Texas Skateboarder Stops Christian Extremist From Burning The Qur’an

[Emit]

~snip~

In Amarillo, Texas, David Grisham, director of Repent Amarillo, “which aims to deter promiscuity, homosexuality and non-Christian worship practices through confrontation and prayer,” planned to burn the Islamic holy text at a public gathering. But before he could set the book ablaze, a 23 year-old skateboarder named Jacob Isom swooped in and grabbed it:

A planned Quran burning Saturday in Amarillo was thwarted by a 23-year-old carrying a skateboard and wearing a T-shirt with “I’m in Repent Amarillo No Joke” scrawled by hand on the back.

Jacob Isom, 23, grabbed David Grisham’s Quran when he became distracted while arguing with several residents at Sam Houston Park about the merits of burning the Islamic holy book. “You’re just trying to start Holy Wars,” Isom said of Grisham after he gave the book to a religious leader from the Islamic Center of Amarillo.

Local news station News Channel 10 covered the event and interviewed Isom. Isom told News Channel 10 that “he heard something about burning the Qur’an. Then I snuck up behind and told him, ‘Dude, you have no Qur’an,’ and took off.” Watch it:

~snip~

As Amarillo Citizens Against Repent Amarillo’s Facebook page shows, Isom made sure the book made it into the safe hands of a smiling local Muslim leader.

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/09/12/skateboarder-extremist-burning-quran/

Meet Skateboard Guy: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=5463030&id=210413812023&ref=fbx_album

[Posteritatis]

1. My day was made by something else earlier, but if it wasn't this would do the trick. (nt)

[frogmarch]

2. Good work,Skateboard guy!

This is a great story. Thanks for posting it. :thumbsup:

[jtuck004]

3. Great move. LOL n/t

[Pirate Smile]

4. I love this story.

Some comments from the Daily Kos diary:


- this facebook photo of skatboarder and the recovered qu'ran.





obama said, change starts with us... (10+ / 0-)
cheers for the skateboarder!

by Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse on Sun Sep 12, 2010 at 07:37:21 PM PDT




"We are the ones we've been waiting for!" (0+ / 0-)
One voice can change a room. One skateboarder can change a city. Amazing. Love that guy.

BTW, where'd he get those glasses? ;)
by marabout40 on Sun Sep 12, 2010 at 07:49:46 PM PDT



Dude, THERE'S my Country!!! n/t (8+ / 0-)
by Egalitare


Other protesters laid their hands on the grill (16+ / 0-)
that guy was trying to use to burn the Koran - check it out:

Protesters threw their hands on the grill Grisham planned to use to burn the Quran, someone took his lighter and Isom stole the Quran, leaving him with just lighter fluid.

link: http://amarillo.com/...

that's some serious nonviolent response right there.



He had no right to steal that Quran? (5+ / 0-)
I didn't go to the link (on dial-up; everything takes too long), so maybe I'm not getting the point---but do you mean Isom had no right to take the Quran from the hands of that man who wanted to burn it?

That's not stealing a Quran - that's rescuing a Quran.

by Miniaussiefan on Sun Sep 12, 2010

[The Northerner]

5. As much as I hate the fundie Islamophobic nutjobs who wanted to burn Qurans

I have to disagree with the skateboarder who prevented the fundies from exercising their free speech rights, even though Quran burning is just plain despicable.

I'm sure the ACLU would agree with me, even though they most likely despise the fundies as well for their stupid actions.

[TygrBright]

7. Skateboard Dude was also exercising his first amendment right of protest. n/t

[The Northerner]

15. He's certainly allowed to protest all he wants but he's not allowed to steal property

even if that property belongs to dim-witted fundie Quran burners.

[EFerrari]

17. Normally, you don't ask for permision to steal property.

You just deal with the consequences. YMMV

[malaise]

46. Did he steal it?? n/t

[Statistical]

27. Mind posting your address so I can come by your house and exercise my first amendment right to take

YOUR property?

Oh yeah that's right there is no first amendment right to confiscate another persons property (even if they are using or intend to use it in a manner that is foolish/destructive/wasteful/etc).

[walldude]

60. Yes you can come to my house and steal anything I plan to burn...

:)

[Orrex]

6. Duplicate thread--it's on the front page.

[blogslut]

9. It's an awesome story

A http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9121207">little repetition won't hurt :)

[JCMach1]

8. Gotta love Unitarians!!!

[Swamp Rat]

10. HAHA!!

Excellent! :D

[Jack_DeLeon]

11. So some people think theft is better than freedom of speech?

If someone wants to destroy their own personal property that is their business.

The skateboarder in this story is a thief.

[azul]

12. If a man was torturing or killing his human slaves or animal possessions for fun,

what would you do? Say that is his legal right, and play dumb, or be so outraged that you would take action? And what action would be suitable?

We are human beings with a conscience, after all, right?

[Orrex]

13. If a Freeper were to steal your copy of an Anne Coulter book to stop you from burning it

would you praise that Freeper for his courage?

what would you do? Say that is his legal right, and play dumb, or be so outraged that you would take action? And what action would be suitable?

The bottom line is that the skateboarder has no reasonable defense if he's arrested and charged with theft (assuming that the would-be burner was actually the owner of the Quran in question).

[Skip Intro]

19. A book is not an animal. Would you like to be the one to redeifine our freedoms?

[Codeine]

62. A huge chunk of DU has suddenly become terrified of the 1st Amendment.

Bizarro DU.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

37. Yes, but that's an entirely irrelevant comparison.

Harming people or animals is objectively wrong; burning the Koran is not.

[Codeine]

61. The Koran is not alive, and nobody is injured by it being burned.

That's easily the most tortured anology I've read all week, and I remind you DU is Tortured Anology Central.

[EFerrari]

16. Yeah, he is. I love that kid.

LOL

[Skip Intro]

18. Blinded by personal convictions is all I can think. Scary.

Scary that so many here would want to sacrifice their freedoms so easily. They guy on the skateboard is accurately described as a thief. That's what he is. He had no right to trample on someone else's rights. I'm amazed at the support for this here. Maybe we should have a court decide some new limits to freedom of expression. Only things we agree with will be allowed. Crazy slippery slope too many here seem willing to slide down.

[Orrex]

20. Your passionate defense of the First Amendment offends me and should be banned.

[EFerrari]

22. Doesn't the 1st Amendment assert that the government

can't restrict free speech? It doesn't say squat about skateboarders.

lol

[Orrex]

23. Did I?

And I note with your interest that your post says nothing about his deliberate theft.

[EFerrari]

24. I fully support that theft and said so up thread.

:)

[Orrex]

26. If he's convicted of theft, should he have to face the consequences?

[Douglas Carpenter]

25. if America is in danger of sliding down a slippery slope right now .. it would be the slippery slope

of anti-Muslim hysteria being pumped up by demagogues across the country and anti-Muslim hatred becoming completely mainstream producing consequences of nightmarish proportions for the country and the whole world.

I cannot compare this with burning the flag, because there simply is no danger of America being swept up into anti-American hysteria.

I cannot even compare it with KKK rallies or Nazis marching, because there simply no danger whatsoever of America at this time being swept up into pro-Nazi hysteria.

There is a real danger of anti-Muslim ethnic and religious hysteria sweeping the nation.

In the world of the Ivory Tower abstract principles it is all well and good to promote this as a free speech principle. And if their freedom of speech carried no more resonance than a Revolutionary Communist Party member burning the flag or Nazis publicly idolizing Adolph Hitler - then let the ACLU file their briefs and let liberals and progressives defend this principle.

But we live in a real world, a dangerous world and dangerous times were anti-Muslim hysteria is being whipped up and the consequences of this hysteria are dire for both the country and the whole world.

[Skip Intro]

28. So what other rights would you restrict in order not to fuel that fire or offend?

Should we create a list of words or actions that are newly illegal in an effort to enforce a certain respect toward Muslims? Where do we go after that? Where do we end up? Are we still an America that values freedom in the end?

[Douglas Carpenter]

33. an America where private individuals speak out in the strongest terms against religious and ethni...

hatred and bigotry. This was not the action of the state this was the actions of an individual.


It is simply a matter of being moral, sensible and pragmatic for private individuals to take a clear and firm stand against those who for political reasons are attempting to promote hatred and animosity against American-Muslim minority. If we were facing a danger of a reemergence of classic anti-Semitism - it would be pragmatic and sensible and moral for private individuals stand up in the strongest terms possible.

[Orrex]

30. So we can cast aside the rule of law when it's inconvenient, then?

Sounds like all we need to do is wrap our justifications in fear and sensationalism, and then we're in the clear. Heck, any other laws you'd like to suspend, while we're at it?

How about illegal search and seizure? Or maybe habeas corpus?

[Douglas Carpenter]

34. don't be ridiculous

[rbixby]

52. Sometimes you gotta take one for the team

Whether his actions were legal or a violation of the other guy's rights, you do have to admit that its kind of funny. If the preacher wants to file charges, I'm sure this guy will gladly plead guilty to them. Do his actions make him a hero? No, I don't think so, but sometimes I do feel like a little karmic vigilantism can be a good thing.

[tigereye]

47. oh come on- seriously?

:shrug:

[MadHound]

14. So, to posit the opposite scenario,

Would it be OK if somebody swooped in and snatch a flag that was about to be burned? Would that be as praiseworthy as what Mr. Isom did?

[EFerrari]

21. It's not really the same, though, is it.

Burning the Quran has become a racialized act. Burning the flag isn't.

[MadHound]

29. Really?

Since the sixties, burning the flag has been considered a radical act, one that has been associated with the left. It promotes great furor, even violence from the right when flags are burned. In fact anti-flag burning amendments have been brought up for serious consideration and numerous court cases, including before the Supremes, have been heard and fought. Hell, stopping flag burning was one of the top ten preoccupations of the right throughout the nineties and is still a hot button topic among conservatives.

I would have to say that the equivalency is there.

[rbixby]

53. I disagree

I think that protesting against a government out of control is different than protesting against a faith, which is essentially only racism. Is it a constitutionally protected right? Yes. Does that mean we need to just sit back and let it happen? Of course not.

Would you say the same thing about burning crosses being a legitimate and acceptable form of protest?

[MadHound]

55. A few points,

Protesting is protesting, be it against a government or against a religion. How is protesting against a faith racism? You are showing your own biases by assuming Islam has adherents who are of only one skin color. Islam has adherents here are of all skin colors. Furthermore, is it racism when people protest against Christianity, the Catholic Church?

Do you need to sit back and let it happen? What are you going to do to stop it? Counterprotest? That's well and good, but stepping in with some physical action, such as stealing this man's Quran, goes over the line.

As far as burning crosses goes, if you use your own cross, in the appropriate venue, I have no problem. Do I like it, no. But it is all part of free speech.

[rbixby]

63. Good points

I still cheer the guy on though.

[EFerrari]

68. I love you, MadHound, but you haven't shown that burning the flag

is the same as the racialized act of buring the Quran.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

36. No, it's exactly the same.

Both are entirely legal acts that large numbers of people find offensive.

[EFerrari]

69. So, the acts are the same in that way but they are not entirely the same.

Because when you burn a flag you are not making a statement about an ethnic group, are you?

[Lucian]

31. It's sad to see people here so focused on property.

Instead of seeing the bigger picture.

[Orrex]

32. Right--the bigger picture is the rule of law

What's really sad is how eager people are to abandon that rule.

[Lucian]

35. The book was going to be burned anyways.

I have no problem with breaking rules and the law in this situation.

And if the law was a big fucking deal, I don't see the cops all over this guy for theft.

[Orrex]

39. So we pick and choose when we do and when we do not live under the rule of law?

What a delightfully anarchic society that would be.


Bush and Cheney haven't been prosecuted, either; by your definition, that means they've done nothing wrong.



Whether or not "the book was going to be burned anyways," it was the owner's right to make that choice.

[Lucian]

43. Sometimes an anarchic society would be nice.

Sometimes.

[seabeyond]

50. isom gave the book to islamic leader. islamic leader gave to police so isom would not be arrested

for theft.

seems to me the islmaic leader walked this in the "purist" form for you.

alls well, that ends well. he took the highest road

[Donald Ian Rankin]

38. The bigger picture is that Koran-burning is becoming increasingly necessary.

It's regrettable that the only people doing it are far-right nutjobs, and it's regrettable that it will offend large numbers of people, but the right to burn the Koran is a vital one, and it looks to me very much as though America is reaching a state where the only way to defend that right is to exercise it.

[seabeyond]

58. no, really, lets practice this right with burning the bible, first. we dont need to go to the koran

you want to practice the right to offend? lets practice with the holy book that means the most to most of the nation. if it is truly about your right to ffend, chose the bible. burning the koran is TOO easy and surely you wouldnt be so cowardly as to take the easy way out.

after practicing your right to offend burning the bible, solidify that right by yelling out crude, vulgar, raunchy epithets to promote racism, sexism and homophobia. then you are truly standing up for your rights.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

64. If anyone tells me I can't burn the Origin of Species, I'll burn that too.

So far as I am aware, no-one is telling me I can't burn the Bible.

Offending Muslims is not the goal of burning the Koran, it's a regrettable side effect. The goal is to preserve the right to do so; if there were a way to preserve that right without offending people that would be preferable, but at present there isn't. No-one is telling anyone in the US they can't burn the Bible (in South Africa a judge just ruled precisely that, which I think makes Bible-burning their necessary).




As to "the easy way out", I don't know about in America, but I'm reasonably confident that here in the UK burning a Koran would be significantly more likely (or rather, less unlikely) to be met with a violent response than burning the Bible*. But even if it were safer to burn the Koran than the bible, that would be irrelevant. The point is that the Koran is the book the right to burn is being threatened, and so that's the one it's currently necessary to burn.




*Two reasons for this. a) the fraction of Muslims willing to resort to harrassement or violence in these matters, while small, is larger than the corresponding fraction of Christians (that's not just a blind prejudice; as evidence for it I cite the response to the Jyllands-Postan Mohammed cartoons), and b) the physical Koran is much more important to Muslims than the physical bible is to Christians (the Torah has a similar status in Judaism, but apart from a few superstitions involving using it to repel demons most Christians don't regard paper on which their scriptures are printed as holy in the same way that many Muslims and Jews do), and so burning a Bible is much less offensive to Christians than burning a Koran is to Muslims. If you want to achieve a similar offence to a large number of Americans, I'd recommend burning an American flag, which has the added benefit that it's a right that was recently threatened. I think that a few years ago it was probably right to burn American flags due to the threat of the flag-burning ammendment, but that that threat has probably wained to the point where it's not currently necessary.

[Jack_DeLeon]

66. In general most Christians dont threaten murder for burning bibles...

we should not cave into the demands of extremists muslims, if any American wants to burn korans, or draw mohammed or burn drawings of momhammed they should have that right and we should defend it regardless of threats of extremists.

[seabeyond]

67. there isnt a chance in hell i am going ot condone ugly behavior. the end.

not a tough one.

i am not saying out law it. so yes, they have the right. and i am gonna have my right to be on their ass

[MadHound]

41. The bigger picture is the First Amendment

We may not like the fact that people feel the need to burn burn a Quran, but it is still within their Constitutional right to do so. There are no free speech exemptions when it comes to religious books, flags, or any other object that one legally owns.

Theft, which is what Mr. Isom committed, is against the law. Worse yet, Mr. Isom stole Mr. Grisham's right to express himself. Nobody should be able to do that.

[Lucian]

42. Theft of a book that's going to be burned is not a BFD.

The cops didn't arrest the guy for it, did they? Did they give him a ticket for it?

I agree the nutjob has the right to burn whatever book he wants. I'm just saying that theft of something like that isn't a BFD. Hell, I don't think a person stealing a $1,500 tv from Walmart is a BFD either. As far as I'm concerned, I don't see anything wrong with taking things from big business store.

I'm kind of a moral nihilistic person when it comes to stuff like this.

[MadHound]

44. The big deal isn't in the fact that Mr. Isom stole a book,

The monetary amount, large or small, isn't the issue.

What is at issue is the fact that Mr. Isom stole Mr. Grisham's right to express himself. People died in order to establish and maintain that right for all of us, and we should not be condoning anybody who steals that right from another.

[Wraith20878]

45. I have to agree

While it's easy to admire him for what he did, he did just prevent a person from exercising free speech. While I disagree with the pastor trying to burn a koran, his free speech should not be impeded. The people protesting the Koran burning with signs are the people we should admire.

[tigereye]

48. yeah, but it wasn't the police stopping it, it was a skateboarder swooping by-

not really the same, eh?

[MadHound]

49. Nobody has the right to steal your right to free expression.

I could not put my hand over your mouth in the town square in order to prevent you from speaking your piece. I could not spray paint over the anti-war sign you were carrying. I could not steal the flag your were getting ready to set alight.

It is unconstitutional for a person to steal another person's right to free speech. It is that simply.

[tigereye]

57. oh, for heaven's sake- aren't you taking it a bit far? It isn't that simple and

this seems like a cop out for an argument. Would you have made the same arguments about folks trying to stop book burnings in the 30s or anyone doing anything that would endanger others?


You could argue that his act was an act of protest, or at least of youthful exuberance. If people who didn't want the flag burned tried to snatch it from me (although it is not something I would probably do), I wouldn't really be surprised, nor would I necessarily assume that they were trying to restrict my free speech rights.

I protested against anti-choice folks screaming at young women in front of abortion clinics, and I was thrilled to see them restricted to spaces far away from the clinic. I think risk to others takes the free-speech (and only that concern) argument way too far.

[MadHound]

65. Not taking it too far at all

First of all, there have been all sorts of burnings, booke, records, all things Elvis, in this country, and we have survived these free expressions of people's opinions. Do I agree with it? No, neither have most Americans in the post-war period. Articles and opinions have been written, arguments advanced and counterprotests launched. That's all well and good, it is all part of the beauty of the First Amendment. But when somebody attempts to limit another's freedom to express themselves by force or unlawful means, that infringes upon that person's right to free speech and expression.

Furthermore, given your own readiness to restrict other's free expression, it isn't much of a surprise that you aren't terribly concerned about others trying to restrict yours. If you don't value a right for yourself, you aren't going to value it in others.

And please, tell me, where was there any danger in this situation?

As far as the anti-choice example you used, there is a vast difference between burning a book and trying to prevent a woman from exercising her own lawful choice. Burning a book doesn't infringe upon anybody's actions.

[Trajan]

40. Skateboarders of the World - UNITE !

My apologies to The Smiths .... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8HNakhSp38

[seabeyond]

51. not condoning the theft, but how many laws did the blacks break, protesting for their rights?

i wonder.

[Marr]

54. Steal a flag to save it from being burned and one side cheers, the other shouts about free speech.

Steal a Koran to save it from being burned, and the roles reverse.

If it's not the government doing to the confiscating, I don't really see what this has to do with free speech rights. If you're trying to be provocative, you should expect conflict. That's just human nature.

[Bluenorthwest]

56. Dude, Where's My Koran?

Good for the skater. A private citizen using his own rights and skills. That is what happens when you want to go public with your expression, you get the responses of the public.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

59. Trying to feel indignant at thief's heinous theft.

Failing miserably.