I didn’t realize that Kenan Makiya and Paul Wolfowitz were Christians while Tariq Aziz was a Muslim.
That’s why he said “in part” and “many”.
As I pointed out earlier, there are videos of people burning Korans on the internet. There are an infinite number of Islamic insults on the internet. They reacted to something Karzai said. This happened 8000 miles away. Reverend Jones didn’t do it at a Mosque, or in front of Muslims. He is no more guilty of the murders than anybody else who has critisized the religion publicly.
If I was President Obama I’d have Karzai on the carpet with threats of pulling out. Fuck that little weasle.
The problem is that the alternative is worse.
Wrong. The culpability lies with the violent adherents of Islam. No one else.
if Jones bears some responsibility for the deaths in riots against his Koran burning, it would seem that abortionists bear the same responsibility for anti-abortion terror.
Regards,
Shodan
Oh, but of course. Whenever Afghans murder other Afghans in Afghanistan, then obviously the US courts have jurisdiction.
It wasn’t just Afghans that were murdered was it?
Threats? IMO, our continued military presence there, viewed by many as an occupation of foreigners, and the death of Afghan civilians, has a lot to do with setting the stage for these riots. I don’t understand why we’re still there.
I agree. If Muslim nations ever want to join the rest of the modern world they must understand the concept of free speech and a proportioned response. Burn the American flag, Obama and Terry Jones, in effigy if you must , but killing innocents is barbaric. Those who used this incident to incite anti-foreign sentiment threw a match on the kindling , more than Jones did.
The event was exploited. That’s not Jones fault.
I have been trying (unsuccessfully) to find some vageuly-recalled discussions here from the early days of the Iraq war about how anti-war protestors were somehow endangering American soldiers by presenting a less-than-united front. I also recall people blaming Bush’s “Bring it on!” statement for inflaming the insurgents. This is hardly the first discussion we’ve had of this kind.
The people who killed people are the ones responsible for killing people. Jones is an asshole for doing something hateful and provocative but the mob in Afghanistan and those who incited them were already looking for any excuse.
I’m sure it wasn’t. The point is that the US doesn’t automatically have jurisdiction across the planet as Qin seems to believe.
Not at all. Intent matters. Doing things necessary for daily life isn’t the same thing as going out of your way to “put the Koran on trial” and burning it when found guilty. :rolleyes:
We all know the killers and in your example the abortion bombers are doing evil acts. But going out of your way to call down the evil people is what this thread is asking about. Performing abortions is legal and necessary. The doctors who do it aren’t specifically trying to rabble-rouse.
I love to participate in these debates. 
Unfortunately I don’t know the answer to this one. :smack:
I do propose a thought experiment. Suppose a group advocating tolerance proposed to hold a parade in Jones’ town, with placards denouncing Jones’ proposed action. Jones responds that if the demonstrators stand down he won’t burn a Koran, but if he sees them marching he will.
The tolerance group parades, Jones burns the Koran, and, as expected, there is deadly violence in Afghanistan in response.
Do the tolerance demonstrators have moral responsibility for those deaths?
Is marching in favor of tolerance an asshole move? Almost certainly not (no more than providing abortions is, Shodan), so even if they have some responsibility, they can justify performing the act anyway.
Change the experiment: some jerkish protestors decide they’re going to go outside his house and set up a minaret and sing 5xdaily calls to prayer, just to piss him off. He predictably responds by burning the Koran, and predictably some murderers in Afghanistan go on a murder-spree. In this changed hypothetical, the minaret-prayer-callers are being assholes, and so their responsibility is unadulterated by any redeeming quality. It in no way lessens the guilt of the murderers or of Jones; it just adds a new group of guilty people to the equation.
By that standard, any protest that pisses off extremists is an asshole move. The on difference, in other words, between burning a Koran and burning a flag is that there are more Muslims terrorists than American terrorists.
The discussion reminds me of the one about the ground zero mosque. They didn’t have to build it there either. Was building it so close to the WTC an asshole move? Would it have been an asshole move if people were killed in anti-Muslim riots in New York City?
It seems the standard is “how civilized, or otherwise, are your opponents?” You can insult Christians freely, because they behave themselves. Insulting Islamic terrorists is different.
How responsible was the jury in the first Rodney King trial? Would the OJ Simpson jury have been responsible if whites rioted after OJ was acquitted?
Regards,
Shodan
I commend you on presenting an excellent thought experiment. A+
So… if, in reaction to P.Z. Myers’ alleged desecration of a Communion wafer, some maniacal Catholic had gone on a killing spree, would ANYBODY on the SDMB be blaming the deaths on Professor Myers?
Can we expand your hypothetical a bit?
In this situation, is there a known tiny group of Catholics that kill random people in response to wafer-disrespect?
If you know that there are a group of said people, and you have no power to stop them, I’d say that waferciding is something you’d need to weigh against the random deaths that you would cause.
Do you have a right to do it? Of course. Is it legal, probably. Would you do it if you knew you’d be getting people who had nothing to do with you killed?