New York: 23 yr old arrested on hate crime charges for throwing Koran in toilet [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

New York: 23 yr old arrested on hate crime charges for throwing Koran in toilet

zicofirol
07-30-2007, 12:47 AM
This story is unfucking believable and is bound to happen more and more with the new stupid and subjective hate crime law.

NEW YORK (AP) _ A 23-year-old man was arrested Friday on hate-crime charges after he threw a Quran in a toilet at Pace University on two separate occasions, police said.

Stanislav Shmulevich of Brooklyn was arrested on charges of criminal mischief and aggravated harassment, both hate crimes, police said. It was unclear if he was a student at the school. A message left at the Shmulevich home was not immediately returned. http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--vandalismquran0727jul27,0,6882662.story?coll=ny-region-apnewyork

He is being charged with FELONIES, not misdemeanors, I wonder if the same would of happened if he threw the mormon bible, the torah or the bible, off course not. The only thing they could charge him for is the price of the book(maybe a misdemeanor for vandalism) other than that this insane, he attacked no one, harrassed no one, but this is what you get with a subjective law.

I hope they arrest christians for burning harry potter books, that is a hate crime against the author, and burning the american flag is a "hate crime" against americans so anyone who does that should be arrested. For some reason muslims think their retarded religion is immune to criticism, we have seen how they react in the middle east to criticism, but for this to happen in the US is ridiculous.

Shahar26
07-30-2007, 01:21 AM
It's all a big misunderstanding, he was just trying to clean it.....

El Legenda
07-30-2007, 01:45 AM
It's all a big misunderstanding, he was just trying to clean it.....

:rolleyes:

ReturnWinner
07-30-2007, 01:58 AM
The Koran is something sacred,not a mere book therefore he should have respect toward it
so the arrest is well deserved

zicofirol
07-30-2007, 02:04 AM
The Koran is something sacred,not a mere book therefore he should have respect toward it
so the arrest is well deserved

sacred to who? its worthless in most people's eyes and IMO its actually a dangerous book if anyone is dumb enough to take it seriously.

El Legenda
07-30-2007, 02:09 AM
sacred to who? its worthless in most people's eyes and IMO its actually a dangerous book if anyone is dumb enough to take it seriously.

over a billion people you :retard:.
USA doesnt have a offical state religon, you can practice whatever you want, if a bible is thrown in the toilet, its same as the koran.

MCL
07-30-2007, 02:12 AM
sacred to who? its worthless in most people's eyes and IMO its actually a dangerous book if anyone is dumb enough to take it seriously.

Do you have any information as to the context of the desecration? Was it someone else's copy? Had he threatened to take the property of another individual with intent to threaten or intimidate them on the basis of their religion?

Who reported his activities? Did he do other illegal things surrounding this activity? Where was he?

The hate crime laws are made with respect to things only with respect to how those things relate to persons (as far as I know). If he legally acquired a copy of the Quran and flushed it, that's his business. (It's highly disrespectful but it's his right.)

El Legenda
07-30-2007, 02:16 AM
^ there is probably more to that story, he posted what he needed to spin it his :retard:ed way

El Legenda
07-30-2007, 02:20 AM
whole story
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--vandalismquran0727jul27,0,6882662.story

MCL
07-30-2007, 02:31 AM
whole story
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--vandalismquran0727jul27,0,6882662.story

Thank you for posting. I doubted the incident happened in isolation from other (hateful) activity.

Scotso
07-30-2007, 02:36 AM
If they were his, he should be allowed to do what he wants with them as long as it doesn't affect others. There is no law protecting books of certain types in this country, nor should they be. Once we start creating laws to keep people from offending other religions, we start down a ridiculous slope of limited speech. It's ridiculous.

If the books were not his, then I might understand this. If he stole them from a Muslim and did this, it would make sense to charge him with a hate crime, because he is certainly using the person's religion to harm them. But if they were his, the only thing he should be punished for is vandalism for putting them in a toilet.

El Legenda
07-30-2007, 03:14 AM
If they were his, he should be allowed to do what he wants with them as long as it doesn't affect others. There is no law protecting books of certain types in this country, nor should they be. Once we start creating laws to keep people from offending other religions, we start down a ridiculous slope of limited speech. It's ridiculous.

.

this is funny in so many ways, coming from you. :wavey:

MusicMyst
07-30-2007, 04:25 AM
The "artist" who put a crucifix in urine and displayed it in an art gallery was a "hero" to the same people who will throw this kid in jail for a "hate" crime.

zicofirol
07-30-2007, 07:42 AM
Thank you for posting. I doubted the incident happened in isolation from other (hateful) activity.

I forgot to add the link, anyway from the story


The incidents came amid a spate of vandalism cases with religious or racial overtones at the school. In an earlier incident on Sept. 21, the school reported another copy of the Quran was found in a library toilet, and in October someone scrawled racial slurs on a student's car at the Westchester County satellite campus and on a bathroom wall at the campus in lower Manhattan. Police did not connect Shmulevich to those incidents. so he is only accused of throwing the koran in the toilet 2 times.

Chloe le Bopper
07-30-2007, 08:11 AM
Absurd. At the same time, this guy really needs to find a more effective means of protest. Then again, he's probably gotten far more press for this than he would have had he put in the effort to do something more intelligent. A sad reflection on our media and culture, that ;)

buddyholly
07-30-2007, 03:01 PM
Given the level of spelling on MTF, I only came in here because I wanted to read about how you throw a Korean in a toilet.

gusman890
07-30-2007, 04:26 PM
jeez, if the man was white, it wouldnt be a hate crime.

the people are looking for exucses to nail people!

cmurray
07-30-2007, 04:45 PM
Hate against whom? I wasn't aware that it was a crime to "hate" a book. Its frightening what America has come to. I bought my daughter a cough suppressant this morning and had to show my DRIVER'S LICENSE in order to purchase it. WTF is going on in this country?

Sofonda Cox
07-30-2007, 04:56 PM
Hate against whom? I wasn't aware that it was a crime to "hate" a book. Its frightening what America has come to. I bought my daughter a cough suppressant this morning and had to show my DRIVER'S LICENSE in order to purchase it. WTF is going on in this country?

WTF? :lol: thats taking it to extremes :unsure: unless it was a really strong medicine?

cmurray
07-30-2007, 05:24 PM
WTF? :lol: thats taking it to extremes :unsure: unless it was a really strong medicine?

nope. Normal over the counter kids cough medicine.

Sofonda Cox
07-30-2007, 05:31 PM
nope. Normal over the counter kids cough medicine.

well things must be different in America from here in Britain, still....seems a bit odd to me, it was only a cough medicine :confused:

MusicMyst
07-30-2007, 06:01 PM
Since September 2006, you have to show an ID to buy OTC medicines with PSE (pseudoephedrine) in them because illegal labs use PSE to make meth. There are now limits on how you can buy each month to help keep the labs from acquiring PSE. Drugstores keep purchaser logs now, just as they do with narcotics like morphine and Oxycontin.

Jim Jones
07-30-2007, 07:23 PM
over a billion people you :retard:.
USA doesnt have a offical state religon, you can practice whatever you want, if a bible is thrown in the toilet, its same as the koran.

U.S. is a Christian country just as Turkey is a Muslim nation. If U.S. is not a Christian nation then nations like Turkey should not be considered as Muslim nations. Same rules should apply to everyone.

Lee
07-30-2007, 07:33 PM
Since September 2006, you have to show an ID to buy OTC medicines with PSE (pseudoephedrine) in them because illegal labs use PSE to make meth. There are now limits on how you can buy each month to help keep the labs from occuring PSE. Drugstores keep purchaser logs now, just as they do with narcotics like morphine and Oxycontin.

pseudoephedrine is the chemical for dicongestion, so not just cough medicine. e.g. allergy medication with dicongestion too.

cmurray
07-30-2007, 08:50 PM
pseudoephedrine is the chemical for dicongestion, so not just cough medicine. e.g. allergy medication with dicongestion too.

This is true, and I already knew that rule. The thing is that this was JUST a cough suppressant. No pseudoephedrine in it at all. Thus my surprise over being asked for my license.

Rafa = Fed Killa
07-30-2007, 08:56 PM
America - the land of hicks and idiots.

El Legenda
07-30-2007, 09:12 PM
America - the land of hicks and idiots.

America and Canada are on same land.

Sofonda Cox
07-30-2007, 09:58 PM
America and Canada are on same land.

don't confuse him, he has enough trouble figuring out Rafa's game plan

dkw
07-31-2007, 12:44 AM
Well if this kid had gone out bought a Koran and flushed it down the toilet in the privacy of his own home... well no harm no foul.

He did it publicly so most likely this was some type of public protest which is needed in a vibrant plural society however to 1) protect the rights of others 2) prevent escalation into violence there has to be limits.

Comparatively if someone buys a placard paints a Swastika on it and walks down the streets of a Jewish neighborhood - “technically” this person is not doing anything wrong. Yet the right thing for the community/police to do especially in a city as diverse/tense/crowded as New York city would be to come down on this person like a ton of bricks.

Mr. Shmulevich just got the New York city special – we simply can’t afford intolerance.

MusicMyst
07-31-2007, 01:07 AM
Well if this kid had gone out bought a Koran and flushed it down the toilet in the privacy of his own home... well no harm no foul.

He did it publicly so most likely this was some type of public protest which is needed in a vibrant plural society however to 1) protect the rights of others 2) prevent escalation into violence there has to be limits.

Comparatively if someone buys a placard paints a Swastika on it and walks down the streets of a Jewish neighborhood - “technically” this person is not doing anything wrong. Yet the right thing for the community/police to do especially in a city as diverse/tense/crowded as New York city would be to come down on this person like a ton of bricks.

Mr. Shmulevich just got the New York city special – we simply can’t afford intolerance.

Sorry, the First Amendment to the US Constitution protects the right of a Nazi to parade a swastika in a Jewish neighborhood. That is not a hate crime and nobody would be arrested -- it's the exercise of Free Speech. In fact, when Nazis did this in in a Jewish neighborhood in Illinois, the ACLU went to court to help them. Same thing with burning the US flag and showing Madonnas made of elephant dung and crucifixes in urine in art galleries. All protected by the First Amendment.

We'll see if the ACLU helps this kid out, but I doubt it very much. :rolleyes:

The kid will get legal help, I'm sure and no doubt he'll plead that he was making a political statement, no different than burning a flag or waving a swastika in Skokie, IL. Muslims don't deserve any more protection from the Free Speech of others than any other minority in the US, no matter how much they whine.

buddyholly
07-31-2007, 01:24 AM
It was paper, with ink on it, nothing more. I throw paper in the toilet every day, sometimes even in public toilets, if there is any.:o

Oh, as I write this, the Koran flush is next up on O'Reilly. Stay tuned.

buddyholly
07-31-2007, 01:35 AM
Surprise, surprise. O'Reilly thinks the guy should be thrown in the can, so to speak. Seems he took the book from the University.

However, to keep the FOX flag flying true to form, Michelle Malkin thinks the guy had good reason to do it and feels sorry for him!!! I like Michelle Malkin. I fantasize about her in high heel boots and a whip, punishing me.

Rafa = Fed Killa
07-31-2007, 02:41 AM
America and Canada are on same land.

Different country, different culture, different political beliefs.

zicofirol
07-31-2007, 03:19 AM
Well if this kid had gone out bought a Koran and flushed it down the toilet in the privacy of his own home... well no harm no foul.

He did it publicly so most likely this was some type of public protest which is needed in a vibrant plural society however to 1) protect the rights of others 2) prevent escalation into violence there has to be limits.

Comparatively if someone buys a placard paints a Swastika on it and walks down the streets of a Jewish neighborhood - “technically” this person is not doing anything wrong. Yet the right thing for the community/police to do especially in a city as diverse/tense/crowded as New York city would be to come down on this person like a ton of bricks.

Mr. Shmulevich just got the New York city special – we simply can’t afford intolerance.
first off your example has already happened, as the KKK and nazi youth have had public meetings in "jewish" towns, where although it infuriated the local jewish community they where protected by police.

And it seems cair is the intolerant organization here, as they cant take criticism.
And never should tolerance be put in front of rights, never.

And these so called race laws, only fuel more intolerance and more division...

zicofirol
07-31-2007, 03:25 AM
Surprise, surprise. O'Reilly thinks the guy should be thrown in the can, so to speak. Seems he took the book from the University.

However, to keep the FOX flag flying true to form, Michelle Malkin thinks the guy had good reason to do it and feels sorry for him!!! I like Michelle Malkin. I fantasize about her in high heel boots and a whip, punishing me.

O'reilly is a tools tool, really for being a "center-conservative" and supposedly being educated he constantly shows he lack any knowledge of individual rights or the constitution...

buddyholly
07-31-2007, 05:02 AM
O'reilly is a tools tool, really for being a "center-conservative" and supposedly being educated he constantly shows he lack any knowledge of individual rights or the constitution...

You should be able to give lots of examples of his ignorance then.

El Legenda
07-31-2007, 08:40 AM
Different country, different culture, different political beliefs.

nice try, you were talking about land. :wavey:

Rafa = Fed Killa
07-31-2007, 07:27 PM
nice try, you were talking about land. :wavey:

By land I meant country. Should have been more specific but I thought people would get it.

R.Federer
08-01-2007, 12:09 AM
Hate against whom? I wasn't aware that it was a crime to "hate" a book. Its frightening what America has come to. I bought my daughter a cough suppressant this morning and had to show my DRIVER'S LICENSE in order to purchase it. WTF is going on in this country?

That was in effect in NY several years ago when I lived there (although I don't remember if it was specifically for cough suppressant --- it certainly was for children's tylenol). One can use cough suppressant to get high. I guess once they figured that out, it became necessary to clamp down.... but not much they will be able to do about that I guess.

dkw
08-01-2007, 02:51 AM
first off your example has already happened, as the KKK and nazi youth have had public meetings in "jewish" towns, where although it infuriated the local jewish community they where protected by police.

And it seems cair is the intolerant organization here, as they cant take criticism.
And never should tolerance be put in front of rights, never.

And these so called race laws, only fuel more intolerance and more division...
I'm no expert but I think you have individual rights and the rights of groups. Tolerance has to do with... well with tolerating the fact that a group of individuals have rights.

So if your argument is that the right of the individual to express themselves should always trump the rights of a group... then in my horrible Swasticka example not only would it be legally okay, for a crazy individual to torment his neighbors with hateful signs, it would also me morally okay as well.

And now I may be projecting my views onto all of New York City, but I think for us New Yorkers something like this or the toilet incident is not morally okay and therefore...Sh*t who am I kidding???

This is New York City. There is way too many of us living in too small a space. And like I said, we just can't afford for a hate war to break out becasue it would shut the whole damn city down. And for what - because some dumb kid had an opinion and wanted to express it... f*ck that. Throw his ass in jail.

Winston's Human
08-01-2007, 04:24 AM
If the copy of the Koran belonged to Mr. Schmulevich, then he had the right to trash it. I do not see how this case is any different than flag burning or any other protected provocative expression of free speech.

It seems to me that the CAIR-crowd is unwilling to accept that in the USA people have a constitutional right to free expression.

R.Federer
08-01-2007, 05:39 AM
In the early 1990s I remember this big incident where a senior white woman at Harvard hung the Confederate flag draped to fall off her window ledge. It sat and flew there despite what it stood for (the woman was apparently from one of the "supremacist" groups), and despite official complaints from not just Black students and what it represented to them, but also from Black leaders in th country. Harvard declined to interfere because of fear of violating her First Amendment rights.

I do think there are many different standards applied in these contexts. As someone correctly said, there have been "works of art" of Mother Mary made out of cow dung and so on, and these have all been okayed.

The test lies in whether First Amendment rights infringe upon "incitement". If the people who charge him feel that word of a Qu'ran being dumped down the shithole would cause mayhem (maybe like the Danish cartoons did) then First Amendment is trumped. In the Mother Mary made of cow dung case, if there was sufficient "feeling" that Christians in the US would not react similarly, then it passes. The rules for deciding "incitement" are very subjective.

zicofirol
08-01-2007, 06:31 AM
I'm no expert but I think you have individual rights and the rights of groups. Tolerance has to do with... well with tolerating the fact that a group of individuals have rights.

So if your argument is that the right of the individual to express themselves should always trump the rights of a group... then in my horrible Swasticka example not only would it be legally okay, for a crazy individual to torment his neighbors with hateful signs, it would also me morally okay as well.

And now I may be projecting my views onto all of New York City, but I think for us New Yorkers something like this or the toilet incident is not morally okay and therefore...Sh*t who am I kidding???

This is New York City. There is way too many of us living in too small a space. And like I said, we just can't afford f.or a hate war to break out becasue it would shut the whole damn city down. And for what - because some dumb kid had an opinion and wanted to express it... f*ck that. Throw his ass in jail.

Your saying that whatever the government syas is legal, must also be moral. That is not the case or else such things as adultery would be considered illegal because the overwhelming majority deem this imoral. Government is not here to regulate morality, they are here to protect individuals from the initiation of force.

An individual(especially in the US) has the right to say anything as long as he is not inciting violence(calling for the killing of x person etc.), but he can offend anyone he wants or say anything he wants. It is up to the person receiving the criticism or insult to respect the other person's freedom of speech no matter how disgusting those insults might be. Remmeber Lenny bruce was put in jail for 4 or 8 years for using bad "offensive" language on stage.

Groups by themselves have no rights, or in other words essence they have the same rights as an individual, but christians, muslims, jews dont have their "own" rights, this would negate the equality of the law. The law must treat each individual the same.
Besides not being offended is not a right, first because no one is initiating violence against you, second what offends us is so subjective that it literally is a different case with each person.

As for your example that because its new york than its okay to violate rights really hold no ground. there have been many protest in new york where awful things are said done etc. Yet those protest are protected, regardless of the beliefs of the majority of new yorkers.

Muslims(or Cair in this case) believe they are somehow above the law, and that their "feelings" must be placed over the law. That is just not the case and if this person gets prosecuted it sets a precedent that any group can put their feeling above the law, just as long as they have many members.

No one is incting a race war, is a simple protest gesture cant be tolerated by a group who cant handle criticism, and they react violently then the police should act quickly to stop any violnce, and it only shows the irrationality of that group, for example the danish cartoon scandal should of opened the eyes of the world to the irrationality of the islamic majority, instead people got scared and caved in to their demands.

The test lies in whether First Amendment rights infringe upon "incitement". If the people who charge him feel that word of a Qu'ran being dumped down the shithole would cause mayhem (maybe like the Danish cartoons did) then First Amendment is trumped.
The danish cartoons where not in any sort of way an incitement of violence, they where the opinions of different cartoonist on islam or muhammed, just because muslims cant handle criticism and must use force to get their point across does not mean they where initiating violence. Muslims could of easily reacted by publishing cartoons making fun of atheism or christianity or calling for a boycott of the magazine etc. but that they resorted to violence just shows how intolerant they are and how they think their religion laws must be applied to all of society.

Chloe le Bopper
08-01-2007, 10:57 AM
nice try, you were talking about land. :wavey:

Well, if you're going to be a pedant... Canada and the US are not literally on the same land. Aside from a few border disputes here and there, our borders are pretty divisive. We do, of course, share a continent, or landmass. But that's really not the same thing as simply stating that "America and Canada are on same land". :angel:

MCL
08-01-2007, 04:25 PM
Groups by themselves have no rights, or in other words essence they have the same rights as an individual, but christians, muslims, jews dont have their "own" rights, this would negate the equality of the law. The law must treat each individual the same.


You make some decent points but I'd like to note that the US laws have never treated everyone the same. Only in the most recent decades (post 60s) has there been an attempt to put equal rights wholly on paper in the US. (For quite some time, white male landowners were the rights-holders.) Thus individuals who belonged to certain groups (i.e. Jane who is a woman) had few rights individually or as a group. Some people are still viewed as members of certain groups more than they are viewed as individuals. That's part of the origination of hate crimes laws.

Side Note
{Every state has not always upheld the rights guaranteed by the US constitution. State rights v. national power has always been a contentious issue. The civil war was as much about states' rights as anything else. Southern states wanted freedom to do many things including maintaining the practice of slavery. In fact it has been theorized/noted that President Lincoln "freed the slaves" as a punishment to the South for challenging the union's power. It was likely more politics than sentimentality. (As long as slavery ended, I could care less.)}

The US has many freedoms but the idea that everyone's individual rights are equally protected is a farce.

Don't believe the hype. :p

zicofirol
08-01-2007, 04:44 PM
You make some decent points but I'd like to note that the US laws have never treated everyone the same. Only in the most recent decades (post 60s) has there been an attempt to put equal rights wholly on paper in the US. (For quite some time, white male landowners were the rights-holders.) Thus individuals who belonged to certain groups (i.e. Jane who is a woman) had few rights individually or as a group. Some people are still viewed as members of certain groups more than they are viewed as individuals. That's part of the origination of hate crimes laws.

yes, that is why I said should, not does. Even the founding fathers where well aware of the hypocrisy of allowing slavery and having a a bill to protect all individuals, and this was a a heated debate even back then.
Also when slavery ended with teh civil war. Black freed slaves participated in elections that is why republicans where able to win elections in the south after slavery, shorty after though, many southers states started passing laws(tax laws, "illiteracy" laws etc.) to not allow blacks to vote. This should of been stopped by government back then but it took another 100 years to put an end to it.

MCL
08-01-2007, 04:58 PM
yes, that is why I said should, not does. Even the founding fathers where well aware of the hypocrisy of allowing slavery and having a a bill to protect all individuals, and this was a a heated debate even back then.
Also when slavery ended with teh civil war. Black freed slaves participated in elections that is why republicans where able to win elections in the south after slavery, shorty after though, many southers states started passing laws(tax laws, "illiteracy" laws etc.) to not allow blacks to vote. This should of been stopped by government back then but it took another 100 years to put an end to it.

I guess the decision has been made to focus on special laws instead of beefing up enforcement of the existing ones. I'll agree that this particular incident (if that is all the guy did) falls more in the realm of theft/destruction of property/vandalism/burglary than a hate crime. When I think of hate crime, I think of a case where a group of young men travelled a city and threw rocks at random people that appeared to be minorities/gay. Sometimes a good law is misapplied to satisfy political forces.

(But I should research this case more to have a better opinion. Summer's made me lazy. ;) )

dorkino
08-01-2007, 05:26 PM
Some thoughts on the topic: :)

* Hatred is not a crime. Hatred is like love , a natural feeling. Hate crime is a strange term in my opinion.
It's how can one control/uncontrol his hatred that makes it a crime.

* I hate ignorance, i hate arrogance. I hate yellow.I hate lemons cos they 're yellow. I never and 'll never dress in yellow. How far can one accept this? freaky as it is but somehow can be acceptable.

Ok; I'll burn all yellow clothes, i'll flush yellow people's clothes in the toilet. How wise 'll be my criticism of yellow color? How far can one accept this "freedom" of mine??

*Whoever did that, didn't throw the book in his own apartment toilet and people reported on him for that.

*It was done in a public place more than once. Of course, He didn't bought the book twice, read it twice and threw it twice or else he's mentally retarded. So apparently it's somekind of message, not a daily attitude.

*He did it at University? So,logically, before talking about silly punsihments (as if there 'll be any :rolleyes: ) , the guy should be made to give a debate together with muslims there who cared about the issue.

He should give the civilized community the opportunity to explain his smart views about the book he flushed in the toilet. He should give those who believe in the Quran reasons to think about his/their actions. Then it'll be his words against theirs.

*Convicted or not, The guy imo should be formally convicted of severe stupidity. He chose the most stupid way to show his protest/ criticism of any thing what so ever. He didn't claim his opinion. Didn't even care to write one damned message saying he's doing it for a specific reason.

If he's such an adult brave guy with a protesting message to spread. He should 've used his brain.
Him, having to live with such amount of stupidity 'll give him enough punishment in his life.


* Freedom is not irrational. other wise it's vulgarity.


Originally posted by [B]Zicofirol
sacred to who? its worthless in most people's eyes
Define: Most people.


and IMO its actually a dangerous book if anyone is dumb enough to take it seriously.
I am sure you 're smart enough. Btw, honestly how much have you read in that book??

Julio1974
08-01-2007, 05:53 PM
* Freedom is not irrational. other wise it's vulgarity.



"it is nevertheless often true that one man's vulgarity is another's lyric. Indeed, we think it is largely because governmental officials cannot make principled distinctions in this area that the Constitution leaves matters of taste and style so largely to the individual" (US Supreme Court, Cohen v. California, 1971).

Lillith
08-01-2007, 06:15 PM
U.S. is a Christian country just as Turkey is a Muslim nation. If U.S. is not a Christian nation then nations like Turkey should not be considered as Muslim nations. Same rules should apply to everyone.

John Adams disagreed with you-

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries." Treaty of Tripoli, 1796


I guess that Murdoch even has his hands in the Suisse media and Fox "News" watchers are everywhere.

Lillith
08-01-2007, 06:19 PM
sacred to who? its worthless in most people's eyes and IMO its actually a dangerous book if anyone is dumb enough to take it seriously.


Ironically, this could be said of every religious text in existence. It all depends on one's point of view, you know.


Though I actually agree that this charge is ludicrous. Even though there is much more to the story than you've posted, this is still an over the top response. One of the reasons I oppose hate crimes legislation is that they are used by overzealous prosecutors who push silly cases in their quest for headlines. Sadly, it is working in this case.

Lillith
08-01-2007, 06:25 PM
The "artist" who put a crucifix in urine and displayed it in an art gallery was a "hero" to the same people who will throw this kid in jail for a "hate" crime.


I know, it's so sad how poor, misunderstood Christians are so abused in this country. It isn't enough that the majority of the population self-identifies as Christian, or that the vast majority of our elected officials are Christian, or that we are are involved in a pissing contest of a war over whose god is bigger because of Bush supporters who think they can force the Second Coming. Not to mention the War On Christmas that will reappear in November. So sad.

That "artist" should have been burned at the stake.

R.Federer
08-01-2007, 06:34 PM
The danish cartoons where not in any sort of way an incitement of violence, they where the opinions of different cartoonist on islam or muhammed, just because muslims cant handle criticism and must use force to get their point across does not mean they where initiating violence. Muslims could of easily reacted by publishing cartoons making fun of atheism or christianity or calling for a boycott of the magazine etc. but that they resorted to violence just shows how intolerant they are and how they think their religion laws must be applied to all of society.

Well, incitement as I wrote in my previous post, is subjective. It is not that you say it's not incitement so it's not incitement.

Apparently the Muslims of the world felt it was crossing over the line and it DID incite violence. So I don't see how that's not incitement when it did incite large scale violence. I am not sure you understand: being an opinion does NOT preclude something from also being the basis of incitement. I don't see why one ought to exclude the other.

There is no one standard for incitement. The matter has to be viewed in the context of both the person doing the act, the group which is the subject of the act, the past history of similar acts on this group, the political/current situation, etc.

If a Neo Nazi group publishes an article in a newspaper talking about how they feel Nazi camps were a good thing and they would like to see that repeated, that too could just "the opinions of different people" like you said. But it would incite violence in all likelihood. So yes being an opinion does not preclude it from being incitement.

mtw
08-01-2007, 06:35 PM
This story is unfucking believable and is bound to happen more and more with the new stupid and subjective hate crime law.

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--vandalismquran0727jul27,0,6882662.story?coll=ny-region-apnewyork

He is being charged with FELONIES, not misdemeanors, I wonder if the same would of happened if he threw the mormon bible, the torah or the bible, off course not. The only thing they could charge him for is the price of the book(maybe a misdemeanor for vandalism) other than that this insane, he attacked no one, harrassed no one, but this is what you get with a subjective law.



This true or not true story shows how dull, simple, people ( rid of respect to values of another nations ) live in USA. It is enough to see what your journalists from CNN say, politicians and soldiers do and did with Iraq to have opinion about all nation.

Lillith
08-01-2007, 06:40 PM
This true or not true story shows how dull, simple, people ( rid of respect to values of another nations ) live in USA. It is enough to see what your journalists from CNN say, politicians and soldiers do and did with Iraq to have opinion about all nation.


Not really. I am not a "USA #1!" defender of my country by any means, but you can't make such ridiuclous generalizations about an entire country.

Otherwise I'd be inclined to think that Poland is full of hateful bigots and misogynists for your country's failure to protect reproductive rights and its treatment of homosexuals.

Lillith
08-01-2007, 06:49 PM
"it is nevertheless often true that one man's vulgarity is another's lyric. Indeed, we think it is largely because governmental officials cannot make principled distinctions in this area that the Constitution leaves matters of taste and style so largely to the individual" (US Supreme Court, Cohen v. California, 1971).


Cohen is one of my favorite SC cases. (yes, I'm a geek) In no uncertain terms, the Court made it quite clear that people in the US do not have the right to not be offended in public (sorry for the double negative). Cohen had "Fuck the War" or "Fuck the draft" written on his jacket, tho I can't remember which. Some conservative nanny types got upset, both with the criticism of the war and the language used, and Cohen was arrested.

Thankfully at that time in this country's history we had a sane high Court. I'm afraid the decision of the Court would be much different today under Roberts' leadership.

R.Federer
08-01-2007, 07:12 PM
U.S. is a Christian country just as Turkey is a Muslim nation. If U.S. is not a Christian nation then nations like Turkey should not be considered as Muslim nations. Same rules should apply to everyone.

John Adams disagreed with you-

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries." Treaty of Tripoli, 1796




I think Jim Jones's point was that if Turkey, which is a secular nation in name, but is often thought of as a Muslim nation because it has a majority of Muslims, then the US, which is also secular in name (your quotation etc), should be thought of as Christian because the majority is.

Julio1974
08-01-2007, 07:25 PM
Cohen is one of my favorite SC cases. (yes, I'm a geek) In no uncertain terms, the Court made it quite clear that people in the US do not have the right to not be offended in public (sorry for the double negative). Cohen had "Fuck the War" or "Fuck the draft" written on his jacket, tho I can't remember which. Some conservative nanny types got upset, both with the criticism of the war and the language used, and Cohen was arrested.

Thankfully at that time in this country's history we had a sane high Court. I'm afraid the decision of the Court would be much different today under Roberts' leadership.

Cohen had the "Fuck the draft" jacket. As one commentator said, if he had been wearing a "Fuck the Vietcong" jacket, COhen would not have been prosecuted. That's why the government must not try to impose civility rules in the public debate.

I also like a lot the Hustler Magazine v. Falweell decision. Part of the this case is shown in the "Larry Flynt" movie.

Lillith
08-01-2007, 07:28 PM
I think Jim Jones's point was that if Turkey, which is a secular nation in name, but is often thought of as a Muslim nation because it has a majority of Muslims, then the US, which is also secular in name (your quotation etc), should be thought of as Christian because the majority is.


Yes, I know, but I like to irritate Mr. Jones for some reason. I think it's because of all those bad rep messages I get anytime I post something contrary to the fascist point of view. :)


Seriously though, I posted that because there really are some people in this world (and on this thread) who think that the US is a quasi-theocracy founded on the Judeo-Christian church. A large segment of the US republican party also believes that, and it's quite amusing to see their heads start spinning when they are shown official US government documents like the Tripoli.


Which is also one of many reasons I'd like to live in Lauterbrunnen. You, Mr. Jones and the other Swiss on the board live in a beautiful country. :)

zicofirol
08-01-2007, 08:57 PM
* Freedom is not irrational. other wise it's vulgarity.



Define: Most people.



I am sure you 're smart enough. Btw, honestly how much have you read in that book??

Vulgarity is subjective, many people cant see a comedian who talks about sex and uses profanity, other people enjoy that.

In most people I meant most people in the US. Most people in America are not muslim and unless studying the religion find no use fo r the koran.

Many people are smart enough to not believe that muhammed was the messnger of God :rolleyes: or that he "talked" to God. I have read a few passages here and there, I find no real use for the book. And from the looks of it its so riddled with inconsistencies that you get what you want from it, that is bound to happen in a book written by the followers of some crazy guy who believed the angel Gabriel spoke to him. Tell me what possible value could I gain from such a clearly irrational book?

Apparently the Muslims of the world felt it was crossing over the line and it DID incite violence. So I don't see how that's not incitement when it did incite large scale violence. I am not sure you understand: being an opinion does NOT preclude something from also being the basis of incitement. I don't see why one ought to exclude the other.

Incitment of violence, as it has been interpreted before is a call to action, a call to commit a violent act. Not someone writing or saying something and the other person getting mad and retaliating with violence, if it where that way you couldn't say anything without inciting violence...

R.Federer
08-01-2007, 09:30 PM
Yes, I know, but I like to irritate Mr. Jones for some reason. I think it's because of all those bad rep messages I get anytime I post something contrary to the fascist point of view. :)

Aha! Okay.... Jim Jones often posts quite balanced views. But I guess I don't know about PMs (maybe I will get one after this?).

Whoa~ Lauterbrunnen. Beautiful. We have spent many Christmas holidays in a closeby area (Grindelwald) where it is also so beautiful.

dkw
08-01-2007, 09:47 PM
Your saying that whatever the government syas is legal, must also be moral.

Not what I'm saying at all... actually I’m saying the opposite.

I'm saying though something is legal it may not be "moral" and perhaps moral is not the right word. Let’s say viewed by the community as appropriate behavior.

I'm saying that in New York City while it's legal to do and say many things one also has to take into consideration the incredible diversity packed into too small a space.

I keep talking about space and unless you've gotten on a subway during rush hour you just won't be able to understand how packed in we are here.

It’s one thing to say in theory that an individual can offend which ever group he wants and if that group reacts violently then the police should crack down on them.

That’s all well and good expect you could end up with a situation where there’s millions of dollars in property damage, millions of dollars in work hours lost or businesses being shut down or worst innocent bystanders being killed.

So now weigh the rights of one individual versus business owners and employees who lose their wages and can’t feed their families, taxes going up to pay for repairs or a bigger police force, etc. etc. etc.

If you still think the rights of one individual should trump everyone else then that’s up to you.

Richard_from_Cal
08-01-2007, 10:24 PM
I of course have been in a situation where runaway executive action precipitated wholesale abuses against my apparent constitutional criminal rights.

If he were (or were not, for that matter,) a student, throwing out a copy of the Pace University Library's Koran, I would want to prosecute. Not using the most "draconian" legislation available...

However, if it were the "Men in Black," and they kept throwing out a copy of a piece of UFO or Alien literature...what would happen? Pragmatically...there are few areas in the U.S.A. where the Jewish population is more concentrated, more politically ....organized. Same no doubt, for the Black Muslim population. Muslim temples everywhere, but probably the most in Detroit, L.A., New York City...

buddyholly
08-01-2007, 10:45 PM
Slightly off-topic, but now they say that the guy who was being chased by cops in Phoenix when two news helicopters collided, may be charged for causing the deaths of the 4 people who died in the helicopter crash. Where has it all gone wrong in the US? They are completely wrapped up in petty issues and have lost sight of the big picture.
The guy in New York, if he stole the Koran from the university, is guilty of theft of a book, nothing else.
And the guy in Phoenix is guilty of fleeing police and damaging a lot of vehicles and whatever he may have done to cause the chase in the first place. The news helicopters were satisfying the publics' desire to see high speed chases live on TV. So it would make just as much sense to me to sue the American public for causing the helicopters to be in the air.
Just seems to me that there are a lot of Niphong's loose in the US, hungry for publicity.

Lee
08-01-2007, 10:50 PM
Slightly off-topic, but now they say that the guy who was being chased by cops in Phoenix when two news helicopters collided, may be charged for causing the deaths of the 4 people who died in the helicopter crash. Where has it all gone wrong in the US? They are completely wrapped up in petty issues and have lost sight of the big picture.
The guy in New York, if he stole the Koran from the university, is guilty of theft of a book, nothing else.
And the guy in Phoenix is guilty of fleeing police and damaging a lot of vehicles and whatever he may have done to cause the chase in the first place. The news helicopters were satisfying the publics' desire to see high speed chases live on TV. So it would make just as much sense to me to sue the American public for causing the helicopters to be in the air.
Just seems to me that there are a lot of Niphong's loose in the US, hungry for publicity.

Not according to the D.A. office. The lawyers probably won't believe the charge will stick. It was the police chief being a bit emotional and dramatic at the moment, IMHO.

MusicMyst
08-01-2007, 11:11 PM
The fact is that students take library books from university libraries all the time, and at most, if you get caught, you get a fine and/or charged for the cost of the book. You don't get charged with two counts of felonies, like this idiot did. What the guy did was stupid and insulting, but what's happening to him is worse. These Muslim organizations aren't helping themselves by trying to give themselves special treatment. If they want to live in America, they'll have to take their lumps under the First Amendment like every other minority group. Shar'ia doesn't apply here.

Winston's Human
08-02-2007, 03:21 AM
As Ben Franklin said:
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."

I think it is appalling to suggest that someone abandon one of the cornerstones of liberty in this country (free speech) to appease some special interest group into not acting violently.

dkw
08-02-2007, 06:06 AM
As Ben Franklin said:
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."

I think it is appalling to suggest that someone abandon one of the cornerstones of liberty in this country (free speech) to appease some special interest group into not acting violently.

I don't know how to say this any differently... free speech, liberty, freedom, etc. are all very good in theory but in a "place" like New York, group rights have to be aggressively protected so that we all feel safe.

Just to give you an example of life in New York - I work at a French bank, the people who come in to clean at night are from Eastern Europe, I go downstairs the guy who has the popular food cart on the corner - he and his night customers are Middle Eastern, the guy selling me an umbrella if its raining is African... All this and I haven't left my block. You can walk down the street and hear 5 - 10 different languages and you're not even counting the tourist.

In a city like this if the authorities don't act and make it seem like it's okay to bash Muslims, then it becomes okay to bash Jews, blacks, gays, hispanics, sikhs, Koreans, Africans, Chinese... I could go on and on.

I'm not saying this type of bashing doesn't already happen. It does. But "we" as in the communtiy of New York City via the public officials we elect - we have to show that this type of bashing is not acceptable.

Unfortunately for this young man an example is being made of him. But he was looking for attention right... so he got it!

Rafa = Fed Killa
08-02-2007, 06:10 AM
I know, it's so sad how poor, misunderstood Christians are so abused in this country. It isn't enough that the majority of the population self-identifies as Christian, or that the vast majority of our elected officials are Christian, or that we are are involved in a pissing contest of a war over whose god is bigger because of Bush supporters who think they can force the Second Coming. Not to mention the War On Christmas that will reappear in November. So sad.

That "artist" should have been burned at the stake.

:worship:

Sarcasm is the best weapon against the insane.

El Legenda
08-02-2007, 06:15 AM
The fact is that students take library books from university libraries all the time, and at most, if you get caught, you get a fine and/or charged for the cost of the book. You don't get charged with two counts of felonies, like this idiot did. What the guy did was stupid and insulting, but what's happening to him is worse. These Muslim organizations aren't helping themselves by trying to give themselves special treatment. If they want to live in America, they'll have to take their lumps under the First Amendment like every other minority group. Shar'ia doesn't apply here.

Pace U liraray is not a public library, also you cant steal books from there, most of those libraries have detectors on doors, their books are private property, so its stealing and destroying private property.

zicofirol
08-02-2007, 07:15 AM
So now weigh the rights of one individual versus business owners and employees who lose their wages and can’t feed their families, taxes going up to pay for repairs or a bigger police force, etc. etc. etc.

If you still think the rights of one individual should trump everyone else then that’s up to you.
You keep on using the example of New York as if it where the only diverse city in the world or in America, its not and New York has been diverse and packed for quite some time now and if the freedom of speech laws have been maintained with some exceptions why change now, unless youre scared of violent protest from muslims.

Second, right are rights because no one can take them away from you.

Your caving in to the feelings of one particular group who thinks their religious laws should be applied in the states. I am sure this is not the first time someone has done something like this, yet I never saw mass violent protest over a simple flag or book burn.

In a city like this if the authorities don't act and make it seem like it's okay to bash Muslims, then it becomes okay to bash Jews, blacks, gays, hispanics, sikhs, Koreans, Africans, Chinese... I could go on and on.

I'm not saying this type of bashing doesn't already happen. It does. But "we" as in the communtiy of New York City via the public officials we elect - we have to show that this type of bashing is not acceptable.

Unfortunately for this young man an example is being made of him. But he was looking for attention right... so he got it!
It is okay to bash muslims, and in a city like new york you have yearly protest that bash christians, gays, jews, republicans etc. Yet all these forms are protest are allowed and should be, and mass violent protest have not come from these protest.

And why do you say this type of bashing is not acceptable? is certianly is, that is what free speech is about, you "New Yorkers" want to show your disagreement with it then dont participate in it, simple as that. But is as you say State officials are free to violate rights at their discretion then see them take away the rest of your rights.

BTW just in practical terms the US rights based constitution has worked for 230 years, with some mishaps and contradictions but it is the longest standing constitutional republic, and for you to want to simply dismiss it for the feelings of the followers of a dark age religion is pathetic.

As for what happens if violent protest erupt over something as ridiculous as this, first it shows what irrationality and intolerance we are dealing with. And that you would think protest could erupt over this means you already have some preconcieved fear of muslims. I hadnt even thought of "protest" over this, in fact I think the majority of muslims in America would disagree with this person going to jail for desecrating the koran.

ps. we are all assuming that he used the library book but copies of the koran, bible etc. are common to be given away in colleges so maybe he got one for free and threw it in the toilet.

dorkino
08-02-2007, 10:24 AM
Originally posted by MusicMyst
What the guy did was stupid and insulting, but what's happening to him is worse. These Muslim organizations aren't helping themselves by trying to give themselves special treatment.
The article didn't mention they asked to hang him to death or to send him to bin Laden or called for any violent action whatsoever. It literally says after repetition of those incidents,they asked the University to act on cracking down these incidents for fear of impacting muslims there.

It would propably be a normal request against an unusual repetitive behaviour made in public property that's seen to be offensive for some group, stupid by others, theft and vandalism by others.

If they want to live in America, they'll have to take their lumps under the First Amendment like every other minority group

Agree.

Posted by Music Myst
Shar'ia doesn't apply here.
:) As a matter of fact ,The book that guy flushed in the toilet calls for ignoring offensive incidents that look very similar to such foolish incident he did.

Interstingly, No violent action what so ever is asked to be taken in the book against similar offensive deeds. According to muslims, Sharia is taken from the Quran.

Poor guy, he should've kept himself a copy to defend his deed , but that's again another proof of his pure free foolishness.:o Again i don't think he 'll get any kind of punishment.

In most people I meant most people in the US.
Great difference between both sentences imo.

Originally posted by Zicofirol
Many people are smart enough to not believe that muhammed was the messnger of God or that he "talked" to God.

a book written by the followers of.....

From the other point of view, Many other people are smart enough to believe Mohammed was the messenger of GOD.

Hundreds if not thousands of studies are there to say the Book (Quran) couldn't have been written by this person or his followers who lived about 14 centuries ago.

These include scientific, mathematical,astronomical, literal facts that in no way were ever known in such details at that time. Literally, The book included verses of blame ,verses that ordered to change some deeds that person Mohammed was doing. Logically, why would a person write such things in his own written book?

The surprising thing (or not) is that most of these studies were/are done by non muslims. For these people the book is far from being worthless, so the world is scarcely built on just one opinion.

Julio1974
08-02-2007, 04:02 PM
I don't know how to say this any differently... free speech, liberty, freedom, etc. are all very good in theory but in a "place" like New York, group rights have to be aggressively protected so that we all feel safe.

Just to give you an example of life in New York - I work at a French bank, the people who come in to clean at night are from Eastern Europe, I go downstairs the guy who has the popular food cart on the corner - he and his night customers are Middle Eastern, the guy selling me an umbrella if its raining is African... All this and I haven't left my block. You can walk down the street and hear 5 - 10 different languages and you're not even counting the tourist.

In a city like this if the authorities don't act and make it seem like it's okay to bash Muslims, then it becomes okay to bash Jews, blacks, gays, hispanics, sikhs, Koreans, Africans, Chinese... I could go on and on.

I'm not saying this type of bashing doesn't already happen. It does. But "we" as in the communtiy of New York City via the public officials we elect - we have to show that this type of bashing is not acceptable.

Unfortunately for this young man an example is being made of him. But he was looking for attention right... so he got it!

"In the realm of religious faith, and in that of political belief, sharp differences arise. In both fields the tenets of one man may seem the rankest error to his neighbor. To persuade others to his own point of view, the pleader, as we know, at times, resorts to exaggeration, to vilification of men who have been, or are, prominent in church or state, and even to false statement. But the people of this nation have ordained in the light of history, that, in spite of the probabilities of excesses and abuses, these liberties are in the long view, essential to enlightened opinion and right conduct on the part of the citizens of a democracy" (US Supreme Court, Cantwell v. Connecticut).

Richard_from_Cal
08-02-2007, 11:43 PM
"In the realm of religious faith, and in that of political belief, sharp differences arise. In both fields the tenets of one man may seem the rankest error to his neighbor. To persuade others to his own point of view, the pleader, as we know, at times, resorts to exaggeration, to vilification of men who have been, or are, prominent in church or state, and even to false statement. But the people of this nation have ordained in the light of history, that, in spite of the probabilities of excesses and abuses, these liberties are in the long view, essential to enlightened opinion and right conduct on the part of the citizens of a democracy" (US Supreme Court, Cantwell v. Connecticut).
Oh good.

Today, I got off, scot-free, on a walking against the red don't walk sign, in a district of downtown L.A. Didn't expect it. No fine. :)

For the Pace University Library? user/stalker/latrine-disposer-of-books, it's similarly in the hands of the courts.

buddyholly
08-03-2007, 03:15 AM
Not according to the D.A. office. The lawyers probably won't believe the charge will stick. It was the police chief being a bit emotional and dramatic at the moment, IMHO.

Then there is hope.

But just wait until the families of the victims realise that there may be money in suing the police department for initiating the chase and thus causing the deaths..

Lee
08-03-2007, 05:21 AM
Then there is hope.

But just wait until the families of the victims realise that there may be money in suing the police department for initiating the chase and thus causing the deaths..

I don't think so. So far, the families of the victims showed they have class. The other day, they interviewed one of the victims' 14 years old son and his posture, maturity, etc are better than most adults.