Karzai demands action on Koran abuse

[CHIMO]

AFGHAN president Hamid Karzai urged the United States yesterday to prosecute and punish anyone found guilt of desecrating the Koran as anti-US protests flared for a fifth day.

Sixteen Afghans have been killed and more than 100 injured since Wednesday, in the worst anti-U.S. protests across Afghanistan since U.S. forces invaded in 2001 to oust the Taliban.

Karzai added his weight to the growing outrage over reports of American desecration of the Muslim holy book, the Koran.

But for the first time since the US and the international community arrived in 2001, there has been a popular outpouring of anti-foreign feeling in Afghanistan, and both the US military and foreign civilians may now be facing a summer of troubles.

http://www.sundayherald.com/49783

[BlackVelvetElvis]

1. But, but, but....

Fox news (this morning) said that there was no proof that this happened.
<imagine my surprise>
BushCo winning hearts and minds again.

[bpilgrim]

35. things must be REALLY bad if he had to side with the 'TERRORIST' on this 1

sounds like the GOATHERDS have reached their tipping point :nuke:

peace

[Boneman]

153. Newsweek was ordered to revise the story by Bussiah and crew. Absolutely

no doubt about it. Disgusting.

[DoNotRefill]

2. Ummmm...somebody kindly tell him....

to fuck off.

[DoNotRefill]

4. This makes me want to do some "performance art"...

involving a Koran, my intestines, and the Chili Cheese Nachos from Denny's.

Death sentence for desecrating a book, indeed...

[physioex]

13. Not sure what you are saying.....

These soldiers weren't descerating a book as an expression of "free speech", but as a tool for torture.

[DoNotRefill]

17. So if I burn a US flag in front of freepers....

I'm guilty of torture???

Is that REALLY what you're saying???

[physioex]

21. I am saying that the other Muslim nations are watching.....

And with the way Americans have been treating Muslims, this just adds to the enragement....

Perphaps if we didn't invade Iraq, or Afghanistan and we are sitting around buring Korans then fine, but not in the present situtaion.

[DoNotRefill]

22. So you're saying....

that we need to abrogate our civil liberties in the US to avoid insulting people overseas?

That's CRAP, and you should know better.

[physioex]

26. CRAP....

Is occupying and invading an unarmed country and not repecting their culture and religion. If you want to burn a Bible or a Koran in your back yard have at it (and I mean your country). But don't go around taking your views about expression elsewhere.....

[DoNotRefill]

29. Did you read the article?

the supposed "desecration" happened on a US military base in Cuba. It didn't happen in Afghanistan.

[physioex]

31. Yes.....

Cuba, but what is the ethinicity/religion of the prisoners? And in what context?

[DoNotRefill]

32. It doesn't matter....

It's in a place that is under US law, and so it's not a crime, PERIOD. It's PROTECTED SPEECH.

[physioex]

34. Don't try and justify it with me....

There are lots of Muslims out there and they are wathing. And this king of behavior compounded with our past adds to the enragement. If that is ok with you, so be it.....

[DoNotRefill]

66. Shredding our most precious civil liberties....

to appease muslims is beyond repulsive.

[Renew Deal]

52. I don't understand how it's protected speech.

Protected speech is you burning korans on your driveway (or the mall, or town square, or city hall or whatever). Flushing korans to embarrass prisoners has nothing to do with speech and has nothing to do with civil liberties to the people offended.

[DoNotRefill]

67. In that case...

when you're arrested and prosecuted for burning an american flag, don't be surprised...because YOU'RE the one setting the "if it offends somebody, it's not protected speech" precedent.

Folks, protected speech is SUPPOSED to be unpopular and repulsive. Popular, warm and fuzzy speech doesn't NEED protection.

[msanthrope]

76. An excellent point.....how many flag-burners have been arrested

because it offends someone else?

I reserve the right to mock your religion. Unreservedly.

[Renew Deal]

96. You as a citizen have the right to do that.

But it is against the law to "harrass or humiliate" as well as against international law to create "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment."

It's not about speech, it's about the treatment of prisoners.

[BornLeft]

85. I agree with you about the free speech

but I have a hard time equating this to a free speech exercise. Usually free speech involves a issue that wants or needs to be heard? So what would the free speech in this case be? Govt endorsement of degrading all "other" religions? I believe you have the right to burn flags, bibles, Qurans and the constitution if you wish, you also have the responsibility to suffer the circumstances of doing those things. In other words "Payback is a bitch"

[Renew Deal]

95. You're the one distorting the argument and my words.

Show me where I said "if it offends somebody, it's not protected speech." I'll be waiting patiently.

This has nothing to do with protected speech. It has to do with the treatment of prisoners. Why are you confusing the issue?

[DoNotRefill]

104. Oh, so this isn't a situation where somebody was offended?

You ask why I'm "confusing the issue". Here's why: BECAUSE ONCE THEY CAN START SAYING THAT DESTROYING ONE RELIGIOUS BOOK IS A CRIME, THEY'LL SAY DESTROYING ANY RELIGIOUS BOOK IS A CRIME.

Don't you GET IT? You're arguing FOR the Religious Fundamentalists like Robertson and Falwell here.

[Renew Deal]

113. No I am not.

I am arguing that there are laws governing the treatment of prisoners. I have said repeatedly that you can burn bibles, crosses, korans, torah scrolls. Have at it as a private citizen or even as a public official, but there are laws governing the treatment of prisoners.

Does your view mean that you are arguing for Saddam Hussein, Islam Karimov (Uzbek boiler man), Lyndie England and the other torturers of the world? It doesn't make sense, but that's your logic.

[DoNotRefill]

116. Ask a freeper if they think watching you burn a US flag is "torture"...

and they'll say "yes".

[Renew Deal]

120. Would they?

They would be wrong. Besides that, I don't like seeing the flag burned. I don't think anyone that loves their country likes seeing their flag burned, but in this country we understand it's protected speech, just like "shitting on korans" at home.

[LiberalFighter]

55. Military personnel DON'T have protected speech

while in uniform or acting in the capacity of the military

[DoNotRefill]

68. Really? Are you sure about that?

Groups like VVAW MIGHT disagree with you....

[LiberalFighter]

93. Vietnam Veterans Against the War are not serving in uniform

they are no longer serving or acting officially on behalf of the military.

[DoNotRefill]

102. So everybody in VVAW had been separated from the service?

REALLY? When was John F. Kerry officially discharged from the US Military? IIRC, his website had documents detailing his discharge up that were dated 1976...In other words, he was still a part of the Military when he was protesting Vietnam.

[LiberalFighter]

145. Do you not understand???

While on active military duty their freedom of speech is limited!!!

Doesn't matter when he was discharged he was no longer on active duty after 1970.

[Sterling]

167. More importantly in this context they are doing official US business.

These acts are being committed under the color of authority of the US Government. To pretend this is a 1st amendment issue is just plain silly.

The government does not have the authority to hold you captive and and force you to be present while your religion is degraded.

Why did this fly right over some people on this threads head?

[LiberalFighter]

168. Some would argue that one can do no wrong in the name of the govt or God

Either way it is wrong. Similar to what the Jesuits, RC, and others did in the name of God to the natives in the Americas. Or what the govt did to the Native American children in school preventing them from speaking their language or wearing their clothing.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

149. exactly

we have a winner folks.

[SOS]

158. Guantanamo is NOT under US law

Karzai was referring only to the incidents at Guantanamo, not "anybody".
And he is correct.
There are two groups in Gitmo- US military personnel and prisoners.
The prisoners have no rights. The Cheney Administration chose Gitmo for that very purpose - to place the prisoners beyond the Bill of Rights.
The military personnel is under UCMJ. It is "strict military policy" to respect the prisoners religion. Karzai was referring to the enforcement of that US policy.

It is protected speech if you do it. Burn all the books you want.
In Gitmo it is a violation of military policy and that is precisely (and only) what Karzai was referring to.

[Renew Deal]

51. I don't see what this has to do with american civil liberties?

We're talking about flushing korans as a way to embarrass prisoners. I don't think that's appropriate, but if you want to burn flags, korans and bibles as a citizen in the states, that's your right. There is a clear distinction and it appears that you are muddying it.

[DoNotRefill]

65. You don't? TRULY?

Let's say that the prisoners flushed a bible to piss off their jailers. Wouldn't that be 100% protected speech?

[Renew Deal]

98. No

because it has nothing to do with free speech. Also, prison guards can't be the subject of "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment."

It doesn't matter what the prisoners do (as long as they don't break the law ie. violence, drugs, etc.) It's the captors that have to behave within the law and that includes not harassing or humiliating" prisoners according to US law precedent and the text I included from international law.

http://www.globalissuesgroup.com/geneva/convention1.html#3

You are muddying the issue as long as you talk about free speech, because it has nothing to do with the issue.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PsychoDad]

142. The express purpose of the exercise

The express purpose of the exercise of flushing the Quran down a toilet was during an act of interrogation.. not during an act of free speech.

If I were to hold you captive, deprive you of sleep, beat you and piss on something you hold sacred, maybe urinate on your child to demonstrate my power over you and your life, to break you as a human being, is that performance art? Free speech?

Was what happened at Abu Ghrab also an act of free speech?

I think most would say no.

[LiberalFighter]

3. Would have to agree that anyone desecrating their Koran should be punished

I had to read the article first to find the details and as presented they should be punished.

Our government has no business violating their customs or religion or property. This is happening in Afghanistan and the military or those under color of the military are intentionally using their religion as a means.

I wonder how any of the Air Force would feel if some "heathen" flushed the Bible down the toilet? (I mentioned Air Force because apparently those graduating from the Academy are indoctrinated and strongly encouraged thru peer pressure in the "Christian" belief.) Considering what these so called "Christians" would do... I wonder what they would do if these "heathen" Muslims were to defecated on their Bible? I bet they would be totally outraged.

Regardless of what the reason we are in ANY country we don't have the right to impose our will on anyone politics, religion or otherwise.

[DoNotRefill]

5. Sorry...it happened at Gitmo....

which is US territory.

There's no crime in desecrating a book. None at all. Free speech, and all that....

[physioex]

14. But not in the context of torture....

No it is not free speech....

[DoNotRefill]

19. So, if somebody finds an act of free speech to be offensive....

it's torture?

Are you SURE you want to go there?

[Renew Deal]

54. You are distorting the issue intentionally.

There is a difference between individual citizens flushing korans for any reason and flushing korans for the purpose of embarrassing a prisoner.

[DoNotRefill]

69. You keep saying that, so I'll give you an opportunity....

to provide us with the code section that delineates the difference. Thanks in advance. What? You can't provide a cite to back up your assertation? Hmmmm....I wonder why.

[BornLeft]

87. Please i am a little confused.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Please what freedom of speech did this represent?

[DoNotRefill]

100. There are two-fold violations...

first, it gives religious books heightened protection, which is a violation of the establishment clause, and secondly, the act of "desecrating" a symbol, be it a book, a flag, a draft card, or whatever, has long been held to be protected under the First Amendment.

If you read the First Amendment carefully, it doesn't even mention burning a flag. Yet it's still protected speech under the First Amendment. Do you want to change that?

[Renew Deal]

103. It has nothing to do with the first amendment.

It's about the treatment of prisoners. This should help clear it up. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1472990&mesg_id=1474240&page=

[Name removed]

119. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Renew Deal]

123. That's when you know you lost the debate.

When you started calling names.

Show me where I advocated any punishment let alone "death sentence for flushing a book down a toilet." I'll be waiting.

[DoNotRefill]

124. Did you RTFA??????

WTF is this about if not the article???

[Renew Deal]

126. Yes

And Karzai doesn't want them handed over to Afghanistan. He said "If proven that this happened, then we will strongly ask the American government to put on trial and punish whoever is the culprit,"

Their chief justice also chimed in. Yesterday Afghanistan’s chief justice Fazl Hadi Shinwari said: “If the Americans have done this, then they should admit it, punish those who did it and apologise to Muslims.”

They want us to punish them.

The article says "The Koran is taken as the literal word of God, and in Pakistan and Afghanistan desecration of the holy book is punishable by death."

But we aren't handing our soldiers over to them, so that is not an issue.

[DoNotRefill]

129. From the article:

"AFGHAN president Hamid Karzai urged the United States yesterday to prosecute and punish anyone found guilt of desecrating the Koran"

Not servicemen, not people who work for the Government, ANYBODY.

[Renew Deal]

136. That's in the context of what happened at Guantanemo.

And here is what Karzai siad himself "If proven that this happened, then we will strongly ask the American government to put on trial and punish whoever is the culprit,"

When he said "this happened", what is he talking about?

[DoNotRefill]

141. Oh really?

that's odd. From reading the article, it sounds like what they're pissed about is the fact that the Koran ended up in the toilet, NOT the fact that it happened at Gitmo.

Kerzai is asking that anybody who desecrates the Koran be put on trial and punished.

[nebula]

154. DoNotRefill reported to forum admins

for breaking one of the forum rules -- no personal attacks/name calling against other posters.

[Renew Deal]

101. I'd be happy to back this up.

US Case law from the Supreme Court. HUDSON v. PALMER, 468 U.S. 517 (1984)

The court recognized that Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 555 -557 (1979), authorized irregular unannounced shakedown searches of prison cells. But the court held that an individual prisoner has a "limited privacy right" in his cell entitling him to protection against searches conducted solely to harass or to humiliate.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=468&invol=517

Art. 3. In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions: (1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria. To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons: (a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; (b) taking of hostages; (c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgement pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples. (2) The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for. An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.

http://www.globalissuesgroup.com/geneva/convention1.html#3

So go ahead and admit you were wrong and that you muddied the issue. Thanks in advance.

[DoNotRefill]

109. So who says that there were any searches going on here?

What you're doing is no different than what the religious freaks like Phelps do when they go through the bible and pull out things that they say supports putting homosexuals to death.

[Renew Deal]

115. Yes

It has to do with the search for personal property (korans) and flushing them. But why just focus on that. There's the international law for you to chew on too.

[DoNotRefill]

121. The Korans are NOT personal property, and you SHOULD know....

that jailers can remove items from prisoners without due process of law.

You keep saying it's a violation of international law, because you feel it's humiliating. Making them eat out of a toilet is humiliating, flushing things down the toilet isn't. Kerzai is saying that people who desecrate the Koran should be punished, and the punishment should be death. Is that something you REALLY want to set as a precedent?

[Renew Deal]

128. They are personal property

And not just that, but they were given to the prisoners by the US.

You can judge what's humiliating however you want. Here's a good way to judge it. Take something that's important to you (your gun, kids, wife, koran or whatever). Then have the government come and destroy it in the most humiliating way possible. That's what we're talking about in Gitmo. Those prisoners have been secluded for their whole stay. Their only possession is the koran. Their captors take their only possession and flush it. You tell me what the intention is.

As far as death for the desecration of the koran, that's an Afghani issue and has nothing to do with US law or this case. Karzai doesn't want the people that did this shipped to Afghanistan, he wants them punished here.

[DoNotRefill]

130. Right...

he wants ANYONE who desecrates the Koran punished. ANYONE includes me if I shit on a copy of the Koran in my own home.

[Renew Deal]

138. No

You are muddying the argument again. That is in the context of what happened at Gitmo.

“If proven that this happened, then we will strongly ask the American government to put on trial and punish whoever is the culprit,”

What does he mean by "this happened"?

[DoNotRefill]

111. I'll tell you what I'm going to do for you...

I'm going to buy a copy of the Koran the next time I'm in town. Then I'll bring it home, and videotape myself shitting on it. Why, you ask? As an act of solidarity with people who desecrate religious books. If you like, I'll buy a bible, too.

[Renew Deal]

117. Have at it.

It's your right. :patriot:

[DoNotRefill]

122. Not according to Kerzai...

according to them, it's a capital offense.

[Renew Deal]

127. In Afghanistan

not the US. They have a right to make any laws they want.

[DoNotRefill]

132. So Kerzai is asking the US to punish people....

who desecrate the Koran in Afghanistan?

Where did you get THAT?

[Renew Deal]

139. No

He is asking the US to punish those that flushed Korans to humiliate prisoners.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

48. I agree

It's really bad Public Relations, and it's absolutely stupid, but punishable?

No way.

I'd defend them for free on this one.

[Theduckno2]

60. There is no crime to have a campfire in my backyard....

But if I take the wood, fashion it into a cross, set it ablaze, all while living next door to an African American, is that OK. I don't think so. What if the interrogaters came up with fake Korans (correct covers and blank pages)? That doesn't seem to make it any better either, for as long as Muslim prisoner believes that you are destroying the word of God, it seems to be torture. I can see taking their Koran away from them as punishment for bad behavior but not destroying them in front of the prisoner.

[LiberallyInclined]

83. if you set the cross ablaze on your own property-

as long as open fire is permissable, would not be illegal, even if you live next door to blacks...if you lit it on their property, it would definitely be illegal.

[LiberallyInclined]

10. what do you suggest that the charges be...?

for someone who tossed a book in the toilet?

[DoNotRefill]

12. I dunno...but the punishment is apparently death....

eom

[physioex]

16. That's not the issue....

You have to treat other cultures with sensitivity.....

[DoNotRefill]

20. Ah. so, because some other cultures find any law other than Sharia....

to be offensive, we need to adopt Sharia here so as not to offend them???

What unmitigated horseshit....

[physioex]

23. If you want to get your kicks burning Bibles and Korans....

Have at it. But with the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan and the torture of prisoners, this just doesn't settle well....

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[physioex]

27. If that's really your view.....

I have nothing more to say....

[DoNotRefill]

33. Which part of the First Amendment don't you understand?

eom

[physioex]

37. I am not going to argue the 1st Ammendment...

And I am no lawyer, but these people went as representatives of the US not as free citizens to express their views.

[DoNotRefill]

71. Ah. so now you're saying that the First Amendment....

becomes null and void if you work for the government? Cite, please.

[Renew Deal]

106. That's not what he's saying.

He's saying that this is not a first amendment issue. You haven't cited one single reference proving you right, though I have cited several proving you wrong on the real issue, which is the treatment of prisoners.

So what do you have besides a keyboard and spare time?

[DoNotRefill]

114. Please differentiate between flag burning and desecrating a koran.

"* The United States Supreme Court has ruled consistently that flag burning is a form of speech protected by the First Amendment. In Texas v. Johnson (1989), the Supreme Court held it unconstitutional to apply to a protester a Texas law punishing people who "desecrate" or otherwise "mistreat" the flag in a manner that the "actor knows will seriously offend one or more persons likely to observe or discover his action." The Court found that the law made flag burning a crime only when the suspect's thoughts and message in the act of burning were offensive, thus violating the First Amendment's protections of freedom of the mind and freedom of speech. The next year, in United States v. Eichman (1990), the Court reviewed a Congressional statute that attempted to be neutral as to the messages that might be conveyed, prohibiting flag burning except when attempting the "disposal of a flag when it has become worn or soiled." The Court struck down this statute as another attempt to punish offensive thoughts. "

http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeechmain.cfm?ContentStyle=3

[Renew Deal]

118. There is no difference.

Like I said. Have at it. This has to do with the treatment of prisoners, not the first amendment.

[DoNotRefill]

134. The article directly contradicts your statements.

What part of "ANYONE" don't you understand?

[Renew Deal]

140. This is in the context of what happened at guantanemo.

“If proven that this happened, then we will strongly ask the American government to put on trial and punish whoever is the culprit,”

What part of "this happened" do you not understand.

[bpilgrim]

143. do YOU not understand the nazi parallels?

whenever officers of a state are attacking ones religion their is cause for alarm.

if you don't GET this perhaps you should bone up on the holocaust not to mention our CURRENT state of affairs/policies.

peace

[DoNotRefill]

77. BTW and FYI: "Ammendment" only has two "m"s in it....

it's "Amendment".

[AtTheEndOfTheDay]

107. My aren't the pantys in a twist today.

[DoNotRefill]

135. Yeah, funny how that happens....

when somebody suggests that anybody who desecrates a Koran should go to jail or be put to death...

[SOS]

150. There is no First Amendment in Guantanamo

It is technically foreign soil. That's why they put the prisoners there in the first place.
Guantanamo was specifically chosen to avoid the Bill of Rights.
The soldiers are under UCMJ and it is strict military policy to respect the religion of the prisoners. The First Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with this.

[bpilgrim]

36. "goatherds in a third-world"

wtf r u talking bout?

peace

[physioex]

38. I agree...

That kinda stuff can get you banned for this site....

[Zhade]

57. Yeah, it's usually called "racism".

Glad the mods decided it was an unwelcome sentiment here.

[Name removed]

75. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bpilgrim]

89. afghans

maybe this post of yours will be deleted as well...

but do you think it would be fair to call all americans greedy, corrupt, war mongering tortures?

but even if you did it wouldn't be accurate.

peace

[DoNotRefill]

99. so, it's racist....

to call all americans "greedy, corrupt, war mongering tortures"???

Wow.

How about if we just called all Red-staters "greedy, corrupt, war mongering tortures"? Is that racist?

[bpilgrim]

105. it's ignorant and discriminatory

since by only DU's existence proves that to be FALSE but their are millions of Americans who aren't.

now if you are judging them based on race as well, then i guess racism fits, too.

:hi:

peace

[Renew Deal]

108. I'd call them a different civilization

No matter how uncivilized.

[LiberallyInclined]

43. So- what would the charges be?

I honestly want to know- if they "find" the person who tossed the koran thru the hoop- what should be done, and what charges should be brought?

[democracyindanger]

44. Nobody seems to be able to come up with one

I mean, you'd expect they'd have one in mind if they're going to insist that Karzai's demands be met, but...oh well.

[LiberallyInclined]

56. that's because nothing illegal was done.

no crime was committed.

[Renew Deal]

110. This argument hasn't been about meeting his demands.

It has been about the treatment of prisoners with a "freedom of speech" non-sequitur.

[democracyindanger]

170. See #3 nt

[BornLeft]

91. If the actions of this

person or person's leads to reprisals against civilians or military people, would that not be a crime? Or would it have to be premeditated? I keep thinking about yelling fire in a theater. Yelling fire is ok but when people are put at risk it is no longer free speech. You have the right to swing your fists until it hits my nose then you went over the line. If this action causes a terrorist to attack is is right?

[DoNotRefill]

97. it wouldn't be likely to cause an immediate breach of the peace...

and you CAN yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater, if it's on fire...

"If this action causes a terrorist to attack is is right?"

Do you have anti-Bush bumper stickers on your car? If a freeper chases after you and attacks you because of your bumper stickers, does that mean your right to put bumper stickers on your car is null?

[BornLeft]

164. Yes i have anti*

stickers and i have been "verbally" attacked. However i still see no intent on what the free speech was in this case. I do not think the person/s that did this had this in mind "It is my right to flush this book because i object to it" It seemed more of an intent to inflame captives. I do not see a argument here under free speech provisions.

[ljaycox]

146. No we don't...

It is nice to treat other cultures with sensitivity. It is smart to do so. It it the best thing in the world someone could.. It is not required, and it should not be.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

49. In our house,

if you toss a book in the toilet, you have to clean it up, snake it out, and then replace it.

It's good to have rules.

[countryjake]

86. How's about strip him naked, leash him, & let him crawl on all fours...

up to each prisoner he insulted, to apologize? What are the charges against the guy whose Koran he destroyed? How long has he been held down at Guantanamo? Who's his lawyer? When's the trial?

It would be interesting to hear the responses if the tables were turned, and there were some 550 Americans being held in a similar situation such as that prison camp in Cuba. A good upstanding Marine gets his Bible ripped up and flushed away...nah, no big deal!

Our own soldiers are becoming more disposable, by the day!

[AtTheEndOfTheDay]

112. Thank you, well said.

[PsychoDad]

148. I don't think punishment for the soldier...

Like Abu Ghrab, the orders most certainly came from above. Those in charge left it to a grunt to do and take the blame for later.

But we should have a review of the policy that allows for such degrading treatment of prisoners who are held outside the Geneva convention and a revision of policy on how interrogations are done, and what acceptable procedure is.

[BiggJawn]

161. Outraged or not, would it still be a CRIME?

The Mayor of Kabul is asking US authorities to apply Sharia law here. Hah! Bush's puppet is having delusions of being the actual LEADER of a country...

If I want to wipe my ass on a book then piss on it, then try to set it afire, if it's MY book, I have the right to do that in this country. It makes NO difference if it's the Koran, the Torah, the Tao Te Ching, The King James Bible, the ccollected utterances of Confuscious, or that holy of holies, The House at Pooh Corner.

That's Freedom of Speech. That's MY First Amendment RIGHT.

Guess Karzai thinks he's the leader of a Theocracy instead of a Democracy. If the US agrees to his demands, guess it won't be long until Pat Robertson and James Dobson are screaming the same thing in THIS country...

[SOS]

163. Karzai was not asking that Sharia be applied here.

He is asking that US military policy be enforced in Guantanamo while his nationals are incarcerated there.
Karzai's request has nothing to do with the First Amendment rights of American citizens.
It is your First Amendment right to do whatever you want with your books. However, destroying a Koran with the intent of causing psychological stress to prisoners is a direct violation of United States military policy.

[BiggJawn]

171. Oh, right....My mistake...

I forgot that we were talking about the Never-Neverland that is US military "intelligence"...:eyes:

I think it's ludicrous that Karzai is still deluding about his "power" in Afghanistan, though.

[Roland99]

6. Quick, someone get Unocal's PR rep on the line!

Karzai's stepped out of his bounds again.

[Solly Mack]

7. Karzai? your outrage at torture? Did I miss that?

while I understand your outrage over the Quran....

Remind me again of your outrage over torture at Gitmo?

[ECH1969]

8. We didn't see this kind of response in

the Middle East over the torture, which makes this whole thing wackey.

[kevinmc]

9. Must Have Changed His Mind.........

Karzai slams anti-US protesters

President Hamid Karzai has said those opposed to Afghanistan's close links with Washington are responsible for riots which have left 16 people dead. He said the protesters are "against the strengthening of the peace process".

BBC

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4547413.stm

[OldLeftieLawyer]

50. I guess he'll give up his cadre of US bodyguards now, huh?

And all the $$$ we poured into putting him into the "Presidency," when, in fact, he's such a pathetic figurehead/American puppet, he's hardly up there with the Mayor of Kabul.

Mouthy little puppet, ain't he?

[Gloria]

59. Anyone else see Karzai on TV, ranting about how the US is there

because they've asked them to be there....and admitting that if they go, Afghanistan will descend into what it was before...even worse than it is now.

[JerseygirlCT]

11. I want to know where his outrage was when

they stoned a woman to death last week for adultry.

After that, I might start worrying about a book.

[Disturbed]

15. Karzi the Mayor of Kabul...

A U.S. puppet trying to talk with both sides of his mouth. Yup, it was a real stupid act regarding the Koran, if indeed this is a true event. No matter if it is "just a copy of a book". It is a copy of a book revered by a few million people and another fuck up that adds to the hate of the U.S., justified or not.

[JerseygirlCT]

40. I didn't mean to suggest that I find any of what

we've done acceptable. It just seems grossly disproportionate to be outraged about treatment of the Koran, when right in your own country, truly horrifying things are happening -- ironically enough, in the name of religion.

I'm perfectly willing to accept that there were many voices raised last week, including Moslem voices, when that woman was so cruelly murdered, and we just never heard them. Perhaps that's what happened. Perhaps Karzai took his countrymen to task and it was never reported. Who knows anymore.

[physioex]

18. I don't like Karzai either....

But other Muslim nations are watching, and they don't like what they are seeing...

[Mz Pip]

28. They burn our flag

We burn their book. Call it even.

I don't think either side has particularly high moral ground to stand on here. We shouldn't be doing it but other than being told to stop doing it I can't see what a reasonable punishment would be.

There are crack pots here who burn Harry Potter books and I'm sure some kids feel like that is torture. Still, it's pretty hard to outlaw stupidity, insensitivity and crass dumb behavior.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[DoNotRefill]

30. Especially when the "stupidity, insensitivity and crass dumb behavior"...

is Constitutionally protected....

[SOS]

90. Guantanamo exists outside the US Constitution

"Cuban sovereignty over Guantanamo exists only in the abstract. Yet it is, for the U.S. government, a convenient legal fiction. In the current litigation over the fate of the hundreds of detainees held on Guantanamo, the government's position is premised on the fact that Guantanamo is technically foreign soil. Because Guantanamo is part of Cuba, argues the government, it is beyond the reach of American courts.
The key precedent underlying the Administration's position is Johnson v. Eisentrager. In that 1950 case, the Supreme Court denied a group of convicted German war criminals the right to seek federal court review of their sentences. The Court's opinion placed great emphasis on the fact that occupied Germany, where the prisoners were being held, was foreign territory.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit found that (Guantanamo prisoners) were "without legal rights that are cognizable in the courts of the United States."

There is no constitutional protection or first amendment or Geneva Convention in Guantanamo. It exists on foreign soil. Anything goes.
But let's not pretend that what happens there won't create decades of violent blowback against the US. Simple adherence to the Geneva Conventions and the US Constitution would have prevented the whole mess, but President Cheney decided otherwise.

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/mariner/20031201.html

[Zhade]

41. Eye for an eye, eh? How progressive.

I thought we were supposed to be BETTER than that. Judging by this response and some others, we're not.

[Mz Pip]

45. You're right

we're not. They have their creeps, we have ours. I don't condone it but that's the reality of it.

And I sort of doubt that there would be nearly the outrage if someone had flushed some bibles down a toilet and offended the likes of Jerry Fowlell.

My point is, you can't have it both ways. Like it or not, there is plenty of blame to go around.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[Zhade]

58. You don't condone it?

"They burn our flag We burn their book. Call it even."

Sure sounds like you condoned it to me, or I would never have replied to your post.

[Name removed]

72. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

151. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bpilgrim]

42. they haven't burned any bibles

yet... i never thought i'd live during a crusade but desecrating another's religion is a sure way to start one though.

guess the neoCONs have got exactly what they wanted.

:scared:

peace

[CJCRANE]

63. What's all this "they" business?

The American Flag is a secular national symbol, the Koran is a religious symbol with no nationality, they are not like for like.

What if some Italians burnt the American Flag, would it then be alright for a representative of the US govt. to burn the Catholic version of the Bible?

On edit: I think a billion plus Catholics might not be happy in that case. Freedom of speech is one thing, but diplomacy and international relations is a whole different ball game.

[DoNotRefill]

80. So you're saying....

that freedom of speech only goes as far as offending somebody overseas?

I hate to tell you this, but to a bunch of people overseas, believing in anything BUT the Koran is apostacy. So I guess that First Amendment right to freedom of religion doesn't really exist either....

[CJCRANE]

137. Let's go back to the beginning -

This story is about a guy locked up in Guantanamo Bay. I have no idea who this guy is, what he's done, whether he's innocent etc. None of us does and probably never will do.

So he's being interrogated and someone flushes his holy book away. I have no idea whether that's an effective form of interrogation, whether the guy deserved it, whether the interrogator thought it was part of his right to freedom of speech to humiliate people's religious beliefs for the fun of it or what.

If the interrogator is some kind of budding conceptual artist and thinks that he's making a statement about religion - great, that's his right.

But if he's acting on behalf of the American government then that's where the idea of diplomacy comes in.

[tyedyeto]

64. IMHO, fLags are very different than books...

esp ones that any reLigion considers hoLy. Any book a reLigion considers hoLy should be treated with respect by each and every person on this pLanet. Taking it away from a prisoner for punishment is one thing, but to destroy it in such a manner is outrageous.

If that happened to one of our miLitary POWs and had it been the Christian bibLe, the pubLic outrage here wouLd have been just as great.

[DoNotRefill]

73. Well, you just threw away two hundred plus years of jurisprudence...

on the First Amendment.

Tell us, are you planning on digging up Maplethorpe's corpse and putting it in jail for "Piss Christ"?

[dddem]

94. I don't think the American flag is a good comparison to use.

I think a better analogy might be if you asked a devout Catholic how they would feel having the Host flushed down a toilet.
Right or wrong, what this book represents to people of the muslim faith goes beyond what we can appreciate, and as a human, I think it deserves the proper amount of respect. Of course, those who desecrated it understand that, or they wouldn't have done it. Shame on them.

[KC21304]

39. Juan Cole has much about this on his site, but

he has one bit of as he calls it tragicomedy.

A friend of mine with Pentagon contacts tells a tragicomic story. The Pakistani government complained to the US Department of Defense about the desecration of the Koran. The Pentagon passed the protest to the Southeast Asia division. It looked into the matter in East Asia and responded that it could find no evidence that the US military had flushed a Korean down the toilet.


http://juancole.com/


That's our Pentagon. Right on the ball.

[Disturbed]

46. What sort of toilet would

that be where a book could be flushed? I thought I read that the book was placed in the toilet. Whatever...again if someone did this it was a stupid act. If it was a U.S. soldier or employee then this person should be reprimanded for stupid behavior, at the very least.

[KC21304]

53. eh.. the Pentagon thought it was a KOREAN that was

flushed down the toilet. That is why they sent it to the Southeast Asian division.

[DoNotRefill]

74. OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!!!!

After all, that's what the punishment for desecrating a Koran is, right?

[msongs]

47. ain't religion swell? xians reserve the right to flush Korans..eom

[nolabels]

61. They should also flush Gutenberg and the printing presses ..........

so we wouldn't have "I,Me,Mine" to fight over, polluting the body politic. Often of two year olds behave better than a lot of these religious whack-os when it comes to common sense test anyway.

Like if your idea was so fragile that it could be flushed down the toilet how could it have been such a good idea in the first place?

THE GUTENBERG REVOLUTION

In 1455, all Europe's printed books could have been carried on a single wagon. Today, ten billion books are printed each year, according to John Man, comprising 50 million tonnes of paper. If we add in the world's newspapers and magazines, that figure rises to 130 million tonnes, a pile more than 2,000 feet high, twice the height of the Empire State Building. All of the books published since 1455 would make 100 pyramids, each twice the size of the Great Pyramid.
(snip)
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FQP/is_4574_131/ai_83260529

[oscarmitre]

62. Muslims believe that the Qu'ran

is actually in Heaven. That it was not created but that it has always been. So descrating the Qu'ran is a serious matter for them. It's not just paper.

Whoever is running this one understands psyops.

[0007]

70. Next thing you know Karzai will be demanding more U.S. troops

for protection. He'll be gone from Afghanistan in about five months or less.

[Ian David]

78. Ahh, that's the way to win Hearts and Minds

At least now we know what to do with those Gideon Bibles in the hotel rooms.

[DoNotRefill]

79. Been there, done that....

I remember one convention I went to where some subversive types went around to a bunch of rooms collecting the gideon bibles and throwing them into the hotel pool, where a particularly raunchy party ensued. I guess we should have all been beheaded for that....

[DoNotRefill]

81. Let me ask y'all this:

suppose, just suppose, that somebody desecrated a Bible, and Pat Robertson was screaming for their head. Would you give it to him?

If your answer to that question is "no", how do you distinguish between the two cases?

[FubarFly]

92. Prisoner abuse is not covered by the first amendment.

In this instance Pat Robertson would be correct in screaming for someone's head, however, he would most likely be doing so for the wrong reasons. The fact that Pat Robertson is a hypocrite doesn't change the fact that Gitmo is already a travesty and deep embarrassment to anyone who would purport to support the principles laid out in the bill of rights. This incident is just one more in a laundry list of neocon induced atrocities.

[PsychoDad]

147. What amazes me...

Is how this act is isolated from the context it was perpetrated in. Forget a human being was being being tortured and degraded, a human like yourself who had in all likelihood been deprived of sleep and beaten...

Let's focus on a book...

It's not just you, but also the Saudi's and Afghanistanis. If only my Muslim Sisters and Brothers would feel the same indignation at having US Sponsored dictators, the same indignation at having over 100,000 dead, most of them women and children, as the result of the US invasion of two sovereign Islamic nations. The same indignation over the US capture and torture of Muslims not only abroad, but also here at home.

If only they would.

Perhaps this insult is simply the straw that broke the camel's back.. The latest humiliation and insult to Islam by Babylon the great that will be tolerated by the average people of the Islamic world, perhaps it will be the spark that will ignite Islamic indignation worldwide and in total against the crusade.

In which case, maybe this act will have the impact that free speech should.. To inflame the people to rise against tyranny and oppression.

If only.

[countryjake]

82. Detained for years, with no release in sight, uncharged and untried

Odd, how quick the Constitution is used in this post as an excuse to spew hatred against whole nations full of people with a different faith.

Gee, funny nobody seems to give a flying fig about the years that more than 600 foreigners were held prisoner under that same Constitution, with absolutely NO due process of law! It follows that those same prisoners should be subjected to cruelty and humiliating and denigrating treatment...the good ole American way, right?

Yup, it sure stands to reason that it's fine to take a man's holy book away from him, rip it up, denigrate it, and stuff it down the shitter, seeing how he's been held but not charged, isn't even sure exactly why he's in prison, is not allowed to consult any lawyer nor protest his prisoner status, and has no contact with his family or the outside world, at all. Business as usual at Guantanamo!

Hallelujah, let Freedom ring! Gotta uphold that Constitution!

[Rex_Goodheart]

84. Hey, Hamid, kiss my American ass...

It was American democracy that gave you your power, and it's American democracy that allows people to treat a book any way we damn please.

[allemand]

131. But please don't ask:

"Why do they hate us so much...?" :eyes:

[dkofos]

88. tell them to burn a bible

[not systems]

125. If Nazi guards at a concentration camp flushed a Torah to break down...

Jewish prisoners would people be defending the guards actions as a free speech issue?

I hope not.

I think that is about what the pro-Koran flushing people here are doing in type but not degree.

[bpilgrim]

144. some don't see any parallels, unfortunately...

fortunately, DU is here to REMIND them :toast:

peace

[Raiden]

152. Good analogy!!!

I agree totally.


I think that citing the soldier's freedom of speech in this context is rediculous. We're talkin' about torture here folks. Trying to defend this action by the first amendment is like trying to defend the abuses at Abu Ghraib as free speech. For one thing, in the context of this event, we're dealing with international law regarding prisoner rights, not the Constitution; so free speech is not an issue in this matter.

And to people who are defending this action, remember this when you ponder the question of why the Muslim world despises the United States so much. The reason is because we turn a collective blind eye to abuses against their religion like this. Abu Ghraib? Who cares! Flushing the Koran? So what! C'mon people... This is not just bad PR, this is yet another example of thoughtless abuses of basic human rights and the Nazi analogy fits perfectly. Prisoners have to be treated with dignity. PERIOD!

[Danieljay]

133. the point is its disrespectful

to all good Muslims and perpetuates the belief that America is out to destroy Islam (which some Americans are I have no doubt). Idiotic acts such as this do nothing but inflame those who already wish to bring harm. Terrorism is at an all time high and our government allows for or pulls stunts like this just shows the continued stupidity of this administration and its so called war on terror. Idiots and zealots...all of them.

They don't hate us for our freedom, they hate us for what we do with it.

[Catrina]

156. There were demonstrations

against the killing of Afghan civilians by US forces last week, before the demonstrations over the Koran. Several women and children had been killed, and Karzai had asked US troops to 'be more careful and to avoid the killing of women and children'. Funny how there was little coverage of those demonstartions, leading many here to ask why the people of Afghanistan don't bother kicking up a fuss over torture and the killing of Muslims. They did.

But it suits the Crusaders' purpose more to cover the perceived ignorance of Muslims in general, to cover this particalur demonstration, imo.

Regarding freedom of speech, if you desecrate a symbol of any kind without the malicious intent to hurt another person either physically or psychologically, you are free to do so.

But, if you have a Freeper in your custody, (maybe you are a prison guard) and you are aware that he would rather be beaten than to see his flag desecrated, and you know this, and then you chose, motivated by the intention to hurt him as much as possible, to take away his flag, mock it and him, and burn it in front of him, when he does not even have the option to walk away, that is not freedom of speech, imo.

Not to mention the fact that when you are in the military, you are not speaking only for yourself, you are being paid by taxpayers and are choosing to speak for all of them, (not just yourself) when you do this. I, eg, do not want to be represented by this kind of expressiion. So, I, and other Americans who do not, had OUR freedom of speech violated, imo.

Motivation is a factor when deciding whether something falls under the protection of the 1st Amendment. You are allowed to express your opinion by desecrating the flag, you are not allowed to express mine. Nor are you allowed to use that freedom of speech to torture another person, if that is your sole motive.

Iow, if someone cornered an elderly relative whom they disliked, and burned a flag in front of them, not to express disagreement with the government, but to psychologically harm that person, that would be a crime, imo.

Not to mention in this case, not realizing, whether we agree with their reaction or not, that this is the reaction that could have been expected. It was cruel and stupid, the first was intended, I'm not sure about the second.

[PsychoDad]

160. Well put.

And welcome to DU :hi:

[Name removed]

155. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[chookie]

157. They have to keep the region unstable

Funny that this topic has been handled as a "freedom of speech" matter rather than what is at stake here....

We have seen that torture/interrogation in Gitmo did not just entail physical pain, but specific types of humiliation geared to members of Islam -- the notion of purity, for example, and now, defiling their holy book.

These techniques of humiliation go beyond the simple sadism of "a few bad apples" to definitive anti-Muslimism. Which begs the question -- who is going along with this stuff? And what is their motivation? The notion that this will break people is a ridiculous deception -- what is actually true is that these tactics only harden prisoners and combatants, and create sympathy for their causes in their homelands.

Defiling the Koran as a means to break prisoners makes my mind reel. While it may have been taught as a way to break prisoners, I think it goes far beyond that -- this action is so far beyond the pale of decency that it is meant to inflame Muslims in outrage worldwide.

You see -- the people behind this WANT unrest, they WANT Muslim protest and violence -- as an excuse to widen the war throughout the Middle East and elsewhere, and perhaps even to manipulate it into a genocide, because clearly, methods like this are specifically and deliberately antiMuslim.

The fact that our government is employing those who use such techniques to insult Islam is deeply demoralizing to me as an American, not only because of the indecency involved, but these vile practices are simply going to make an extremely bad situation even worse. It is my feeling, however, that those behind this war WANT to make things worse....

[Name removed]

159. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PsychoDad]

162. Asalaam Alikum

And welcome to DU :hi:

Indeed, most of he Islamic world will see this single act as more of an affront then the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Muslims over the last 12 years due to sanctions that destroyed the middle class of Iraq and led to the suffering of millions and the massive bombing and invasion of a country that posed no threat to the "last superpower".

As for this, I think due respect should be given for each and their beliefs. I would never burn or desecrate a Bible or Baghavad gita. It is sad to see that the opinion of some is that "they" are just getting what they deserve.

I'm sure that throughout history someone has always felt that the persecuted group of the day deserved what they got.

[Name removed]

169. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[clem_c_rock]

165. The stooge begins to realize he's a stooge

the Unocal puppet will get no such apology. Most likely a shut-the-fuck up and get back to work.

[phrenzy]

166. How Is This A 'Freedom Of Speech' Issue?

Ok, mainly for 'donotrefill' and his reductio ad absurdum arugments (i.e. 'Karzai wants all americans punished for bla bla bla under Sharia law bla bla')

Now, every post you have made in this thread has ignored the PRIMARY fact and you have argued over something that is NOT of any relevance here.

Now, I want you to think carefully about this. Keep your eye on the ball.

What is being argued here is POLICY. That's right. POLICY. You know, like, if you go in to a work and call your black co-worker the 'N' word - will you start screaming if you are fired for simply exercising your 1st amendment rights?

THAT is the parallel we are talking about. These 'interrogators' are EMPLOYEES of the United States Govt. They are routinely held to different and often STRICTER standards of conduct than civilians BECAUSE they are acting as representatives of the US Govt.

Now, the official POLICY for the treatment of prisoners specifically states that:

(c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment

This is in the context of PRISONERS. Get it? The official standards regarding the TREATMENT OF PRISONERS. NOT U.S. Citizens in General.

Now, I didn't see Karzai calling for anyone getting their head removed. I do however think it is reasonable and in fact JUSTICE to dishonorably discharge the offending interrogators and anyone who had anything to do with the violation of a very important and sensitive policy.

Now, you may argue that the policy is incorrect. In which case, if you think that shitting on Bibles / Korans should be A-OK in terms of interrogation techniques - well have a following that path to its logical conclusion.