What's new

Sweden: Request filed to burn Torah, Bible outside Israeli embassy

It`ll be very interesting indeed to see how the swedes will handle this one.... :sarcastic:

https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/international/europe/1688564148-sweden-request-filed-to-burn-torah-bible-outside-israeli-embassy


Sweden: Request filed to burn Torah, Bible outside Israeli embassy

The request follows the burning on a Quran outside a mosque in Stockholm, sparking backlash across the Muslim world
8291d7be19bf1f17dafec362d42c9d74.jpg

Police in Stockholm received a request on Wednesday to burn a Torah scroll and the Bible in front of the Israeli embassy, following the burning of a Quran outside a mosque in the Swedish capital that prompted harsh condemnation across the Muslim world.
Authorities told Sweden’s national public broadcaster SVT that behind the request to burn the Jewish and Christian holy books on July 15 was a man in his 30s, who said it would be in response to the Quran burning last week and meant “as a symbolic statement for freedom of expression.”
“I am shocked and horrified by the prospect of the burning of more books in Sweden, be it the Quran, the Torah, or any other holy book,” Israel’s Ambassador to Sweden, Ziv Nebo Coleman, tweeted.
“This is clearly an act of hatred that must be stopped.”
Another request to burn a Quran “as soon as possible” in Stockholm was submitted by a woman in her 50s. Police do not immediately rule out either request, saying any application is reviewed on an individual basis.
 
That is all stated in the Congress authorization to the President.
That lists a number of reasons which are each good reasons to terminate the cease-fire. You have to show that each such reason is invalid.

An example is the continuous violations of the ceasefire agreement by attacks on coalition troops.
You seriously have a comprehension problem... UN never found WMD... Enuff said.
 
You seriously have a comprehension problem... UN never found WMD... Enuff said.
But it’s a fact Iraq used them in the past, during mass murders of Kurds in Halabja, and against Iranian troops during the war between Iran/Iraq.

It was a bad excuse to use for a war against Iraq by the Americans, but Saddam wasn’t exactly a friendly guy.
 
But it’s a fact Iraq used them in the past, during mass murders of Kurds in Halabja, and against Iranian troops during the war between Iran/Iraq.

It was a bad excuse to use for a war against Iraq by the Americans, but Saddam wasn’t exactly a friendly guy.

What Saddy does at home is irrelevant there are plenty who have done worse you expect US to invade those countries too..... You made a valid point above in bold.
 
Why do you Swedes and Danes love to burn the holy Quran?
He is in hiding & now government questioning why a militia man who murdered 100s of Iraqis received citizenship

Sweden media throws off mask of Islamophobic provocateur Salwan Momika that desecrated Quran in Stockholm​

Sweden's state-run broadcaster SVT has recently brought attention to the individuals involved in the attacks on the Holy Quran, prominently featuring images of Salwan Momika from Iraq. This incident adds to the series of provocative attacks against the Quran in Sweden, with Salwan Momika and his friend Salwan Najem being highlighted once more.

  • Islamophobia
  • Agencies and A News
  • Published Date: 03:01 | 01 August 2023
  • Modified Date: 03:04 | 01 August 2023
Sweden's state-run broadcaster SVT recently focused on the individuals responsible for the attacks on the Holy Quran and prominently featured images of Salwan Momika in Iraq. This marks another addition to the ongoing provocative attacks against the Quran in Sweden, with Salwan Momika and his friend Salwan Najem at the forefront once again.
Although the Swedish government acknowledges that these disturbing attacks, which they defend as 'freedom of expression,' have started to create security concerns in the country, concrete actions have not been taken yet.
In the news report, it was highlighted that the Quran-burning incidents have led to a diplomatic crisis and a deteriorating security situation in Sweden. The report featured images of provocateur Momika holding a gun and addressing a militia group.
According to SVT, Salwan Momika is a 37-year-old Iraqi immigrant who arrived in Sweden in 2018 and received a three-year residence permit in April 2021. Following the first Quran-burning incident,the immigration office filed a lawsuit to revoke Momika's residence permit due to new information obtained. Videos and photographs from Momika's time in Iraq revealed his involvement in leading militia groups.
Momika, however, denied the allegations against him, claiming that he was a political party leader, not a militia leader. He stated that there was a reward on his head, and he constantly faced death threats, making it the responsibility of the Swedish police to ensure his safety.
Salwan Najem, the 48-year-old individual who accompanied Momika in the recent attack, immigrated to Sweden from Iraq in 1998 and became a Swedish citizen in June 2005. Both individuals are currently under investigation on suspicion of inciting violence against an ethnic group.
Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson expressed that the country is facing its most serious security challenge since World War II. Meanwhile, Swedish Foreign Minister Tobias Billström sent a letter to the foreign ministers of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), addressing the Quran-burning incidents in Denmark and Sweden. He stated that the legal process is ongoing and subject to continued evaluation.
 
You seriously have a comprehension problem... UN never found WMD... Enuff said.
The important thing is that if you give 10 reasons for war, and one is invalid, you still have nine reasons for war left.
You only need one valid reason for war.
Since the US did not start a new war, and merely terminated the ceasefire agreement, they did not even need a single reason for war.

That is the legal background for those that prefer not sticking their head in the ground like an ostrich.

What Saddy does at home is irrelevant there are plenty who have done worse you expect US to invade those countries too..... You made a valid point above in bold.
How many countries have tried to assassinate a former US President?
 
Last edited:
He is in hiding & now government questioning why a militia man who murdered 100s of Iraqis received citizenship

Sweden media throws off mask of Islamophobic provocateur Salwan Momika that desecrated Quran in Stockholm​

Sweden's state-run broadcaster SVT has recently brought attention to the individuals involved in the attacks on the Holy Quran, prominently featuring images of Salwan Momika from Iraq. This incident adds to the series of provocative attacks against the Quran in Sweden, with Salwan Momika and his friend Salwan Najem being highlighted once more.

  • Islamophobia
  • Agencies and A News
  • Published Date: 03:01 | 01 August 2023
  • Modified Date: 03:04 | 01 August 2023
Sweden's state-run broadcaster SVT recently focused on the individuals responsible for the attacks on the Holy Quran and prominently featured images of Salwan Momika in Iraq. This marks another addition to the ongoing provocative attacks against the Quran in Sweden, with Salwan Momika and his friend Salwan Najem at the forefront once again.
Although the Swedish government acknowledges that these disturbing attacks, which they defend as 'freedom of expression,' have started to create security concerns in the country, concrete actions have not been taken yet.
In the news report, it was highlighted that the Quran-burning incidents have led to a diplomatic crisis and a deteriorating security situation in Sweden. The report featured images of provocateur Momika holding a gun and addressing a militia group.
According to SVT, Salwan Momika is a 37-year-old Iraqi immigrant who arrived in Sweden in 2018 and received a three-year residence permit in April 2021. Following the first Quran-burning incident,the immigration office filed a lawsuit to revoke Momika's residence permit due to new information obtained. Videos and photographs from Momika's time in Iraq revealed his involvement in leading militia groups.
Momika, however, denied the allegations against him, claiming that he was a political party leader, not a militia leader. He stated that there was a reward on his head, and he constantly faced death threats, making it the responsibility of the Swedish police to ensure his safety.
Salwan Najem, the 48-year-old individual who accompanied Momika in the recent attack, immigrated to Sweden from Iraq in 1998 and became a Swedish citizen in June 2005. Both individuals are currently under investigation on suspicion of inciting violence against an ethnic group.
Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson expressed that the country is facing its most serious security challenge since World War II. Meanwhile, Swedish Foreign Minister Tobias Billström sent a letter to the foreign ministers of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), addressing the Quran-burning incidents in Denmark and Sweden. He stated that the legal process is ongoing and subject to continued evaluation.
No, there is no lawsuit.
And the ”government” is not involved. They are not allowed to be involved.

The civil service (Migrationsverket) has received information that has led them to start an investigation whether the residency permit should be revoked. Courts are not involved in any such decision.
Parts of the investigation is to validate the information received.
The information received is not public.

This appears to be pure speculation.
 
Last edited:
The important thing is that if you give 10 reasons for war, and one is invalid, you still have nine reasons for war left.
You only need one valid reason for war.
Since the US did not start a new war, and merely terminated the ceasefire agreement, they did not even need a single reason for war.

That is the legal background for those that prefer not sticking their head in the ground like an ostrich.


How many countries have tried to assassinate a former US President?
You keep on wasting bandwidth trying hard to prove something that only exists in a parallel universe. The invasion/terrorism of Eyraq was due to WMD and I can provide direct quotes from the UN but wont waste time with your type.
 
Look, if they burn Qur'an in Sweden, then also burn Torah, Bible, Vedas, and Tipitaka (Buddhist holy book) in Sweden.
 
You keep on wasting bandwidth trying hard to prove something that only exists in a parallel universe. The invasion/terrorism of Eyraq was due to WMD and I can provide direct quotes from the UN but wont waste time with your type.
The invasion of Iraq was described in the Congress authorization to the president. That is the legal document that provides the Casus Belli.
That is the document that you have to disprove.




As it was a termination of a ceasefire, it was not a start of a new war.

So far you have not proven your claim that the US starts wars.
 
Last edited:
[107th Congress Public Law 243]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]


<DOC>
[DOCID: f:publ243.107]


[[Page 1497]]

AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE AGAINST IRAQ RESOLUTION OF 2002

[[Page 116 STAT. 1498]]

Public Law 107-243
107th Congress

Joint Resolution



To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against
Iraq. <<NOTE: Oct. 16, 2002 - [H.J. Res. 114]>>

Whereas in 1990 in response to Iraq's war of aggression against and
illegal occupation of Kuwait, the United States forged a coalition
of nations to liberate Kuwait and its people in order to defend the
national security of the United States and enforce United Nations
Security Council resolutions relating to Iraq;

Whereas after the liberation of Kuwait in 1991, Iraq entered into a
United Nations sponsored cease-fire agreement pursuant to which Iraq
unequivocally agreed, among other things, to eliminate its nuclear,
biological, and chemical weapons programs and the means to deliver
and develop them, and to end its support for international
terrorism;

Whereas the efforts of international weapons inspectors, United States
intelligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors led to the discovery that
Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical weapons and a large scale
biological weapons program, and that Iraq had an advanced nuclear
weapons development program that was much closer to producing a
nuclear weapon than intelligence reporting had previously indicated;

Whereas Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the cease-fire,
attempted to thwart the efforts of weapons inspectors to identify
and destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction stockpiles and
development capabilities, which finally resulted in the withdrawal
of inspectors from Iraq on October 31, 1998;

Whereas in Public Law 105-235 (August 14, 1998), Congress concluded that
Iraq's continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened
vital United States interests and international peace and security,
declared Iraq to be in ``material and unacceptable breach of its
international obligations'' and urged the President ``to take
appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant
laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its
international obligations'';

Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of
the United States and international peace and security in the
Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach
of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing
to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons
capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and
supporting and harboring terrorist organizations;

Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolution of the United Nations
Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its
civilian population thereby threatening international peace

[[Page 116 STAT. 1499]]

and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or
account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq,
including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property
wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and
willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations
and its own people;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing
hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States,
including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush
and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and
Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the
United Nations Security Council;

Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for
attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including
the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in
Iraq;

Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist
organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and
safety of United States citizens;

Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001,
underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of
weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist
organizations;

Whereas Iraq's demonstrated capability and willingness to use weapons of
mass destruction, the risk that the current Iraqi regime will either
employ those weapons to launch a surprise attack against the United
States or its Armed Forces or provide them to international
terrorists who would do so, and the extreme magnitude of harm that
would result to the United States and its citizens from such an
attack, combine to justify action by the United States to defend
itself;

Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) authorizes
the use of all necessary means to enforce United Nations Security
Council Resolution 660 (1990) and subsequent relevant resolutions
and to compel Iraq to cease certain activities that threaten
international peace and security, including the development of
weapons of mass destruction and refusal or obstruction of United
Nations weapons inspections in violation of United Nations Security
Council Resolution 687 (1991), repression of its civilian population
in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688
(1991), and threatening its neighbors or United Nations operations
in Iraq in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution
949 (1994);

Whereas in the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq
Resolution (Public Law 102-1), Congress has authorized the President
``to use United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations
Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) in order to achieve
implementation of Security Council Resolution 660, 661, 662, 664,
665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677'';

Whereas in December 1991, Congress expressed its sense that it
``supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of
United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 as being consistent
with the Authorization of Use of Military Force Against

[[Page 116 STAT. 1500]]

Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1),'' that Iraq's repression of its
civilian population violates United Nations Security Council
Resolution 688 and ``constitutes a continuing threat to the peace,
security, and stability of the Persian Gulf region,'' and that
Congress, ``supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the
goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688'';

Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338) expressed
the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United
States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi
regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to
replace that regime;

Whereas on September 12, 2002, President Bush committed the United
States to ``work with the United Nations Security Council to meet
our common challenge'' posed by Iraq and to ``work for the necessary
resolutions,'' while also making clear that ``the Security Council
resolutions will be enforced, and the just demands of peace and
security will be met, or action will be unavoidable'';

Whereas the United States is determined to prosecute the war on
terrorism and Iraq's ongoing support for international terrorist
groups combined with its development of weapons of mass destruction
in direct violation of its obligations under the 1991 cease-fire and
other United Nations Security Council resolutions make clear that it
is in the national security interests of the United States and in
furtherance of the war on terrorism that all relevant United Nations
Security Council resolutions be enforced, including through the use
of force if necessary;

Whereas Congress has taken steps to pursue vigorously the war on
terrorism through the provision of authorities and funding requested
by the President to take the necessary actions against international
terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations,
organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or
aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or
harbored such persons or organizations;

Whereas the President and Congress are determined to continue to take
all appropriate actions against international terrorists and
terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or
persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist
attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such
persons or organizations;

Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution to take
action in order to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism
against the United States, as Congress recognized in the joint
resolution on Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law
107-40); and

Whereas it is in the national security interests of the United States to
restore international peace and security to the Persian Gulf region:
Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress <<NOTE: Authorization for Use of Military
Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002. 50 USC 1541 note.>> assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This joint resolution may be cited as the ``Authorization for Use of
Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002''.

[[Page 116 STAT. 1501]]

SEC. 2. SUPPORT FOR UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC EFFORTS.

The Congress of the United States supports the efforts by the
President to--
(1) strictly enforce through the United Nations Security
Council all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq
and encourages him in those efforts; and
(2) obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security
Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay,
evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies
with all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) Authorization.--The President is authorized to use the Armed
Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and
appropriate in order to--
(1) defend the national security of the United States
against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council
resolutions regarding Iraq.

(b) Presidential Determination.--In connection with the exercise of
the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President
shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible,
but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make
available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the
President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that--
(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or
other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately
protect the national security of the United States against the
continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to
enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council
resolutions regarding Iraq; and
(2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent
with the United States and other countries continuing to take
the necessary actions against international terrorist and
terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations,
or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the
terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

(c) War Powers Resolution Requirements.--
(1) Specific statutory authorization.--Consistent with
section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress
declares that this section is intended to constitute specific
statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of
the War Powers Resolution.
(2) Applicability of other requirements.--Nothing in this
joint resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers
Resolution.

SEC. 4. REPORTS TO CONGRESS.

(a) <<NOTE: President.>> Reports.--The President shall, at least
once every 60 days, submit to the Congress a report on matters relevant
to this joint resolution, including actions taken pursuant to the
exercise of authority granted in section 3 and the status of planning
for efforts that are expected to be required after such actions are
completed, including those actions described in section 7 of the Iraq
Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338).

[[Page 116 STAT. 1502]]

(b) Single Consolidated Report.--To the extent that the submission
of any report described in subsection (a) coincides with the submission
of any other report on matters relevant to this joint resolution
otherwise required to be submitted to Congress pursuant to the reporting
requirements of the War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148), all such
reports may be submitted as a single consolidated report to the
Congress.
(c) Rule of Construction.--To the extent that the information
required by section 3 of the Authorization for Use of Military Force
Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1) is included in the report
required by this section, such report shall be considered as meeting the
requirements of section 3 of such resolution.

Approved October 16, 2002.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.J. Res. 114 (S.J. Res. 45) (S.J. Res. 46):
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 107-721 (Comm. on International Relations).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 148 (2002):
Oct. 8, 9, considered in House.
Oct. 10, considered and passed House and Senate.
WEEKLY COMPILATION OF PRESIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS, Vol. 38 (2002):
Oct. 16, Presidential remarks and statement.

<all>
 
one think I want to make clear, I don’t support burning Quran, Torah, Bible or whatever book.
But what wonders me, is that most of the Quran burnings are being done by immigrants. In Sweden, it was done by Iraqi immigrants/refugees. Were they Muslims, converted Muslims, or Iraqis with another religion?

And what’s their purpose? To anger Muslims worldwide? Or to create hate against Sweden? In that case, they bite the hand that feeds them.
Anyway, whatever they want to achieve, the best thing Sweden could do is send them on the first plane to Iraq. And let them judge. According to Islamic laws.
 
one think I want to make clear, I don’t support burning Quran, Torah, Bible or whatever book.
But what wonders me, is that most of the Quran burnings are being done by immigrants. In Sweden, it was done by Iraqi immigrants/refugees. Were they Muslims, converted Muslims, or Iraqis with another religion?

And what’s their purpose? To anger Muslims worldwide? Or to create hate against Sweden? In that case, they bite the hand that feeds them.
Anyway, whatever they want to achieve, the best thing Sweden could do is send them on the first plane to Iraq. And let them judge. According to Islamic laws.
The purpose of the Iraqi immigrant (a Christian who was tortured by Muslims in Iraq) is to convince the Swedish government to ban the Quran due to its contents.
 
So how do we tell the religious folks that we don't like the contents of their books? What if we find that these books are creating violence and backwardness?

Not burning holy books, not insulting believers. To be honest, i don t give a s* if you are a non believer or atheist, punishment is for you, not for me. Yu have not right to burn holy books or insult believers.
 
Not burning holy books, not insulting believers. To be honest, i don t give a s* if you are a non believer or atheist, punishment is for you, not for me. Yu have not right to burn holy books or insult believers.
Will you stop propagating your faith and indoctrinating people, including your family, if I stop criticising?

I criticise, cos I find faiths to be detrimental to human existence and progress.
 
Back
Top Bottom