Retaliation: Muslims Burn The US Constitution

[fedfem]

Quote by: tinybear You forgot to mention they were disowned Saudi citizens. But as far I'm concerned, it doesn't matter what they citizenship they hold. They're murderers.

They were not disowned citizens.

[tinybear]

Bin Laden's disowned. But does it matter? They can be US citizens for all I care. Doesn't change the fact that they were Islamic terrorists who murdered thousands of innocent people.

[rmnunez]

I'm struck by the analogy made between the US constitution and the Q'ran.

[Chris the Chees]

Quote by: tinybear What? We're just talking about burning some books and flags here. Now the kidnappings, beheadings, suicide bombs and use of human shields; now that's what gets me incensed. Still, I won't start a riot and start killing innocent people. :rolleyes:

That insenses you, well perhaps you should consider the fact that over 20,000 Iraqi civillians have been killed, which is several times larger than 9/11. Upto 45,000 Iraq troops have been killed. Over 1,000 US troops are also dead.

So were talking well over 50,000 dead, and you talk about being insensed?

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/wars21c.htm#Iraq03

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

[tinybear]

Why not? Are you saying we shouldn't be incensed because of the body count in the Iraqi War so far? What's the connection?

[jose]

Quote by: tinybear Bin Laden's disowned. But does it matter? They can be US citizens for all I care. Doesn't change the fact that they were Islamic terrorists who murdered thousands of innocent people.

it´s not a fact they were islamic ,terrorists yes but we still don´t know who they were,or who they were working for
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/hijackers.html

FBI Admits: No Evidence Links 'Hijackers' to 9-11
http://www.americanfreepress.net/051...evidence_.html

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: tinybear You forgot to mention they were disowned Saudi citizens. But as far I'm concerned, it doesn't matter what they citizenship they hold. They're murderers.

So, they are murderers, we have established that, but what are "we", as in the collective, we?


It is our tax dollars, and our corrupt policies that they are fighting against.


What other course of action would you recommend to somebody who has no way to fight back, or even draw attention to their plight?


Perhaps, planting a few trees?


Please, tell us...

[tinybear]

What are you talking about Milton? Are you supporting what they did on September 11 2001? Are you suggesting that hijacking a plane and ramming it into the WTC was justified because they were fighting against 'our tax dollars and our corrupt practices'? Who do you mean by 'our'? And what 'corrupt practices'? I don't quite get the point you're trying to make, I'm afraid. Please clarify?

[tinybear]

Jose> Please. No fairy tale conspiracy theories, OK? :)

[Osborn F Enready]

tinybear said:
Jose> Please. No fairy tale conspiracy theories, OK?

I say:
That what I say everytime you say the government is taking away my rights for my own good.

You have become one of the biggest peddlers of conspiracy theory.

[tinybear]

You get to choose your government Osborn. Is that not enough? Spare a thought for those far less fortunate than you; like those poor Chinese for example. Think about them every time you think your rights have been taken away by a government you chose.

[rmnunez]

Terrorism is ultimately a means of communication, they have a message and seek to get it to their adversaries. The burning of a US constitution is expressive conduct, just as were the hooded performers at Condoleeza's speech. Expressive conduct is a term used in constitutional law refering to freedom of speech. The bounds of expressive conduct can be stretched from a t-shirt with a peace sign in an ROTC class at the height of the anti-Vietnam war demonstrations in the US. But expressive conduct won't stretch to include decapitations, massacre by bombs, usage of human shields or deliberated and planned cold-blooded mass murder.

Burning the US constitution is expressive conduct and a message was sent, I was struck by its poignance since obviously the ones sending the message equated their Q'rans to the US document. Critical lefties read into the gesture something different from what the Muslim terrorists sought to convey.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Burning the Constitution really doesnt protest those in power right now. The Constitution, according to Imperialist, New America is 'out-dated': (From a commentary in Capitol Hill Blue)

.....(Alberto)Gonzales said, adding that the most controversial provisions of the Patriot Act have “proven invaluable in fighting terrorism and aiding other investigations.” The key phrase here is “other investigations.” Although the Patriot Act was rushed into law to fight terrorism, the Justice Department under former Attorney General John Ashcroft and now Gonzales sees nothing wrong with using the act to go after anybody for any perceived crime. Ashcroft, a religious zealot, deployed the powers of the Act in several unsuccessful attempts to prosecute American citizens for selling dirty books and videos. "It's important that these authorities remain available," Gonzales added. For what? To spy on any and all Americans for any and all perceived crimes? This is the same Alberto Gonzales who said, while still serving as White House Counsel, the “Constitution is an outdated document.” The current Patriot Act already gives the government power to wiretap at will, snoop into private travel and financial records and monitor the day-to-day activities of virtually any American citizen. But FBI Director Mueller says that’s not enough. He wants the powers expanded.

[rmnunez]

gr8 is a fine example of this misinterpretation. He sees the constitution being burned and destroyed by the Patriot Act, into which he reads applicability, if at all, only outside the US and to non united statians. The Muslims were not saying "your constitution (or rights) are burning" (or are being burned by Bush and his co-conspirators).

[gr8fuldaniel]

Quote by: rmnunez The Muslims were not saying "your constitution (or rights) are burning"

I am aware of that. They are trying to offend us. However, we who love America and those who rule America are 2 separate entities. The protesters hate what makes America evil. Our Leaders, not our Constitution, but they dont realize that our most sacred document is a thing of the past. This regime has declared it quaint, in favor of the un-Patriotic act. We are invaders. Every time you hear Bush speak switch the word Freedom with Invasion, to break the code.

[abub]

Ha, muslims burning our constitution? That doesn't outrage me at all. Infact I let out a few giggles when I first read the article. They have no idea what we have in comparison to what they have.

[fedfem]

Quote by: rmnunez Terrorism is ultimately a means of communication, they have a message and seek to get it to their adversaries. The burning of a US constitution is expressive conduct, just as were the hooded performers at Condoleeza's speech. Expressive conduct is a term used in constitutional law refering to freedom of speech. The bounds of expressive conduct can be stretched from a t-shirt with a peace sign in an ROTC class at the height of the anti-Vietnam war demonstrations in the US. But expressive conduct won't stretch to include decapitations, massacre by bombs, usage of human shields or deliberated and planned cold-blooded mass murder. Burning the US constitution is expressive conduct and a message was sent, I was struck by its poignance since obviously the ones sending the message equated their Q'rans to the US document. Critical lefties read into the gesture something different from what the Muslim terrorists sought to convey.

Terrorism is a tactic. People do not engage in acts of terrorism unless they feel all other methods have failed.

Some tend to lump criminal behavior and in some cases self-defence into acts of terrorism which they are not.

The US Constitution represents secularism--which is what they see as being in opposition to the Koran which represents their theocratic mindset.

[Chris the Chees]

Quote by: tinybear Why not? Are you saying we shouldn't be incensed because of the body count in the Iraqi War so far? What's the connection?

The point is that you talk about being insensed because a few Iraqis bomb Americans, etc. Yet, I see no condemnation for the attrocities commited by US troops, bombs, etc.

If you want to talk about crimes, etc, then you and all American conservatives who supported this farse need to take a long look in the mirror.

[tinybear]

I must say I have mixed feelibngs about this Iraqi War, that's why. On the one hand, I deplore the way our troops have treated Iraqi civilians since the occupation of Iraq. The sort of shoot first, ask questions later policy and the lack of respect for the ordinary folk and their religion and culture has failed to win the hearts of the people; so essential to winning a guerilla war. We must battle to win the hearts of the people, and not just to see who kills more of the other side. This we have failed to do. I have always advocated better public relations (propaganda if need be) to polish up the image of the US and to put the terrorists in as bad a light as possible. At the same time, we must gather accurate info about the whereabouts of terrorists and insurgents and hit them hard and without mercy. Such info gathering will not be possible if we alienate the Iraqi people. In short, the people of Iraq must consider us their friends and the insurgents their foes.

On the other hand, I'm very happy Saddam is gone. Aren't you?

[gr8fuldaniel]

Quote by: tinybear On the other hand, I'm very happy Saddam is gone. Aren't you?

Not at this price!
It could end up costing trillions of dollars and millions of lives. All for a fucking lie.