Will Koran Burning Be Banned In The United States?

The American Thinker ^ | April 05, 2011 | Allan Wall

[Scanian]

As an American in the United States of America, you are allowed to do many things.

You can burn the flag. You can burn the Bible. You can produce obscene art and sometimes even get government money to finance it.

You can make movies and TV shows that ridicule Christianity, traditional morality, and that take the Lord's name in vain.

If anybody objects to this, you can just accuse him of trying to impose his values on others. Then start talking about the Salem Witch Trials and the Spanish Inquisition.

Yes, you can do all those things, and more.

But can you burn a Koran?

Yes, but maybe not for long.

Terry Jones, pastor of the Dove World Outreach Center, in Gainesville, Florida, became the target of world condemnation last year when he announced he would burn a copy of the Koran in protest.

President Obama didn't want him to do it. Neither did General David Petraeus, commander of U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

Actress/Activist Angelina Jolie spoke out against it. I'm still waiting for Angelina to speak out against anti-Christianity in Hollywood.

As a result of his plan to burn a Koran in the U.S.A., Terry Jones received death threats. His website was shut down. The mortgage on his church's property was called in and -- what a coincidence -- the church's property insurance was cancelled. The city of Gainesville threatened to charge the church for protection. And who knows what else happened behind the scenes? All this happened to a private group which wanted to burn a privately-owned book on private property.

What if the powers that be decide your private activity is objectionable ?

In the end, Jones decided not to burn the Koran.

That was seven months ago. But now, he and his group have finally...

[Old Teufel Hunden]

One other thing about our involvement in Libya. We are out now, but Obama went to the UN and never went to our Congress except to send them a letter per the War Powers Act. Totally unconstitutional! At some point, he should have went to Congress for a joint resolution. If we go back in again as NATO will surely beg us to do, he BETTER go to Congress and the Republicans BETTER insist on it. To start a war is a political matter, therefore it belongs in the Congress. To prosecute a war belongs in the Commander in Chief’s hands and should never be political.

[P-Marlowe]

One other thing about our involvement in Libya. We are out now

Wow, that's the first I've heard of it. It has been turned over to NATO, but the last time I looked probably 90% of the actual fighting force of NATO (the guys who are on the front lines) are US Servicemen and women. The only difference is that they are now taking orders from a Canadian.

We will be in Libya when I die of old age. We will be in Afghanistan for another decade. We should have gone in there in 2001 and kicked their butts and got out. Then we should have gone back in 2003 and kicked their butts and got out. Then we might have had to return in 2005 and kick their butts and got out. This nation building idea of Bush's was nuts.

Again, when the Military ordered the burning of the bibles, America lost its mission. From that point forward we have been treading water and protecting an Islamic regime that is destined to fall and be replaced by an even more repressive Islamic regime.

It's long past time we left there and let these Islamic tribal goons kill each other off. If they don't have American Troops to kill, they will be more than happy to use their bullets on their fellow countrymen. Historically when Muslims run out of Jews and Christians to kill, they invariably turn their swords on each other.

[Scanian]

A lot of the replies I’ve been reading lately have given me pause. On a number of issues.

I’d yell “troll” but some have been around longer than I have.

[BobL]

“I’d yell “troll” but some have been around longer than I have.”

I agree...they sound like trolls, but they’re not. They’re just people who, despite all their time on this site, are still capable of being manipulated by the MSM.

Sad...but that’s the way it is these days.

[Scanian]

When I read something like “That stuff about Social Security being broke is a bunch of hype,” I’d swear it was Bernie Sanders talking.

[HereInTheHeartland]

“Will Koran Burning Be Banned In The United States? “

Hopefully.
Koreans like Japanese are pretty industrious people. We could use more of them and not resort to burning them.

[BobL]

“When I read something like “That stuff about Social Security being broke is a bunch of hype,” I’d swear it was Bernie Sanders talking.”

...or Barney Frank. But it is tough to believe the government on anything, so when they say it’s broke, is it reeeeaaaallly broke? For those of us who do the math...of course it’s broke, and long past being salvageable.

For Obama, keep acting like all is fine...after all 70% of the country can’t do their own calculations, so you win.

[Scanian]

Ok, cool...that’s mighty white of you.

So how do you feel about Qurans?

[HereInTheHeartland]

I don’t know, those Quarians are pretty spooky people. I’ll stay with Koreans.

http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Quarian

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"Wow, that's the first I've heard of it. It has been turned over to NATO, but the last time I looked probably 90% of the actual fighting force of NATO (the guys who are on the front lines) are US Servicemen and women."

Uh, from everything I've read all American planes pulled out of this Sunday night. It is mostly the Brits and Frances show right now. That's why there's stories out there that NATO can't support this mission. Which is expected and a joke. I don't doubt that we get in again, but from everything I've read, we are not involved right now. Other than most likely CIA personnel on the ground which we'll never know about for sure.

[xzins]

If we go back in again as NATO will surely beg us to do

NATO is the US.

NATO has NEVER had anything other than an American Nato Commander. Currently it is Adm James Stavridis.

Go to this link: NATO is the US http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2696316/posts

[xzins]

You have a point. No need for it to be pig piss. It would be a better statement if it were EXACTLY the same as the treatment given to Christianity.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"NATO is the US."

Well, in one sense can't argue with that. However, at this point in time we do not have any planes enforcing the no fly zone as of Sunday night. Whether it is the Admiral or someone else, what I meant was that the Admiral or whoever in their official capacity as NATO will be asking the U.S. at some point (IMO) to fly missions again.

[P-Marlowe]

However, at this point in time we do not have any planes enforcing the no fly zone as of Sunday night.

I honestly do not believe that to be true. Undoubtedly we have AWACs in the air and other support aircraft and if and when a French or British jet happens to be accidentally shot down by the Rebels (like what I believe happened to the the F15 that went down last week) then it will be American Marines that go in and effectuate the rescue.

To say we are "out" of the Libyan conflict would be to deny that we are giving any support to the effort. We are in this thing up to our necks. But Obama is trying to make this a NATO operation so that when it all goes bad, as it is clearly doing, then he can point the finger at NATO for its failures.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"To say we are "out" of the Libyan conflict would be to deny that we are giving any support to the effort."

What has been reported is that our planes are not enforcing the no fly zone. You are correct, we most likely have AWACs in the air, possibly we are doing in flight refuelings. However, our planes flying missions are in no danger and are not blowing things up or killing people. As for our Marines rescuing possible downed NATO pilots. That's a good question that there is no current answer out there I have read. Would be interesting to hear a reporter ask that question.

If NATO as an organization officially requests that we start flying missions to enforce the no fly zone (i.e. jets bombing targets etc..) Barry better go to the Congress to get approval and the Republicans better demand it!!

[P-Marlowe]

However, our planes flying missions are in no danger and are not blowing things up or killing people.

First of all, how do you know that? Secondly to say our planes are not in danger or blowing things up or killing people is to ignore the realities of this war. If you refuel a fighter jet, then you are just as responsible for dropping the bombs that kill the people below as the guy who presses the release button. You are part of a team and the mission of the team is to kill people and break things. Secondly a refueling plane or an AWAC is a big target for a SAM and neither plane has the ability to do the necessary maneuvers to avoid getting hit. So in that sense they are in more danger than the fighter pilots who at least can maneuver away from an incoming missile.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

Do you know how high up an AWAC or a refueler fly? And how far out of the theater they operate? Believe me, they are in no danger. When was the last time you heard of an AWAC or refueler being shot down by any of America's enemy? The next time will be the first time. Besides, at the beginning of this thing, our planes supposedly took out all of their radar and missile installations to protect all of the fighters and fighter/bombers.

"Secondly to say our planes are not in danger or blowing things up or killing people is to ignore the realities of this war."

Why do you constantly try to inject things that I did not say or intend by my statements? We were talking about whether our troops were in harms way. They are not. Now you want to talk about the moral issue of whether we are responsible for the cause of this war. Totally seperate issue that I have never even commented upon. Obviously America shares a large burden of the moral responsibility.

[xzins]

Since the US is the major military contributor to Nato, and since the Commander of Nato is a US admiral, it is unrealistic to think that the US is not involved in any air missions inside Libya.

Also, the CIA operatives on the ground are military, and trust me, they have every air asset the US has at their disposal. The last thing we want is US operatives captured or killed with their boots on the ground.

Our special ops forces and other means of using them is simply a matter of paperwork. One day you’re delta, and the next day you’re cia. And then back again, and back and forth, etc. It’s simply the way these guys operate.