6 Men Arrested In Suspected Quran Burning In UK

LONDON — British police say they have arrested six men on suspicion of stirring racial hatred after they posted a video on the Internet in which they appear to burn two Qurans on Sept. 11.

Northumbria police say the men posted bail and were released. They will face further court hearings for their actions in the town of Gateshead in northern England, police said in a statement.

The arrests were made public Thursday. Police say two men were arrested Sept. 15 and four on Sept. 22. Police would not say how much bail was required.

The arrests follow a controversy that started when a Florida pastor said he would burn a Quran on the anniversary of the Sept. 11 terror attacks.

Gateshead officials said Thursday that the behavior does not reflect community values.

Comments

[at1980]

03:43 AM on 09/27/2010

So what the UK police are saying here is that I have to treat some of MY books in a certain way, but not others, because some people think they have a super-natural relationship with a book that I possess?

Is that sane?

[NYC-CatLover]

10:32 AM on 09/26/2010

Ugh, it's a crime in the UK to burn the Koran? I know I complain a lot about the state of things in the US, but when I read things like this I'm glad to be American. At least our government values our constitutional rights and the concept of free speech, and it's not a crime to burn a Koran (or Harry Potter, or a Harlequin Romance, or anything else) in this country. And I hope it stays that way, as some politicians seem to walk to take away all of our freedoms and send us down this same road.

[Gus314159]

05:15 PM on 09/25/2010

Here’s a legitimately silly question. Let’s say I have a copy of the Quran on my hard drive, but I’m running out of memory so I film myself dragging the Quran to the trash to delete it and then post it on YouTube. Will Angry jack-booted, Muslims crash through my door, kidnap me and then force me to watch hours of “Dancing with The Mullahs” as punishment ?

[julian101]

11:01 AM on 09/25/2010

I'd really actually like to see this paradox addressed:

Here is something interesting:
"Expressions of hatred toward someone on account of that person's colour, race, nationality (including citizenship), ethnic or national origin, religion, or sexual orientation is forbidden."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speec­h_laws_in_­the_United­_Kingdom

Both Christianity and Islam have expressions of hatred toward someone on account of that person's religion or sexual orientation written into their texts.

So, what is the logical conclusion? Should their religious texts be banned?
Its like some kind of fun paradox in the law, no?

[greatness891]

12:30 AM on 09/25/2010

http://www.tfn.org/site/PageServer?pagename=issues_sboe_islam_resolution

[redmaple]

01:17 PM on 09/24/2010

Deport all muslims from the west. Go back home if you can't adapt.

[libertasdon]

02:24 PM on 09/24/2010

Red, I would have agreed with you as recently as a year ago. But since then, I have learned that some Muslims believe they have a perfect right to be here and they surely do not need to adapt. It is you and I who will do the adapting. "Here," ( America, the West --wherever Islamic law is not the law of the land) is known to some Muslims as dar al-harb -- the House of War, or Land of War; war meaning a state of tension or instability that exists in a country where Islam is not protected as the predominant religion with sharia as the established law of the land. It is the duty of every Muslim living in dar al-harb to change it to dar al-Islam (bringing peace to the land). Muslims will accomplish this conversion either by peacefully converting non-Muslims through proselytizing (dawa); or by persuading non-Muslims to relinquish all religious and political power, and accept a second-class status (dhimmitude). In some countries, dhimmis are required to pay the dhimmi tax. Lastly, ready for this? -- they will just make war (jihad) on you until you become a dhimmi or you are dead. Those who believe this will never happen need to look at Europe. Read Mark Steyn, Oriana Fallaci, Wafa Sultan, Nonie Darwish, or Robert Spencer. Ask yourself, why is the Obama administration, just like Bush's, so desperately looking to find and support "moderate" Muslims?

[Staxx]

03:31 PM on 09/24/2010

Wow! Are you sure you are not from the 16th century? Or is it the 15th? Anyway, welcome.

[AmigaMan]

04:05 PM on 09/24/2010

Don't forget that in the end times Muslims will kill all Jews without question. Christians will be given the opportunity to convert to Islam. If they refuse they will meet the same fate as the Jew - beheading.

More love from The Religion Of Peace™.

[greatness891]

12:20 AM on 09/25/2010

I would like to bring attention to what happend today in texas


Attacking Religious Freedom: The Anti-Islam Resolution

Just months after recklessly politicizing new social studies curriculum standards, the Texas State Board of Education wasted no time manufacturing another political controversy. At the September 24 meeting, the board narrowly approved a resolution condemning alleged “pro-Islamic/anti-Christian bias” in social studies textbooks. Opposition to this resolution was bipartisan. Three Democrats (Rick Agosto, Lawrence Allen, Mavis Knight) and three Republicans (Bob Craig, Pat Hardy, Geraldine “Tincy” Miller) voted to reject the resolution. But the board’s far-right members voted, as they almost always do, as a bloc to pass it. With two Democrats absent, the board approved the resolution 7-6.
http://www.tfn.org/site/PageServer?pagename=issues_sbo­e_islam_re­solution

[jam2715]

01:08 PM on 10/20/2010

its Texas, if you expect common sense you will always be disappointed

[studana51]

11:44 AM on 09/24/2010

The UK seems to be in a hurry to be become a province of Pakistan.
Birmingham and Manchester are pretty much Taliban controlled.
Good luck with what's left of your "Empire".

[Frank Bourne]

12:45 PM on 09/24/2010

New Pakistan.

[MiraMcB]

04:17 PM on 09/24/2010

They're realizing it. Have a lot of family and friends there. Visit often. It's become a real mess and not just the U.K. France, the Netherlands, Spain, Germany, Italy, etc. Some very serious issues now.

[Occam123]

11:14 AM on 09/24/2010

If it were a Bible, Torah or Tao Te Ching  he'd get off with a warning.
But the  Koran holds a special  in the little coward.ly hearts of Euro  multi-cultis.

[Oblongato]

05:52 PM on 09/24/2010

Why should there be a warning for "committing an act of free expression"? That any symbol should be granted protected legal status is deeply worrying.

[greatness891]

12:32 AM on 09/25/2010

http://www.tfn.org/site/PageServer?pagename=issues_sboe_islam_resolution

[libertasdon]

10:49 AM on 09/24/2010

"So's a nation having a coronary over the merest glimpse of Janet Jacksons nipple, so's DADT.
American's are in NO position to lecture anyone else about freedom of speech and expression."
-- deluk

The incident with Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" and a transistional compromise over military with same sex sexual orientation hardly defines America's capacity to protect freedom of speech and expression. More particularly, this comment section deals with persons arrested in England for allegedly publishing a video of a book burning. I suggest that you save your thoughts about nudity and sexual orientation for a news report more closely related to such topics. This one is about persons arrested for burning a holy book and publishing a video of it? Do you have any ideas how to deal with that?

[libertasdon]

02:47 PM on 09/24/2010

transistional? I meant transitional -- as in interim, temporary, or before we get a permanent fix.

[NYC-CatLover]

10:33 AM on 09/26/2010

Nobody got arrested over Janet Jackson's boobs, that's the difference. It wasn't a crime against the state.

[Disdain]

10:04 AM on 09/24/2010

I'm sure they were as quick to arrest every single one of the protesters that carried these signs.
http://msgboard.snopes.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=60;t=001291;p=1
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4682262.stm

[Occam123]

11:35 AM on 09/24/2010

Of course no arrest for these  so-called people, afflicted with Offended M-lim Syndrome ( OMS).
These lovers of  democracy  were  simply exercising their  free speech.

[Amadahy]

11:42 AM on 09/24/2010

Wow.

[slogward]

09:49 AM on 09/24/2010

I need someone to explain to me why burning a RELIGIOUS tract represents an incitement to RACIAL hatred.
The UK's police force diddles around with this kind of tiny minority pc nonsense, but let's petty criminals run riot. It beggars belief.

Islamist maniacs burn American and British flags on a daily basis, stone those who convert to Christianity, and spit on democracy in every single rigged election they hold.
http://nbyslog.blogspot.com/2010/09/islamic-voting-for-dummies.html

[UKVisitor]

10:33 AM on 09/24/2010

If that's a genuine question it's because practically all the Muslims in this country come from Pakistan and Bangladesh (OK there are Somalis & Kurds too, but you get my point)

[Oblongato]

05:56 PM on 09/24/2010

And yet religion is not genetic. Slogward's point is perfectly valid, even if there are non-rational reasons for the association.

[MolliBlum]

11:31 AM on 09/24/2010

It's not about "tiny minority pc nonsense" -- it's about ensuring that people from many different backgrounds and cultures can live normal everyday lives without having to put up with abuse from others. Just because some people in other countries behave differently doesn't mean we have to adopt or condone the same antics.

[libertasdon]

01:04 PM on 09/24/2010

Molli, I think you overextend your argument and miss the point regarding those who criticize some Muslims for their rejection of the West, its religions and culture. Burning a holy book and putting it online interferes with no one who does not watch the video. Expressing contempt does not rise to abuse until it inteferes with a person's right to privacy or one's freedom to pursue lawful activity. If I could rephrase your last statement, the way some British Muslim activists might say it, it would read, "Just because Muslims have immigrated to England, which just so happens to have its own jurisprudence, and its own highly refined freedom of expression, doesn't mean that we Muslims have to adopt or condone the same antics.

[yankees]

09:42 AM on 09/24/2010

Fahrenheit 451-Book by Bradbury, Movie was good too.
Book burning is subjective to the people in control. Whether it be the Koran, the Bible or any other religious writings.
Most of you won't remember the burning of Beatles Records for Lennon's comments on Jesus.

[slogward]

09:50 AM on 09/24/2010

I do. I was travelling in the deep South at the time, with long hair and an English accent. It wasn't much fun....but then religious fanatics never are.

http://nbyslog.blogspot.com/2010/09/islamic-voting-for-dummies.html

[fishnetdiver]

10:19 AM on 09/24/2010

was in high school for the PMRC sponsored burnings of John Denver and Frank Zappa albums. stood and cried as our local churches sponsored a bonfire on our city square.

[MolliBlum]

10:42 AM on 09/24/2010

They did WHAT?

[Oblongato]

05:59 PM on 09/24/2010

On the other hand, it was always comforting to think that I had the same right to burn the symbols of symbol-burners. I am not so sure I have that right today...

[Gary Dillingham]

09:24 AM on 09/24/2010

The reason for this sort of government action is because the action will cause the Muslims to be radicalized and become terrorists....no one is worried about a person in a Christian nation becoming radicalized and having violent pretests and committing acts of terrorism against the government. They aren't afraid of US...they are afraid of Muslims. The governments of the world will ALWAYS take the path of least resistance and silence those who are the easiest to silence. When we become hard to silence we gain REAL power.

[kikaidaboy]

09:35 AM on 09/24/2010

Careful, your hegemony is showing.

[libertasdon]

11:44 AM on 09/24/2010

Best answer as to why the Brits would hustle off to the hoosegow a half-dozen of their young ones for posting online a video of a burning book. A lot of lawyer types would agree, but then say that is why they exist -- to fight that kind of government overreach. The West has walked away from freedom of speech in recent years in its adoption of hate speech laws that can be abused by folks who have an ulterior purpose. For example certain Muslim nations (ok -- most Muslim nations) are working hard at the UN to get a resolution condemning the defamation of religion. They would like to put a muzzle on criticism about their sharia law-driven dhimmi status for non-Muslims; expressions of outrage in the West for punitive amputations for theft, death by stoning (only for women) for adultery, and whiplashings and imprisonment for holding hands in public if the perps are not married. Here is a link to a wonderful reply from a Muslim female reporter from Canada to the Pakistani ambassador to the UN who did not appreciate freedom of expression in the US. I hope you like it. Just give me a Muslim female reporter from Canada any ol' time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-e69vAW0wBg&feature=player_embedded

[MiraMcB]

04:36 PM on 09/24/2010

Excellent commentary by Ms. Raza! Thanks for the link.

[westakhen]

09:22 AM on 09/24/2010

the usually sensible english have gone mad...

everyone should be free to burn whatever they want

and those who will turn out and demonstrate in anger against that should also be free to do so

[deluk]

09:56 AM on 09/24/2010

People are free to burn whatever they want,the burnings not the issue.

[MARYHOBE]

09:18 AM on 09/24/2010

I hate "hate" and am intolerant of intolerance, but the Hate laws in force in UK, Canada and a few more are a big problem for me. These laws have actually been used rarely, and only some of the most egregious characters have been accused under the statutes. Many judges have a hard time forgetting the basic rules of free speech the statutes constrain and prosecutors (crown attorneys) know this. Still, I would think that rights of free speech should be as close to absolute as possible, with the constraint not exceeding the limits held in common law precedents. And modern technology affords us the power to confront and hold accountable those who advocate hate of any kind. So, in conclusion I would think that we should revisit these laws and try to find a solution that is more in keeping with our traditions. Oh, btw, Noam Chomsky has written a great deal on this subject and has interesting views on the matter.