Woman arrested after spraying Quran-burner with fire extinguisher in Sweden
Swedish police detained a woman who sprayed an anti-Islam activist with a fire extinguisher as he staged a Quran-burning protest outside the Iranian Embassy in Stockholm.
Video of the scene showed the woman rushing up to Salwan Momika and spraying white powder towards him before she was intercepted by plainclothes police officers who led her away. Momika, who appeared stunned but unhurt on Friday, then resumed his demonstration, which had been authorised by police.
Police spokeswoman Towe Hagg said the woman, who was not identified by police, was detained on suspicion of disturbing public order and violence against a police officer.
Momika, a refugee from Iraq, has desecrated the Quran in a series of anti-Islam protests that have caused anger in many Muslim countries. Swedish police have allowed his demonstrations, citing freedom of speech while filing preliminary hate speech charges against him.
Prosecutors are investigating whether his actions are permissible under Sweden’s hate speech law, which prohibits incitement of hatred against groups or individuals based on race, religion or sexual orientation. Momika has said his protests target the religion of Islam, not Muslim people.
The Quran-burnings have sparked angry protests in Muslim countries, attacks on Swedish diplomatic missions and threats.
Sweden on Thursday raised its terrorism alert to the second-highest level, saying the country had become a priority target for armed groups.
Momika said he would continue to burn the Quran despite threats directed at him and Sweden, saying he wants to protect Sweden’s population from the messages of the Quran.
“I have freedom of speech,” Swedish news agency TT quoted him as saying.
Muslim leaders in Sweden have called on the government to find ways to stop the Quran burnings. Sweden dropped its last blasphemy laws in the 1970s and the government has said it has no intention to reintroduce them.
However, the government on Friday announced an inquiry into legal possibilities for enabling police to reject permits for demonstrations over national security concerns.
According to Justice Minister Gunnar Strommer, the inquiry will study legislation in countries such as France, Norway and the Netherlands that he said have extensive freedom of speech but “greater scope for including security in this type of assessment”
So the national terrorist threat level rose because a guy burned a fairy tale book.
Yeah I think that accurately sums up why he burnt it to begin with.
Religion shouldn't have this much power.
I agree people should have the right to burn it.
What's important I think is that burning ANYTHING that people like / consider culturally important is going to make them upset, regardless of what the contents actually are. People absolutely shouldn't get violent over that, but I don't like how some comments (not yours) on these threads are fanning the flames to the conflicts. Hoping for things to escalate just to prove a point is... a bad look.
This next bit is opinion on the burnings: I don't think the burnings are that productive and they don't get much of a meaningful dialogue. Instead they just escalate tensions, deepen divisions / resentment, and when it happens it undermines the goals of the entire thing.
That's not the point of the recent discussions, which are around if it should be legal. I guess I'm trying to say "it's legal, but the act still harms everyone involved"
related example: Burning the Canadian flag is a valid form of protest, and it's legal to do / should stay legal. However, it's usually not productive
It's productive in the sense of raising awareness. Everytime someone burns a book or a flag it sends a clear message and the outrage is usually part of the message.
The message is "I don't care about your culture, your culture does not define me and I refuse to adhere to it" which is perfectly understandable when said culture is trying to force change in areas where people don't want that change.
That's the idea behind it, but it causes more harm to that cause than whatever the gains from it are. Other forms of protest/raising awareness are more effective in the long run.
While I don't know much about the specifics of "culture is trying to force change in areas where people don't want that change", my gut says that the vast majority of people already oppose those changes. An inflammatory 'burning' protest isn't helping much.
Another example that comes to mind are the different types of climate protests. A lot of the public already supports positive changes. So when certain climate groups block roads or access to hospitals, while it's a loud and clear message, it might hurt the cause more than it helps.
What if the goal of the entire thing is escalating tensions? Threats by Islamists lead to fear in the population lead to rising far-right sentiment in the population. This is a very effective method to get people to support your side (if your side is far-right).
Bro, I’ve seen whole ass streets stop to beat someone up for burning an American flag, only stopping because someone intervened. Overreaction to perceived disrespect isn’t exclusively a Muslim thing.
You're acting like American rednecks are totally different than Muslim rednecks in other ways.
thesamepicture.jpg
The Republican Party would like a word with you.
They should go back to the middle east where they do follow that insane religion
With all due to respect, if your family was massacred by religious zealots you'd kind of hate that religion too. You can't blame some people for not liking a religion that subjected them to cruelty, it's victim blaming.
Just look at Iran if you want a great example of a Theocratic State formed by religious zealots. No one wants that. Which is why so many flee places like that to begin with and go to the west
This is simply religious nutjobs not getting their way and then using violence and intimidating to get what they want
Makes me want to burn one too. Fun for the whole family.
Ugh, they made more than one copy you bozos. You're not going to save Sweden from the Qaran, there's like a million copies.
Fuckin Gutenberg bruh.
I don't really get the "I'm burning it for your own good" defence.
Burning any book doesn't help anything. Reading the Quran doesn't immediately convert you to Islam and alluding to that makes it seem even more powerful than it is.
All historical "dangerous books" should be read with some context and discussion.
It outs the other parties willingness and intent to bend others to their beliefs with force.
I don't think the other party are really trying to convince the quran burner they are wrong though, they just want them to stop defiling their most sacred object.
It's just senseless on both sides to me.
Right, but sacred to you doesn't mean sacred to me, which is something they have to accept in a modern globalized society, and the whole point of the burnings.
In a modern globalised society, shouldn't we be tolerating when other people find something sacred, rather than burning it because we don't?
I get that he has beef with Islam because we can see his backstory, but I question the motives of anyone who jumps on the book burning bandwagon.
Shouldn't they tolerate my burning the book if I consider religion one of the roots of evil in the world?
Why should tolerance be one sided?
In other thread, some Swedes said this whole mess was a Russian ploy to get Turkey against Sweden. But who knows anymore...
please don't let this be a loss for Sweden
I mean it sounds like they consider Holy book burning a chargeable hate crime… so it already kinda is.
They should investigate, sure. However, the true test is in the court's. A ruling supporting that Momika's demonstration is in protest and does not preditorally target a religious group would be of benefit to future activists.
How would burning a holy book not be a direct condemnation on a practically specific religion? My issue is with the country that charged the victim for making a statement. Then again i am american and for all the problems we have over here, you face no charges for demonstration against a religion by burning their holy book. They have it coming.
It is because of the potential threat. Burning a cross in the yard if a black man in the southern US is an example. I suspect burning a Torah outside of a synagogue (or even the Israeli embassy) in Germany might be touchy as well. Context matters.
That’s because burning a cross on the lawn of a black man is not a protest. Its a direct threat that the klu klux clan has targeted this black man for murder. And usually it gets plead down to harassment, which itself is not taken as seriously as it should.
Religion? They Do not deserve such protection that it can’t be demonstrated against. I think less of a country that by law sensors a persons right to demonstrate against monolithic institutions
Burning Torahs in front of Synagogues is not illegal per se in Germany. But:
...the test is whether, taking the whole of public perception into account, your burning was an expression of revilement. As such you have to be careful and keep your mouth shut why you're doing it, including social media posts which might clarify your motive. Oh and state and municipal laws regarding open fires apply if they can't find anything else they'll dock you for improper waste disposal, crimes against the environment and public health, suchlike.
Was in principle introduced back in the days after the 30year war so that Lutherans and Catholics would stop calling each other idolaters and stuff. "Ideology" is a bad translation, Weltanschauung is stuff like Humanism or Stoicism or similar kinds of philosophies.
Fun side note: It's perfectly legal to call the Catholic Church a child fucker cult. It may be a pointed statement but it's a statement of fact with undisputable core of truth which enjoys strict constitutional protection, and it's not suited to disturb the public peace either the Church did that all by itself by being, well, a child fucker cult. "Keep our sins hidden so people aren't angry" isn't what's meant by "disturbing the public peace", no matter how much they'd like it to be that way.
Yea thus law makes me think less of Germany, i kinda get it as a protection for minority religions due to the Holocaust. But i am against the censoring of non violent protest. No religion is above direct and harsh rebuke
And the law isn't outlawing that. Also the whole thing includes Atheism in case you're wondering, calling non-believers amoral daemon satanspawn doesn't fly in Germany.
What?
The man’s been allowed to continue multiple times now and with police protection.
What reality do you live in, because it’s clearly not this one where the complete opposite is being allowed to happen.
The article states that the person who was attacked is also getting charged for hate crimes for burning a holy book. You should be allowed to demonstrate in such ways. No religion is above such rebuke
Repeat after me... My rights end where other people's rights begin.
Burning a piece of property that you own doesn't violate any laws that I can think of. Religious fruitcakes love book burning normally.
I remember reading an article about Muslims protesting LGBTQ inclusion in Canadian schools. I hope these people were just as mad otherwise I don't care. Hell I wouldn't care if someone burned a bible so this isn't really different.
Not an impartial article at all. It's only "Desecration" to those who believe in this nonsense, if I were to burn a Lord of the Rings copy, would that also be desecration, because that is not more fictional than anything ever stated in any religion. Al Jazeera is famously funded by Qatar and was used as an instrument for the destabilisation of the Arabic world in the 2000s and 2010s in Qatari interests.
I think the best way to handle this really is to just deny police presence based on the risks involved. Naturally anyone harming the person burning the Quran should still be charged but I have a feeling noone wants to burn it if they have to face the angry mob without a hefty police detail protecting them.
Nah, the best way to handle it is the arrest the violent criminals in the crown who’d dare assault a person.
I think it's quite extreme to compare razzing someone with a fire extinguisher to violent crime.
Okay, go shoot yourself in the face with an extinguisher and breath in all those non-hazardous chemicals.
Ehhh, letting a protest devolve into chaos and violence will only cause more protests/chaos/violence afterwards