that this exhibition crosses the line of freedom of speech into endangermnt of others.

Unless they are burning them in a manner that can catch something else on fire or is some kind of zoning violation or something to that effect I'd say not. They have as much of a right to burn those books as the folks have to build an Islamic community center two blocks from the former World Trade Center site. Telling them to not burn books because it will hurt some feelings makes about as much sense as stopping that community center from being built.

Our soldiers are in danger because we sent them there. Those people over there hate us because we won't leave them alone. Everything else is just a convenient excuse.

 

[lemmings]

The Government should not restrict other people's rights to express themselves, but we do need to quell the anti-Muslim hysteria in this country. A simple way to do this without removing anyone's rights is to repeat the Taliban's own statements. Eventually the message will get across that if your response to extremist violence is hate speech, you will only give them more fuel.


"We talk about how America tortures with waterboarding, about the cruel confinement of Muslims in wire cages in Guantanamo, about the killing of innocent women and children in air attacks -- and now America gives us another gift with its street protests to prevent a mosque from being built in New York," Zabihullah says. "Showing reality always makes the best propaganda."

 

[JustMeSee]

It seems to me that that particular church is going about things in the wrong way. I don't want their rights to be violated, but I wish they would try to lead people to Christ in a more constructive way.

 

[TheUnwanted]

Typical liberals. Building a mosque on the ruins of the World Trade Centre is fine, but burning a few books might incite violence, so Christians should abandon their rights while muslirms get a free pass. So much for equality.

 

[Douger]

Typical liberals. Building a mosque on the ruins of the World Trade Centre is fine, but burning a few books might incite violence, so Christians should abandon their rights while muslirms get a free pass. So much for equality.

The General made his remarks from a purely strategic view point. The Christians here have made their remarks as Christians urging a better example of Christianity. This isn't about "liberals".

 

[TheUnwanted]

The General made his remarks from a purely strategic view point. The Christians here have made their remarks as Christians urging a better example of Christianity. This isn't about "liberals".

Of course. CHRISTIANS are being told to adapt to what the muslimes want. And that doesn't strike you as a problem???

 

[FallenPaladin]

The General made his remarks from a purely strategic view point. The Christians here have made their remarks as Christians urging a better example of Christianity. This isn't about "liberals".

If the General wanted to be strategic he would bury the dead terrorists in pig skins and do a few other things the British Empire did to settle down the Muslims when they had to deal with their uprisings. Its no wonder the US can't win these wars against third world countries anymore.

 

[AirPo]

Typical liberals. Building a mosque on the ruins of the World Trade Centre is fine, but burning a few books might incite violence, so Christians should abandon their rights while muslirms get a free pass. So much for equality.

Typical conservative. Blatently lieing to smear liberals.

/Sarcasm.

 

[goldenviolet]

imo..

what stupid idea. (what if they got together and burned the bible)... what on earth are they thinking? goodgrief. as if there isn't enough hate already. this is a good way to spread hate against the world; let alone our own country. i'm stunned.

Lord please stop this event

 

[AirPo]

What I found funny is that they are calling it international. As if someone else somewhere in the world is planning on joining them.

 

[JustMeSee]

Of course. CHRISTIANS are being told to adapt to what the muslimes want. And that doesn't strike you as a problem???

It appears that you are posting on an unrelated thread. Christians are not being told to adapt to what muslims want. This church is being encouraged not to carry out an unnecessary act that will anger people.

So, in response to your question, no it does not strike me as a problem.

 

[Douger]

Of course. CHRISTIANS are being told to adapt to what the muslimes want. And that doesn't strike you as a problem???

No, not a problem. Do you think so? Why?

 

[Skaloop]

Typical liberals. Building a mosque on the ruins of the World Trade Centre is fine, but burning a few books might incite violence, so Christians should abandon their rights while muslirms get a free pass. So much for equality.

So the template phrase/suggestion "Do not perform [ACT A] as it will be upsetting to [GROUP B]" is just fine when the act is building a community center near Ground Zero and the group is Christians (or Americans), but is not ok when the act is burning the Koran and the group is Muslims?

Both building the community center and burning the Koran are perfectly legal, and the people doing it are equally well within their rights to do it according to local laws and requirements. Patreaus is just suggesting to the burners, as most of the people opposed to the community center are suggesting to the builders, that it might not be the best idea.

Muslims do something inadvisable, people suggest they shouldn't. Christians do somethimg inadvisable, people suggest they shouldn't. Where's the inequality?

 

[Phylogeny]

I support the right to burn a holy book, but the act itself is pretty vile. Burning a holy book to protest another religion's existence is, IMHO, very much not what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they wrote the First Amendment. However, evil unpopular speech should be allowed as long as it does not directly endanger others. I understand what Petaeus is trying to say, but I don't think the cause and affect is strong enough to ban the church from burning the Koran.

Besides, how does disrespecting another people's religion going to turn people's hearts? Change people's mind? Would burning the Bible turn some Christians away from their God?

 

[Markus6]

So the template phrase/suggestion "Do not perform [ACT A] as it will be upsetting to [GROUP B]" is just fine when the act is building a community center near Ground Zero and the group is Christians (or Americans), but is not ok when the act is burning the Koran and the group is Muslims?

Both building the community center and burning the Koran are perfectly legal, and the people doing it are equally well within their rights to do it according to local laws and requirements. Patreaus is just suggesting to the burners, as most of the people opposed to the community center are suggesting to the builders, that it might not be the best idea.

Muslims do something inadvisable, people suggest they shouldn't. Christians do somethimg inadvisable, people suggest they shouldn't. Where's the inequality?

One action is constructive and the other is destructive - in pretty much as literal a sense as you can get.

One serves a purpose beyond any potential upset caused and the other's only purpose is to cause upset.

The community centre will only offend you if you hold all Muslim's responsible for 911 and therefore see the community centre as a symbol of victory. The Koran is holy to every single Muslim and so is offensive to all of them.

Whilst the two situations are certainly comparable you can easily contrast them too.