Attorney General: Murderous Muslim rage over Qur'an-burning "idiotic and dangerous" -- no, wait...

"Bibles were confiscated, destroyed and burned", US Army spokesman says in 2009 in Afghanistan. The video is clear (51 second to 1 min 6 seconds). The US Army burned Bibles to appease the muslims.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m0FQ6GdGVM&feature=channel

Let's spread this to the blogosphere and maybe some of the mainstream media will ask the legitimate questions.

"This could have been a teaching moment for what it means to live in a free and pluralistic society."

Islam, like its founder, is morally dyslexic. Teaching would be wasted. It would be pearls for ignorant swine.

It just goes to show that they are afraid of the religion of peace. Confiscate and burn any material that might offend the great and tolerant muslims, then grant them special treatment and condemn anyone who might offend them, lest the peace loving muslims turn violent.

It is astoundingly transparent hypocrisy.

Obama must be consistent. He took a stand over the Ground Zero mosque - they have a right to build the mosque, (assuming they not funded and backed by the perpetrators of the 9/11 attack)

He should he now make a statement, that the Rev Terry Jones has the right to burn the Qurans under the freedom of expression.

The following is adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat:

Islam is not a religion nor is it a cult. It is a complete system.

Islam has religious, legal, political, economic and military components. The religious component is a beard for all the other components.

Islamization occurs when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their so-called 'religious rights.'

When politically correct and culturally diverse societies agree to 'the reasonable' Muslim demands for their 'religious rights,' they also get the other components under the table. Here's how it works (percentages source CIA: The World Fact Book (2007)).

As long as the Muslim population remains around 1% of any given country they will be regarded as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to anyone. In fact, they may be featured in articles and films, stereotyped for their colorful uniqueness:

United States -- Muslim 1.0%
Australia -- Muslim 1.5%
Canada -- Muslim 1.9%
China -- Muslim 1%-2%
Italy -- Muslim 1.5%
Norway -- Muslim 1.8%

At 2% and 3% they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs:

Denmark -- Muslim 2%
Germany -- Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%
Spain -- Muslim 4%
Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population.

They will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature it on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. ( United States ).

France -- Muslim 8%
Philippines -- Muslim 5%
Sweden -- Muslim 5%
Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad &Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islam is not to convert the world but to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

When Muslims reach 10% of the population, they will increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions ( Paris --car-burnings). Any non-Muslim action that offends Islam will result in uprisings and threats ( Amsterdam - Mohammed cartoons).

Guyana -- Muslim 10%
India -- Muslim 13.4%
Israel -- Muslim 16%
Kenya -- Muslim 10%
Russia -- Muslim 10-15%

After reaching 20% expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings and church and synagogue burning:
Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%

At 40% you will find widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks and ongoing militia warfare:

Bosnia -- Muslim 40%
Chad -- Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%

From 60% you may expect unfettered persecution of non-believers and other religions, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels:

Albania -- Muslim 70%
Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%
Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%
Sudan -- Muslim 70%

After 80% expect State run ethnic cleansing and genocide:

Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%
Egypt -- Muslim 90%
Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%
Iran -- Muslim 98%
Iraq -- Muslim 97%
Jordan -- Muslim 92%
Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan -- Muslim 97%
Palestine -- Muslim 99%
Syria -- Muslim 90%
Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%
Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of 'Dar-es-Salaam' -- the Islamic House of Peace -- there's supposed to be peace because everybody is a Muslim:

Afghanistan -- Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%
Somalia -- Muslim 100%
Yemen -- Muslim 99.9%

Of course, that's not the case. To satisfy their blood lust, Muslims then start killing each other for a variety of reasons.

'Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; and the tribe against the world and all of us against the infidel. – Leon Uris, 'The Haj'

It is good to remember that in many, many countries, such as France, the Muslim populations are centered around ghettos based on their ethnicity. Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. Therefore, they exercise more power than their national average would indicate.

as I have mentioned here before many times, Bloomberg is the most honorable poitician our country has ever seen.
m

Generally speaking, burning books is not an overly good idea and the reaction to the Qur'an burning will be predictable. However, if he wants to do it let him go ahead. Any resultant violence will be perpetrated by Muslims and will be entirely their responsibility.

It's odd what Muslims find offensive is it not? Say anything critical about their religion or prophet even if it is something they know to be true (e.g. Mohammed being a paedophile) and they scream "off with their heads!" I don't know about you, but I find stoning people to death, amputating limbs and genitally mutilating girls to be more offensive than burning some book. For some reason though, doctrinaire Muslims disagree and would sooner maim, mutilate and kill than see a book burn. A certain lack of perspective methinks.

Christine Tasin is the latest person to incur the hate of the Mohammedans in France for organising a series of anti-Islamisation demonstrations last Saturday. A Facebook fatwa has been issued calling for her to be subject to the Islamic punishment for blasphemy (i.e. beheading). Her 'crime': demanding that France stays true to its secular values. She's received two death threats in 24 hours. The police are taking things seriously, but Tasin remains unfazed. So come on, what's more offensive: burning a heap of books or passing a death sentence on someone because they hold a different opinion? Why have the media been completely silent about the Tasin case? See here for further information: http://durotrigan.blogspot.com/2010/09/christine-tasin-receives-facebook-fatwa.html

Filip Markov,

I had forgotten all about that incident.

Gee, what a double standard.

I think I was right the first time...'Holder, Clinton, Gibbs and all the rest', are forced into a corner because they have to admit that the 'Religion of Peace' is dangerous, and that danger makes them fearful...Cognitive dissonance...Islam cannot be the 'Religion of Peace', and dangerous at the same time...So what can a fearful liberal do when cornered...The very first thing is to take a deep breath and try not to pant...Then face reality...Islam is not compatible with any
part of the US...and that incompatibility is what makes it dangerous...There is nothing in Islam that is compatible with kufr...And Mahoundians are told to fight kufr...That does not seem too peaceful to me...

When foreigners in the US burn American flags, we simply have to deal with it. It happens all the time and it is completely offensive but yet, the disapproval and words I just typed are the extent of repercussion any demonstrators will receive. Honestly, I'm am very OK with that fact...silly thing to get murderously mad over.

Some crazy preacher decides to burn a couple Qurans in Florida, USA and Americans all over the world are now in danger from those peace-loving suicide bombers.

How many American flags are burned over seas? Isn't it so many its not even news. Will anybody be in danger because of it... no one even cares.

uk..
the biased broadcasting corp are at it again, they are all over this, isolated, pastor, (expresssing their er! outrage)and his stunt, even down to that hamashooper guy turning up,(& turning stomachs)on the 5live radio news.giving it so much coverage its unreal
whilst at the same time, the oft mentioned
er! "asian" :-)youths, have reappeared, attacking a boy, in his school, the gang repeatedly hit him with a hammer, giving him brain damage, the constructed phone in wanted to veer towards, plain old bullying(the verbal contortions frankly despicable), despite the fact that..as we have seen on many occasions, a fully organised team turned up in a car, with hammer, check it out , the.. "unrest"...apparently
was caused by a recent influx, of er! "asians" into the area
and surprise surprise, these "asians" were causing growing "friction" within the local community,and even the school itself, was struggling to cope, with this growing threat whilst not wanting to appear to be un multi-cultural.
...................

Dear AG Holder:

YOU are the "idiot." You and Axelrod, both.

As I wrote earlier, there is no moral equivalence to 'burning the Koran' and 'stoning to death a woman'. One is a victimless crime, while the other is a most heinous crime against a human being, especially a woman. If that victimless crime so enrages Muslims that they will riot worldwide, but remain in silent 'submission' to the Sharia cult punishment of stoning, then no matter what anyone says about 'freedom of speech', there is a glaring disproportionality between the two 'crimes'. One is merely annoying sensationalist, book-burning is not a crime by human standards if no one gets hurt; but the other is truly an odious Sharia-sanctioned crime against humanity.

Bloomberg: Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Bloggers, Silent_rage,

Please help to spread the story. We need to remind the US and the media about this double standard.

"Bibles were confiscated, destroyed and burned", US Army spokesman says in 2009 in Afghanistan. The video is clear (51 second to 1 min 6 seconds). The US Army burned Bibles to appease the muslims.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m0FQ6GdGVM&feature=channel

I too am against the burning of Qurans, but the pastor has the right to do it.

At first I thought what an idiotic thing to do.

But this guy with a flock of 50 taking on 1.5 billion people, a large percentage of whom are stirred onto murderous rage by any insult real or imagined to their religion, has won my grudging admiration.

This is not David vs Goliath, this is puny David taking on the entire Philistine army.

This guy is the stuff legends are made of.

The Qur'an-burning, if it takes place, can only harm the right side, the side that is properly alarmed not about a book, but about the people who take that book to heart and those who find ways to look away, deny, pretend otherwise. The wrong side will be helped, all because of the undue sense of self, and desire for self-promotion, of an otherwise forgettable figure. If it takes place, it will be worse than a crime: it will be an error.

I find myself in disagreement with Hugh above.

Heinrich Heine writes in Almansor nearly 200 years ago (1821): "Where they have burned books, they will end in burning human beings.” And now, nearly 100 years later, we look on book-burning as a Nazi activity. Heine didn't see it as a Nazi activity at all, obviously, nor did the Nazis see their own book-burning as one equivalent to the Terry Jones book-burning incident up-coming. Heine saw religious bigotry leading from burning an intellectual's work leading to burning the man to stop him from spreading his ideas in the community. The Nazis and related groups saw book-burning as a prelude to burning whole races and types of people to stop them physically from spreading in the world. The Catholics and Protestant book-burners determined to stop ideas, people being secondary. The Nazis et al, determined to exterminate people, the books being secondary. The point of both groups was to stop information from spreading that challenged the ruling cliques ideologies, and the Nazis went so far as to try to eliminate people as people, ideas or not. Jones is doing nothing of either sort in his campaign. He is not burning books, he is publicly protesting against a political ideology that is a poligion, a political religion, only slightly different from any other collectivist poligion. It has nothing to do with stopping the ideas of Islam. Jones is not a representative of a State or a State religion: he is one private person acting individually with other individuals to make a political point to the public, which the public can happily ignore, should they choose to. Jones does not have the power of the State to confiscate and proscribe Islamic writings. He's making a personal statement.

If Jones and friends determine to burn Qur'ans, why would we think this is a bad thing? Because the Qur'an is a book? I've burnt many books, often on camping trips when the book is a burden and I'm tired of carrying it when it's better used as fire-wood. I've thrown books in the trash where they go to the city incinerator. Burning books is not objectively bad. It's only a bad thing when burning a book is a State or Authority-driven activity to suppress intellectual work that the Authority doesn't approve of. That is an attack on the people, not so much on the author. When the Iranian government burns Salman Rushdie books, it is a fascist programme. When I toss one on the camp fire, it's prudent. When I burn a Qur'an in Florida on 9-11 it's a personal political statement on the part of an individual; one might go so far as to call it an "intellectual statement." Waxing sentimental over "books" strikes me as a philistine expression exercised by those who don't actually read books at all. It strikes me as an idolatry, a fetish over a false ascription to books a mystical nature. If books were scared as books, then the worst that could happen to a book is not that it's burnt but that it ends in the remainder bin at a second-hand bookshop. That is a statement of contempt.

I am in full support of Jones and friends in their public display of burning Qur'ans. Were they to send the police to search for my dozen or so Qur'ans, that would be a different matter. It would not be a public protest against a fascist poligion, it would be a fascist attempt to control the minds of the people, to enforce a rigid conformity on the masses. This protest against Jones' burning Qur'ans is that very fascist attempt to make people conform to the intellectual pretensions of our Post-Modernist elites. When the State demands that one not burn a private book, then one finds oneself in confrontation with Authority over a private matter that has no genuine concern for the State. No politician should have a public opinion of this effort to protest against Islam. It is a matter of private people making a public statement. State interference is a fascist gesture. Those who clamour against the book-burning might look on it as just one more day in the life of humanity, a rather large issue that really has little to do with many at all. Public intellectuals should of course weigh in as public intellectuals, and the public should weigh the ideas of their own accord. It has nothing to do with the State unless one longs for fascism.

Where they ban book-burners, they will turn eventually to burning book-burning people.

Burn, you Qur'an, and warm my heart, I say.

Obviously I did not write in direct response to Hugh. I write my defence of Jones not in defence of Jones but in defence of "direct action." Jones seems to be making a deliberate and obnoxious provocation in public determined to antagonise Muslims. I'm for it.

I'm not in favour of antagonising Muslims just for the sake of my personal pleasure. I support this action because it is a legitimate and aggressive defence of liberty against the philistine dhimmitude and philobarabarism of our intelligentsia against the interests of the people. If this pokes the intelligentsia in the eye, and if the Muslim world is offended at the same time, so be it. This is a matter of self-assertion of the people. The rest of it is secondary, if important as well.

Everything we do to stand up for personal liberty, regardless of whether it offends Muslims or dhimmi fascism in the West, is good. If our opposition don't like it, that's to be expected. Why should we care what the opposition think? If we think through their positions honestly and conclude that we disagree, then we have done a fair job and must move on from there. Liberty first, sociability maybe later.

The saddest part of all this is that we know in our hearts that the burning of a book does nothing to further the cause of our own civilisation.

The enemies of reason and democracy are the politicos of Europe and the the United States, not prepared to listen to the people they are supposed to represent. They are the ones who should be being burned in effigy.

If this stunt goes ahead the real danger, nay certainty, is that the first victims won't be found in America, they are most likely to be Christian minority folk who are least able to defend themselves, in lands far from the protection of US/UN forces. We have all seen it so many times before.

If just one young school girl in say the Phillipines or Thailand or anywhere else for that matter, ends up beheaded and laid out on a mortuary slab, will the supporters of the book burning still feel vindicated in the 'exercising of their democratic right' in this way?

Is the loss of an innocent life to be held so cheaply just because no one in the US thinks it could happen to them? If that is the case then we are no better than the vicious bastards we wish to be rid of.

Rev Terry Jones cannot back down now for if he does the Muslims have won yet again. They already know that the vast majority of the people in the West are dhimmified especially their religious and political leaders. Go to it Reverend Jones

The question is not whether Reverend Jones has a right to do it or how difficult it is to suppress the private and no doubt understandable impulse to immolate a hideous text in what an old poet calls "a backyard auto-da-fe," but whether, at this historical moement, in the larger scheme of things, it hinders or helps. Right now, given the way things were going -- the right way -- why have a stock figure from our contemporary Commedia dell'Arte -- the Right-Wing Narrow-Minded Fire-and-Brimstone Southern Preacher Man, who hates not only Islam but all all kinds of things -- be handed on a platter to the banal huffing-and-puffington posters of this world?

When did cunning go out of style?

The critics of the green book burning are creating the controversy that they deride.

All they have to do is Google "koran burning" and they can see several videos of the koran, the bible, and all sorts of flags and stuff getting abused.

Burning the koran is nothing new, and those inclined to be violent already have all the excuses they need.

Since the US Military took the extraordinary step of burning bibles themselves (those written in Pashtun) who are they to complain about someone else burning religious texts?

What, there were no riots by christians over the US Military burning bibles?

Where was the outrage of the politicians then?

Too 'bad' the "outrage" ploy won't work - people are beginning to ask "What is actually in that book?"

I can see the TV ad now: Mother says to her daughter who is a conversion target "Can we talk - have you actually READ what is in this book?"

I am with RS on this one, burning the koran serves no useful purpose.
Unfortunately we have gotten in such a predicament that our troops are in harm's way. If the good reverend goes through the much published Koran burning. The troops may not be in danger from the general population but from our well trained and equipped Muslim allies. Our so called allies who we had supposedly won their hearts and minds. The Muslims of the world have literally millions or so unarmed Christian hostages to vent their anger on. This is not the wisest thing to do. A better way is to simply educate, educate, and educate all the people about the evils of the death cult and it's evil manual, the Koran.

If a deliberate provocation of Muslims were simply a deliberate provocation of Muslims for its own sake, and if that were to lead to the murder of innocents abroad or elsewhere, I would be against that. It would serve no good purpose to provoke Muslims to murder just for its own sake. But, if provoking Muslims is one step toward a goal, then I might say I am in favour. That goal must be the elimination of jihadis who kill the innocent.

Does burning Qur'ans in Florida further the demise of jihad in general? I wonder, but I doubt it. It might even deepen the commitment of some Muslims to further engage in jihad. That is not the point of burning Qur'ans, not to destroy Islam by burning nor to cause the deaths of innocents by burning Qur'ans. The point is to arouse aggression among our own people so they can finally stand up to the fascist intelligentsia and defy the hostage-takers of the world, even if some "hostages" are killed due to this.

This act of public defiance is not so much against Islam as it is against dhimmitude in the West. Burning the Qur'an in Florida is a slap in the face of dhimmis. Dhimmitude allows for the hostage-taking of the world. Replace the dhimmi intelligentsia and we will finally confront the terror that is jihad. First we must defeat our own dhimmitude, Then we can turn our attentions to jihad.

Elsewhere, I've agreed with RS while recognizing Jones' First Amendment right to do something imprudent.

My biggest concern about the Qu'ran-burning is not the hair-trigger mobs of the Muslim street or the timid MultiCulties who pretend to be American leaders. Nor is it Terry Jones' lack of prudence.

Rather, there are more Muslims than we know who have been questioning their received faith over the last few decades. Since 9/11, their numbers have grown. I've run into immigrant West African students in my school who ask me to address them by their tribal rather than Muslim names, because they have become Christians.

It would be an unprecedented tragedy, at a time when God the Holy Spirit is clearing cracking the hard ground of the Islamic World, for a billion Muslims to see the Gospel as a club held over their heads rather than a gate through which they are invited to pass to a true knowledge of God.

Islam threatens and kills no matter what you do, except perhaps recite the shahada.
It is not our responsibility for their actions; they must be held responsible. It is like an extremely abusive parent who beats their child bloody and then says "see what you made me do!?" There is no restraining appeasement that will change the outcome, if they want to threaten and kill. It is just what they will do, and we must do as we must, either to protest their actions, or stop them. Their response will be abuse regardless. The outrage is we do nothing.

From pastor Terry Jones view, as far as as it looks by his writings and postings, he is not burning a book of a flawed faith. His actions are not targeting muslims.

He is clear about what he thinks islam is, it is the "bible" of satan, the devil's word.

A Fox news reporter called him a "anti-islam bigot" for his burning the qur'an event, however if viewed from his perspective, he is actually a "anti-satan bigot", and perhaps one should consider if a Christian pastor should hold this view.

Unless a Christian pastor, who speaks and acts against what he sees as satanic, is no longer considered a proper position to hold.

If satan's bible is torched, in this context, who can call him a "bigot"?

rich: yes! Everyone is against him, but how many of us have fantasies like burning the Koran, or trying to get it banned, or all kinds of things...but we are waiting for someone else to do it, and then we can criticise them, but secretly admire them and be grateful to them for doing the dirty work.

to burn the islamic religious book sends a message we accept islam as a religion. We are not fighting a religion. We are fighting the imposition of a foreign legal and political system contrary to our Constitution. Why don't we burn the MASLIM BROTHERHOOD manifesto instead?

I too heard the FOX reporter call this man, Mr. Jones, "bigot." Like so many reporters and others in public life, she doesn't seem to know the true meaning of the word. Bigot is not a word against a chosen way, but against race or ethnicity. Islam is chosen, not a birth condition.
Also, she, and others, are not saying, "In my opinion,"...they are making statements as though making the statement of their opinion makes it a statement of fact.

Islam is touted, here and abroad, as a religion of "peace." Most commentators it seems are afraid to say differently. This is understandable to some degree because the average muslim man is more than willing to kill for the slightest, nay, not even rising to the level of a slight, insult. We have been told, time and again, endlessly, that there is a "minority" of muslims who are violent. When was the definition of "minority" changed? When did this word come to mean millions? The populations of some countries?
There seems to be no end to the taliban fighters...i.e. violent muslim...who are willing to come out of their caves and dens to put women, children, and soldiers to death. How many millions does it take to equal a significant number?

The fact that this man in Gainseville wants to make a statement of his feelings about this violent way of life is his business. It was determined many years ago that burning something that has special meaning for others is a lawful act and not subject to legal censure.

I wouldn't personally possess the book to burn...it is a waste of money to buy one. Therefore, I don't have one to burn. But the man has a legal right to burn it as long as he is not putting lives in danger. Literally! This is an isolated act that will not kill anyone in any other country.

To say that he is going to kill soldiers, Christians, or others in countries where Islam is powerful enough that men can come out into the streets and kill others with impunity is giving a validation to the murder of these persons. After all, muslims say they are killing because: there have been Americans in Saudia Arabia, muslims are poor due to American supremacy in the world, etc. and ad nauseam.

Why isn't someone saying, Why the violent outrage by the members of the "religion of peace" over the burning of a book? Because those who are deciding that this man is not a "Christian" like them, and they wouldn't burn the koran because it isn't "Christian" are too willing to allow the muslims to dictate what is "American" and "Christian" and it all boils down to fear of reprisal.

Will the "attack" on the mosque out west be linked by some to this man's plans to burn the koran? What if the "attack" is found to be the act of a muslim who wants the mosque to appear to have been a target of a "hate crime?"

What if Terry Jones became ill on Saturday and had to postpone his book burning? Would the violence against non-muslims cease until he got well and chose another day?

The general could have called Jones and asked him privately not to go ahead with his plans. The others could have just kept quiet about it as it isn't their business to get into the personal business of each individual in the country.

I agree with those who hold that burning the Bible by U.S. soldiers so the muslims would stay peaceful....they would have to get there to stay there....did not receive nearly the press that this little book burning by a lone figure has received. We all know why that is true. At least, some of us do.

A muslim doesn't need a "reason" like a koran burning to kill. They kill anyway, every day, in war and in "peace."

What do you mean if? There has been for years a double standard that allows all those that disagree with America to burn its flags and/or leaders in effigy. These pictures have graced almost every notable magazine and website at some point or another. Yet the continued expected behavior for Americans has been to bend and take it with a smile. I deplore the idea of have to stoop to these tactics but it is hard to forget my Sun Tzu in these matters. Consider the results of Black Jack Pershings' campaign and how his singular attack on their beliefs caused ( at least towards the US ) a hiatus in the terrorist attacks. These are troubling times and the best and most simple way to look at the coming war is that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Therefore since Islam is for world domination; it is against everyone else; SO WE ARE ALL FRIENDS IN THIS CAUSE. We must support this mans act however misguided it may be, he is a scared man pushed to the brink of making a huge statement on behalf of all of us. He has rightfully identified the koran as nothing more than another Anarchist Cookbook; Turner Diaries; Mien Kampf; take your pick of books that have done nothing but encourage death, rape, mutilation, racism, etc. Hell the Turner Diaries is a work of socio-political fiction and its never goes close to saying its THE WORD of GOD. Neither do any other books on that list. The only other place you find this same ranting is from guys like Jim JOnes, David Koresh, Charlie Manson, Hugo Chaves, ya know that kinda guy. You hear about those food chit "good life cards" ? This in now way qualifies the holie kuranny as anything more than a death and robbery cult cooked up by some pedophile sheepherder that says he talked to an angel in a cave. SO HE NEVER TALKED TO GOD. Maybe, just maybe he talked to the devil; ya think? Who else encourages us to lie? to cheat? to steal? to rape? to kill? to die in the pursuit of worship? Regardless of your theological position; it is time to unite and take a stand against this cult that wishes to shut out the lives, emotions, art, land, faiths, histories and even the thoughts of anyone who does not practice this same death cult. I shall always resist. What will you do?

If Europeans had started burning copies of Hitler's book, Mein Kampf (My fight or struggle) Europe might have avoided WW II and saved millions of lives including Germans. But they chose to be politically correct and wear blinders and try to appease that demanding monster. Terry Jones will go down in history for having turned the American tide. Granted decent folks are shocked about a book burning but it is only symbolic here. How come the same self-righteous folks weren't shocked by that phony Rauf proposing a mosque as a victory symbol on the bodies of New Yorkers? No matter what Jones does tomorrow, I'll bet anyone that there will be others having qurani roasts tomorrow in other parts of America.

The Pastor did make a good point. He merely threatens to burn Qurans and the Muslim and dhimmi world gets hysterical and condemns him, and the world is told that any Muslim retaliation would be justified. A giant mosque is being built over the ruins of 9/11 with Saudi jihad money and those American citizens who oppose it are ridiculed and ignored and told to be "tolerant" of the desecration. It is the unofficial global enforcement of Sharia law, which claims worldwide jurisdiction. Can anyone foresee the next step?