Introduction
Recently, a Quran burning incident took place outside Stockholm’s main mosque, this was condemned by Sweden’s government as an “Islamophobic” act. Islamophobia refers to the irrational fear, prejudice, or hatred towards Islam, Muslims, or Islamic culture. It is a term used to describe discrimination, bias, or negative attitudes and actions directed towards individuals or communities based on their perceived association with Islam. Islamophobia can manifest in various ways, such as verbal or physical attacks, discrimination in employment or housing, stereotypes, or the marginalization of Muslims in society.[1]
Islamophobia often stems from misconceptions, stereotypes, and a lack of understanding about Islam and its followers. The actions of extremist groups or acts of terrorism committed by individuals claiming to be Muslims have also contributed to the perpetuation of negative perceptions and fears. However, it is essential to differentiate between the
actions of a few individuals and the beliefs and practices of the broader Muslim population.
Islamophobia has significant consequences for individuals and communities leading to social exclusion, hate crimes, and systemic discrimination. It can undermine social cohesion, hinder dialogue and understanding between different religious and cultural groups, and perpetuate harmful stereotypes. Efforts to combat Islamophobia involve promoting education, fostering interfaith dialogue, challenging stereotypes,
and advocating for the rights and inclusion of Muslims in society. These initiatives aim to raise awareness, build bridges, and foster greater understanding and acceptance among diverse communities.
After this incident, protests erupted in the Muslim world to condemn this Islamophobic act of Quran burning.³ The protesters stormed the compound of the Swedish embassy in Iraq’s capital, Baghdad. Quran burning is not a new phenomenon, it keeps happening intermittently for political reasons, to get attention or fame or some other benefits by individuals and organizations. The apathy of the EU governments is disappointing. There have been several Quran burning events in Europe and the USA. Here are some of them:
1. Gainesville, Florida, USA (2010)
Terry Jones, the pastor of a small church announced plans to burn copies of the Quran on the anniversary of the September 11 attacks. Although he initially canceled the event, he went ahead with the burning in March 2011, sparking widespread condemnation. This led to protests in Afghanistan that resulted in the deaths of at least 20 people[2].
2. Dresden, Germany (2015)
Members of the far-right organization PEGIDA (Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the West) burned a Quran during a rally in Dresden. The incident sparked outrage and condemnation from various quarters.
3. Charleroi, Belgium (2016)
A group of far-right activists burned a Quran in a public square during an unauthorized demonstration. The act was widely condemned by political and religious leaders in Belgium.[3]
4. In 2022, there were riots in Sweden over planned Quran burnings by a far-right group.[4]
5. Malmo, Sweden (2015)
A far-right political group called the Swedish Defense League burned a Quran during a demonstration in the city of Malmo. This led to protests and clashes between different groups in the area. The burning of the Muslim holy book is a well-practised stunt by the leader of the anti-immigration and anti-Islam group Hard Line, Danish-Swedish politician Rasmus Paludan.
Paludan – whose father is a Swedish national – first came to public attention in 2017 when he started making anti-Muslim YouTube videos. He justified his stunts in Denmark – such as burning the Muslim holy book, sometimes wrapped in bacon – as a tribute to free speech. “The enemy is Islam and Muslims. The best thing would be if there were not a single Muslim left on this Earth, then we would have reached our final goal,” he said in a December 2018 video. Paludan was sentenced to 14 days in jail in 2019 for racist speech in Denmark.
A year later, he faced one month of imprisonment with two additional months of a suspended sentence after being found guilty of 14 different charges of racism, defamation and hazardous driving. Hard Line, or Stram Kurs in Swedish failed to win a single seat in the last Danish national elections in 2019.
Now Paludan plans to run again in the June 2023 vote, but he reportedly does not have the necessary number of signatures to secure his candidature. Paludan and his Hard Line party were banned from Belgium for a year in 2020 over plans to burn the Quran in an area of Brussels largely occupied by Muslims. He was also deported from France after suggesting the same in Paris. (Al-Jazeera).[5]
The other issue is disrespect towards Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). Acts of disrespect, mockery, or deliberate offense towards religious figures are deeply hurtful and offensive to those who hold them in high regard. In recent years, there have been incidents in Europe and the USA that have sparked controversy and hurt sentiments within the Muslim community.
These incidents often involve depictions or expressions that are considered disrespectful or blasphemous to Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) Such actions can lead to anger, frustration, and a sense of alienation among Muslims who find their religious beliefs and symbols targeted.
Freedom of expression and freedom of speech
are fundamental principles in many democratic societies, including Sweden. These principles protect the right to express one’s opinions and ideas. However, these freedoms are not absolute and may be subject to limitations, such as incitement to violence or hate speech. Sweden and other EU/ Christian dominated countries should respect the sentiments of 1.5 Bn Muslims as they respect Jewish sentiments on denial of the Holocaust.
Discrimination / Double Standards
Holocaust Denial
The denial of Holocaust is often seen as a form of historical revisionism, denial of a well-documented genocide of six million Jews by Nazis in WW2. It is considered deeply offensive and harmful to the Jewish community. Laws and regulations that prohibit Holocaust denial exist in several countries to prevent the spread of anti-Semitic ideologies and to ensure respect for the memory of the Holocaust victims. Sixteen European countries, along with Canada and Israel have laws against Holocaust denial, the denial of the systematic genocidal killing of approximately six million Jews in Europe by Nazi Germany in the 1930s
and 1940s.[6]
Noam Chomsky is a renowned linguist, philosopher, and political activist who is Jewish. Chomsky’s work and influence extend far beyond his personal background, as he has made substantial intellectual contributions across various domains.
Chomsky has expressed his views on freedom of speech and the importance of protecting it, even when it comes to controversial or offensive speech. Chomsky believes that in a democratic society, it is crucial to allow all perspectives and opinions to be expressed, even if they are deeply unpleasant or offensive. Regarding Holocaust denial specifically, Chomsky has defended the principle of freedom of expression and argued against laws that criminalize Holocaust denial. While he vehemently condemns Holocaust denial and considers it a form of anti-Semitism, he believes that prohibiting or criminalizing it can set a dangerous precedent for restricting freedom of speech.
Chomsky’s position is that it is more effective to counter and challenge Holocaust denial through open debate, education, and providing historical evidence rather than through legal restrictions. It is important to note that Chomsky’s stance on this issue has sparked significant debate and criticism.
There are many scholars who deny the Holocaust and have faced consequences by going to jail. Some common arguments put forth by Holocaust deniers are:
Denial of the systematic nature
Some deniers argue that the mass extermination of Jews and other persecuted groups was not part of a systematic plan, but rather a series of isolated actions or unfortunate
events that occurred during the war. They claim that there was no intentional effort by the Nazis to eliminate specific populations.
Distortion of evidence
Holocaust deniers often pick specific pieces of evidence or documents. They question the authenticity of certain photographs, testimonies, or official records to cast doubt on the existence of mass extermination.
Downplaying the number of victims
Some deniers attempt to minimize the number of Jews and others who were killed during the Holocaust. They argue that the figures provided by historians and researchers are exaggerated or fabricated, without presenting credible evidence to support their claims.
Concentration camp conditions
Deniers focus on describing the conditions in concentration camps as less severe than commonly portrayed, suggesting that the high death toll was a result of disease, malnutrition, or other factors rather than systematic extermination.
Accusations of conspiracy
Some deniers claim that the Holocaust is a fabricated event perpetuated by a global conspiracy, often alleging that it was created by Jewish individuals or organizations to advance their own interests.
The denial or distortion of the Holocaust is generally considered a form of anti-Semitism and is not based on credible research or evidence. Following are some famous Holocaust
deniers:[7]
1. David Irving
Irving is a British author who has written several books on World War II and has been widely criticized for his Holocaust denial and distortion of historical facts. He faced legal challenges in the past due to his controversial views. The trial, known as Irving v Penguin Books and Lipstadt, took place in the UK’s High Court in 2000. The case centered around Irving’s denial of the existence of gas chambers at Auschwitz and his questioning of the systematic nature of the Holocaust. The court found that Irving was indeed a Holocaust denier and labeled him as “anti-Semitic” and a “right-wing extremist.” David Irving was also tried in Switzerland for Holocaust denial. He was found guilty in Vienna of denying the Holocaust of European Jewry and sentenced to three years in prison. He had pleaded guilty to the charge, based on a speech and interview he gave in Austria in 1989.[8]
2. Ernst Zündel
Zündel was a German-born publisher and Holocaust denier who lived in Canada. He was notorious for publishing and distributing materials denying the Holocaust and was convicted of spreading false news.
3. Robert Faurisson
Faurisson was a French academic and Holocaust denier who gained notoriety for his publications and speeches denying the existence of gas chambers and the systematic nature of the Holocaust.
4. Germar Rudolf
Rudolf is a German chemist who became involved in Holocaust denial and revisionism. He published pseudoscientific papers denying the use of gas chambers during the Holocaust and has faced legal consequences for his activities.
5. French convicted of Holocaust denial: This list includes, Robert Faurisson, Roger Garaudy, Alain Guionnet, Jean-Marie Le Pen, Henry de Lesquen, Vincent Reynouard, Hervé Ryssen, Alain Soral and Georges Theil.[9]
6. German convicted of Holocaust denial
Bela Ewald Althans, Thies Christophersen, Günter Deckert, Ursula Haverbeck, Horst Mahler, Udo Pastörs, Manfred Roeder, Germar Rudolf, Sylvia Stolz, Fredrick Töben & Udo Walendy, Ernst Zündel.[10]
Holocaust is one of historic events, history always has many versions which exist and are accepted. Making laws to protect certain historical events is against the spirit of freedom of speech. It is essential to approach the implementation of such laws with caution to ensure they do not inadvertently stifle legitimate debate or differing interpretations of historical events.
Criticism of Law on Holocaust Denial
János Kis[11] and in particular András Schiffer[12] feel the work of Holocaust deniers should be protected by a universal right to free speech. An identical argument was used[13] by the Hungarian Constitutional Court (Alkotmánybíróság) led by László Sólyom when it struck down a law against Holocaust denial in 1992. The argument that laws punishing Holocaust denial are incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights have been rejected by institutions of the Council of Europe (the European Commission of Human Rights,[14] the European Court of Human Rights[15]s) and also by the United Nations Human Rights Committee[16]. Many historians and scholars have been convicted.[17] The brutalities, oppression and inhuman treatment of Palestinians by Israel reflect as if Jews don’t know about the holocaust, they are the biggest holocaust deniers.
Different Approaches
The different approaches toward Quran burning and Holocaust denial might stem from the fact that they are seen through different legal and cultural lenses. The element of hypocrisy, double standards, haltered against Muslims cannot be overruled.[18] It is not intended to suggest that the sentiments of any particular group are more or less important than another. All individuals and communities deserve respect and consideration for their beliefs and sentiments. While the majority Christians respect Islam and other religions, the Islamophobic Christians (atheists and others) in their hatred against Islam, consider it as their right under freedom of expression to burn the Quran without caring for the sentiments of 1.5 billion Muslims. They are deceived by the common perception that the Muslims cannot burn the Bible in retaliation because they believe in the Bible and respect it like the Quran. Muslims respect the Bible despite the scriptual corruption[19] admitted by Christian scholars, however Muslims do not believe in all 66 books of the Bible to be of divine origin, they believe in Ten books of the Bible out of 66 books.
Books of the Bible
Old Testament
Torah / Pentateuch 1. Genesis, 2. Exodus, 3. Leviticus, 4. Numbers, 5. Deuteronomy [Torah is mentioned by Quran, Muslims believe in Torah revealed to Prophet Moses (PBUH) and Psalms to King and Prophet David (PBUH).
Other books 6. Joshua, 7. Judges, 8. Ruth, 9. 1 Samuel, 10. 2 Samuel, 11. 1 Kings, 12. 2 Kings, 13. 1 Chronicles, 14. 2 Chronicles, 15. Ezra, 16. Nehemiah, 17. Esther, 18. Job, 19. Psalms, 20. Proverbs, 21. Ecclesiastes, 22. Song of Solomon (Song of Songs), 23. Isaiah, 24. Jeremiah, 25. Lamentations, 26. Ezekie, 27. Daniel, 28. Hosea, 29. Joel, 30. Amos, 31. Obadiah, 32. Jonah, 33. Micah, 34. Nahum , 35. Habakkuk, 36. Zephaniah, 37. Haggai, 38. Zechariah, 39. Malachi
New Testament 27 Books
Four Books of Gospels/ Injel 1.Matthew 2.Mark 3.Luke 4.John [Muslims believe in the Gospel revealed to Prophet Jesus Christ (PBUH).
New Testament Other 23 Books
5.Acts (of the Apostles) 6.Romans 7.I Corinthians (1 Corinthians) 8.II Corinthians (2 Corinthians) 9.Galatians 10.Ephesians 11.Philippians 12.Colossians 13.I Thessalonians (1 Thessalonians) 14.II Thessalonians (2 Thessalonians) 15.I Timothy (1 Timothy) 16.II Timothy (2 Timothy) 17.Titus 18.Philemon 19.Hebrews 20.James 21.I Peter (1 Peter) 22.II Peter (2 Peter) 23.I John (1 John) 24.II John (2 John) 25.III John (3 John) 26.Jude 27.Revelation¹².
Muslims Believe in 10 Books of Bible
Muslims recognize the “Taurah” (Torah), the “Zabur” (Psalms) and the “Injil” (Gospel) as Scriptures revealed to Prophet Moses, David and Jesus (peace be upon them) respectively. The Quran speaks very highly of these books, calling them “Books of God,” describing them as a “sign,” a “light,” a “guidance,” or a “mercy,” hence Muslims revere them.[20]
While Muslims may not believe in all the books of the Bible, they generally hold a deep respect for the Bible as a religious text. Jewish Talmud is also not a divine book[21].
Unfortunately, Islamophobes exploit Muslim respect for holy books by engaging in provocative actions such as burning the Quran, which is considered a sacred scripture in Islam, with the intent to inflict pain and hurt upon Muslims. Similarly the disrespect to Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) is also intolerable for Muslims.
Acts of Quran burning are highly inflammatory and are intended to provoke and offend Muslims. Such actions not only show a profound lack of understanding and respect for religious diversity but also contribute to the perpetuation of Islamophobic sentiments. They deepen divisions, breed animosity, and hinder efforts towards interfaith dialogue and harmony.
Muslim Options
Muslims have two options, both have support from the Quran and Bible, however local law and legal, social aspects have to be kept in view and respected.
Option -1
Muslims have an option to retaliate and burn the other 56 books of the Bible if the Islamophobes don’t stop burning the Quran in Christian dominated countries, with tacit approval of governments who instead of prohibiting this hate crime look the other way on pretext of free speech . There is clear command in Bible and Quran:
“An eye for an eye” (עַיִן תַּחַת עַיִן, ʿayīn taḥaṯ ʿayīn/ وَ الۡعَیۡنَ بِالۡعَیۡ) [Bible , Exodus 21:23–27[22]/ Quran 5:45[23]]
Law of the land and other socio- legal aspects have to be considered and respected.
Option-2
It is important to approach the sensitive issues with care and promote understanding rather than advocating for retaliation or further division. It is crucial to foster dialogue and respect among different religious communities.
Muslims, as followers of Islam, do hold the Quran in high regard as their sacred scripture as it is a source of guidance and spiritual significance for them. Similarly, Christians hold the Bible, including the Old and New Testaments, as their holy scripture. Respect for religious texts should be upheld as a general principle, regardless of the specific beliefs one holds.
Instances of individuals disrespecting or burning religious texts, such as the Quran, should be condemned as they undermine the principles of tolerance, empathy, and mutual respect. Freedom of expression, while important, should not be used as a justification for inciting hatred or disrespecting the religious sentiments of others.
Promoting understanding and fostering dialogue between different religious communities can help bridge divides and build harmonious relationships. It is crucial to focus on the values that promote peace, compassion, and respect, rather than advocating for retaliation or further conflict.
Quran Support both Options
وَ کَتَبۡنَا عَلَیۡہِمۡ فِیۡہَاۤ اَنَّ النَّفۡسَ بِالنَّفۡسِ ۙ وَ الۡعَیۡنَ بِالۡعَیۡنِ وَ الۡاَنۡفَ بِالۡاَنۡفِ وَ الۡاُذُنَ بِالۡاُذُنِ وَ السِّنَّ بِالسِّنِّ ۙ وَ الۡجُرُوۡحَ قِصَاصٌ ؕ فَمَنۡ تَصَدَّقَ بِہٖ فَہُوَ کَفَّارَۃٌ لَّہٗ ؕ وَ مَنۡ لَّمۡ یَحۡکُمۡ بِمَاۤ اَنۡزَلَ اللّٰہُ فَاُولٰٓئِکَ ہُمُ الظّٰلِمُوۡنَ ﴿۴۵
“And We ordained for them therein a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, a tooth for a tooth, and for wounds is legal retribution. But whoever gives [up his right as] charity, it is an expiation for him. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed – then it is those who are the wrongdoers.” [Quran 5:45][24]
While using Options-2, Muslims should make it clear to Islamophobes that Option-1 is also available. Muslims can also use freedom of expression to burn their holy book in line with local law, reluctantly with a heavy heart, if they don’t stop this heinous practice. The local population and government should play a positive role to create interfaith peace and harmony.
UN Rights Council Condemns Desecration of Holy Quran
The UN Human Rights Council at Geneva voted on 16 July 2023 to condemn the recent Holy Quran desecration incidents, an outcome that marks a major defeat for Western countries at a time when the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) has unprecedented clout in the UN’s top rights body. The resolution, introduced by Pakistan on behalf of the 57-nation OIC, calls for the UN rights chief to publish a report on religious hatred and for states to review their laws and plug gaps that may “impede the prevention and prosecution of acts and advocacy of religious hatred”.
Pakistan and other OIC countries brought forward a debate and resolution after an Iraqi refugee in Sweden burnt pages from the Holy Quran outside Stockholm’s main mosque last month. The incident triggered a diplomatic backlash across the Muslim world.
The UN’s council, the only body made up of governments to protect human rights worldwide, backed the OIC resolution on countering religious hatred by 28 votes in favor, out of 47 members of the council, with 12 against and 7 abstentions.
Double Standards of USA & EU
Britain, the US, the European Union countries including France and Germany, plus Costa Rica and Montenegro, were among those that voted against the resolution. Benin, Chile, Mexico, Nepal and Paraguay were among the abstentions.
Pakistan’s permanent representative to the UN in Geneva said the resolution was not looking to curtail free speech but had been aimed at striking a prudent balance. Speaking for the OIC, he said: “Regrettably, some states have chosen to abdicate their responsibility to prevent and counter the scourge of religious hatred. “A message has been sent to billions of people of faith across the world that their commitment to preventing religious hatred is merely lip service. “The opposition of a few in the room has emanated from their unwillingness to condemn the public desecration of the Holy Quran. “They lack political, legal and moral courage.”
The wording of the resolution condemns all manifestations of religious hatred, including “public and premeditated acts of desecration of the Holy Quran”, and underscores the need to hold those responsible to account. It urges states to adopt laws to “address, prevent and prosecute acts and advocacy of religious hatred that constitute incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence”. It also wants the UN rights Chief Volker Turk to identify gaps in countries’ laws in light of the resolution.
Argentina, China, Cuba, India, South Africa, Ukraine and Vietnam backed the resolution. China’s ambassador said that; “Islamophobia is on the rise. Incidents involving desecrating the Holy Quran have happened again and again in some countries,” “These countries have done nothing to implement their professed respect for the protection of freedom of religious belief.”
The United States and the European Union said the resolution conflicted with their view on human rights and freedom of expression. While condemning the desecration of the Holy Quran, they argued the OIC initiative was designed to safeguard religious symbols rather than human rights. Marc Limon, director of the Geneva-based Universal Rights Group, said the outcome showed “the West is in full retreat at the Human Rights Council”. “They are increasingly losing support and losing the argument,” he said.[25]
Unfortunately many European societies do not appear to have moved on from their centuries-old prejudices when it comes to demonizing Islam. It must change.
Conclusion
Quran burning and lack of action from governments in Christian-dominated countries is a very serious matter of great concern which may result in worldwide retaliation worsening the situation. However, it is important to approach this issue in a manner that promotes understanding, dialogue, and respect among different religious communities. Retaliation in the form of burning other religious texts, such as the books of the Bible, is not a productive or constructive response. Such actions would only further escalate tensions, deepen divisions, and perpetuate a cycle of hatred and intolerance. It is crucial to seek peaceful and constructive means of addressing these concerns rather than resorting to acts that perpetuate violence and animosity.
Addressing Islamophobia and combating hate crimes requires comprehensive efforts from various stakeholders, including governments, communities, and individuals. Governments should strive to ensure the protection of religious freedom and the prevention of hate crimes, regardless of the religious background of the targeted individuals or communities. Legislation and policies should be in place to address acts of discrimination and incitement to hatred, while also promoting interfaith dialogue and fostering a culture of understanding and respect. Engaging in open dialogue, promoting education, and fostering greater interfaith understanding are crucial steps towards countering Islamophobia. It is through respectful conversations and efforts to bridge differences that we can challenge stereotypes, combat prejudice, and work towards a more inclusive and harmonious society.
The Kuwait government has announced printing of 100,000 copies of the Quran translated into Swedish language [26]. These copies will be distributed in Sweden with the objective of disseminating Islamic principles, values, and fostering positive coexistence among all individuals. The move aims at promoting love, tolerance, and peace, besides discouraging feelings of hatred, extremism, and religious intolerance. It is also the duty of Muslims to educate the local population about Islam and its values for peace.[27]
[As for such (non-Muslims) who do not fight you on account of (your) faith, or drive you forth from your homelands, God does not forbid you to show them kindness (also love and respect) and to deal with them with equity, for God loves those who act equitably. God only forbids you to turn in friendship towards such as fight against you because of (your) faith and drive you forth from your homelands or aid (others) in driving you forth. As for those from among you who turn towards them for alliance, it is they who are wrongdoers.] (Al-Mumtahanah 60:8-9)
Invite (all humankind) to the path of your Lord with wisdom and goodly exhortation and argue with them in the most kindly manner, for, indeed, your Lord knows best as to who strays from His path, and best who are the right-guided.] (An-Nahl 16:125)
References [28]
https://islamphobia.wordpress.com/
https://wp.me/s1dL2Q-burning
[1] Islamophobia – Merriam-Webster. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Islamophobia, Cambridge Dictionary. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/islamophobia
Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamophobia
[2]Arrests at Sweden Quran burnings. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-61134734
[3] https://www.dw.com/en/sweden-man-burns-quran-outside-mosque-during-eid-al-adha/a-66053104
[4] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/4/19/what-do-we-know-about-the-sweden-riots
[5] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/4/19/what-do-we-know-about-the-sweden-riots
[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_Holocaust_denial
7 Holocaust denial – Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_denial
(ii) Holocaust deniers – Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Holocaust_deniers
(iii) They Are And Why They Believe. https://allthatsinteresting.com/holocaust-deniers
8 BBC NEWS | Holocaust denier Irving is jailed. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4733820.stm.
(ii) Irving trial – Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irving_trial
(iii) The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/feb/20/austria.thefarright
(iv) ‘Pariah’ Irving sues Holocaust author | https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/jan/12/irving.history
(v) The true story Holocaust denial- BBC https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-38758249
(vi) BBC Holocaust denial trial. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3csyx03
[9] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:French_people_convicted_of_Holocaust_denial
[10]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:German_people_convicted_of_Holocaust_denial
[11] János Kis: Szólássabadság és náci beszéd, Népszabadság, March 30, 1996
[12] Fogadatlan prókátorok – A gárdaítélet félreértelmezéseiről, Magyar Narancs, July 23, 2009
[13] Alkotmánybíróság – Kezdőlap” (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 21 April 2016. Retrieved 6 April 2016.
[14] X. v. Federal Republic of Germany (European Commission of Human Rights 16 July 1982).
[15] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_Holocaust_denial#cite_note-7
[16] Lehideux and Isorni v. France, 1998-VII, no. 92; application number 24662/94, case number 55/1997/839/1045 (European Court of Human Rights 23 September 1998).
[17] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_Holocaust_denial#cite_note-102
[18] https://wp.me/s1dL2Q-burning
[19] Preface to Bible – Confirms Errors http://bible-christianity.blogspot.com/2013/09/preface-to-rsv-bible.html
20 Muslim View of the Bible? | CBN. https://www2.cbn.com/article/religion/what-muslim-view-bible
(ii) Islamic holy books – Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_holy_books
(iii) Holy books in Islam -BBC. https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/zmp6pbk/revision/6
(iv) Islamic view of the Bible – Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_view_of_the_Bible
[21] Hadith, Mishnah, Gomorrah & Talmud Books: https://wp.me/scyQCZ-mishnah
[22] https://biblehub.com/exodus/21-24.htm
[23] https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/5/45/default.htm
[24] https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/5/45/default.htm
[25] https://www.dawn.com/news/1764369/un-rights-council-condemns-desecration-of-holy-quran
[26] Kuwait to print Holy Quran in Swedish https://en.dailypakistan.com.pk/11-Jul-2023/kuwait-decides-to-print-100-000-copies-of-holy-quran-in-swedish-language-after-desecration-incident
[27] https://salaamone.com/muslim-non-muslim-relationship/
28 Sweden Quran burning: Protesters storm embassy in Baghdad. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-66052670 / https://biblehub.com/exodus/21-24.htm
(ii) Sweden government condemns ‘Islamophobic’ Quran burning. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/7/2/sweden-government-condemns-islamophobic-quran-burning.
(iii) Sweden government condemns Quran burning. https://www.newarab.com/news/sweden-government-condemns-islamophobic-quran-burning.
(iv) Protest rallies Quran burning in Sweden. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/protest-rallies-across-pakistan-over-quran-burning-in-sweden/ar-AA1dyCY0.
(v) Swedish government condemns ‘Islamophobic’ burning of Qur’an. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/02/swedish-government-condemns-islamophobic-burning-of-a-quran
(vi) https://trueorators.com/quran-translations/5/45 / https://biblehub.com/exodus/21-24.htm
https://bible-christianity.blogspot.com/
