vedaxcool:

Well said, the article clearly indicated the word Mob, these people were in a frenzy, but this is highly condemnable as those that died were not invovled even remotely with the Burning, it reminds one of september 11, during which some Mobs attack mosques and even some muslims loose their lives. A mob is always an irrational set of individuals who take the law unto their hands this kind of thing happens every where, Law enforcement must always be ready to do their part. The pastor might come out more prosperous for this kind of attacks at sacred values, but like my brother sweetnecta said the Qur'an is really at heart and now even in mp3s .  And the funny thing is everytime a goff ball attacks Islam in the west he ends up selling the brand, as more intelligent individuals will research into the lies and slanders, the spread of Islam in the west has be helped by their unrestricted paranoia over islam, Islam is always in the news, for the
wrong reasons, Yet wise people keep unearthing the heap of lies and hatred against the Religion ALLAH has ordained for mankind. Did ALLAH say:

They strive to extinguish the light of ALLAH, yet ALLAH perfects it even more.

and indeed the Pastor is only doing us a favour, Cause every time he Burns a Qur'an ALLAH perfectshis Light even more, if only the Afghan Mob knew.

How do this two compare? no country permits the killing of people at the slightest provocation, a more sensible comparison will have been restriction on the "right" to incite people, If a man burns a book in h back yard, who will be bothered or even know? But when a man creates a media hype on such actions which like is making an announcement to the world I bought a book and it is going on trial, and it will be sentenced soon, it is plain commonsense that his intenton or the actions we see was clearly to incite violence and gain popularity with such political satements. I bet those that are here saying the man has the freedom to Incitively Burn Book for cheap popularity are the same individuals that would say wearing a bouka is against civilised norms, indeed the Hypocrisy is stinks.

Can you point where the author supported killing at the slightest provocation as I understand the healthy limit he reffered to centres around tolerance and restricted expression of hatred and Idon't know which country gives the right to its citizens to kill people at the slightest provocation. Again you comparison of two "rights" is very fallacious, as you have the right to do to book what you want but not in manner that is designed and intended to incite people, a more sensible approached is that the media should not have given the man such attention which would have made it clearly his business.

Its a shame on your intelligence that YOU can make such claim without even sitting back for one minute to think through what is it you are implying.


Yes, funny thing is that Jesus name occurs atleast 25 times in the Qur'an, the man easily burnt it without remorse, Just as you Jubilant over it.

It seems that you only condemn this action because aid workers were killed. Would you support this action if the pastor was killed?
Do you think the pastor has the right to burn his book?
How is a man burning his book in his church inciting people half way across the world to kill other people?
Why is it that Muslims seem to be unable to condemn actual crimes committed for the sake of the Qur'an but shout at any perceived slight on the Qur'an?

@Oritameta: « #24 on: Today at 01:12:45 AM »
[Quote]@Sweetnecta:

Its one thing to want to defend the actions of your fellow muslims but I'm not the kind of person you'd want to play the words game with. I didn't come up with the word "stiff-necked" of my own will. Its in the Bible, the same one you (muslims) say has been extensively falsified. Now, Ismael is the first born no doubt but you erroneously mention Ismael being the only son of Abraham and that his descendants are the Palestinians? Do you realize that from what you've just confessed, you've categorically broken off the false link you Muslims had hitherto had to Abraham. So who built the alleged Kabba if Ismael's descendants have always been living in Israel. Do you guys not claim that Abraham built it? *I'm spending more time laughing at your (Muslims) ignorance than I do writing this piece*[/Quote]I do not intend to trow jab for jab with you. however, a first child is always the only child before another child is born. in the case of Ismail [as], it is for 13 years, according to even the belief of the christians and jews on the matter. Palestinians are children of Ibrahim [as] by two reasons, either by Islam and or by being Arabs. No one says that Palestinians are the only children of Ibrahim, through Ismail. It is clear that Ismail was the father of the Arabs which included all Makkans at least the Quraishi where Hashimite clan rose from. Please think like today's man, instead of yesterday's where the idea that Ibrahim must be a jew, when the jew was merely a tribe from the 12 nations of the children of Jacob. which must come first; Ismail or part of his descendants, the palestinians [philistines]?



[Quote]Yes the Israelite were stiff-necked and the Bible shows us how they paid each time they went against God's will. The destruction of the first and second temple and the sending to exiles on several occasions and the last of such which was the siege of Jerusalem in AD 70 in the Jew-Roman war was as a result of their stiff-neckedness. Their stiff-neckedness wasn't against neighboring kingdoms, it was actually because they joined their neigbours in idol worship. It was for this that God punished them but guess what, he made a vow with them, an everlasting vow, because it's through them that salvation was to come to the world. Salvation through the Lord Jesus.[/Quote]from exodus till the time israel was torn to Israel and Judea nations, tell which neighbor they didn't kill; Jebusites, Hetittittes, or people of Jericho? Almighty will never support an evil people, it is that very reason that the prayer of Ibrahim [as] was answered on Muhammad [as] being the last messenger with uncorrupted Book. You actually dont know the Legacy of God. The Almighty is not unjust, hence He will not support forever a people that killed, disrespect and or disobey and reject His Messengers and Prophets [AS].
It would be act of injustice that God will bring about the type of salvation that you say is through jesus, because the people who died before jesus would have been cheated, if that was true. The Almighty is not unjust to His creatures, the reason that you need to open your mind and know that what you advocate of salvation is a farce.



[Quote]The Hittites and the likes you made mentioned were drove out of the land as God commanded the Israelite because God had promised Abraham to give the land to Isaac and his children. It should as well interest you that Abraham bought a piece of land from this same Hittites during his life time.[/Quote]Imagine if those Hittites were believers of what Moses brought, could they have been "driven off" since you didnt want to say that they were killed, which was what actually happened? Isaac is not the only child of Ibrahim. He had a brother older who was circumcised at the same time Ibrahim was being circumcised. Isaac came much later. Further, what happened to the children of the twin brother of Israel? Did you forget Esau? Your bible or you are playing unfair at every opportunity you have to tell any story.



[Quote]Next time, before you start writing about Israelis acquiring land through conquest, try reading the brief history of your own country Nigeria. read about how OYO Ile ruled and how it lost its kingdom even to the extent of relocating from the porch King Palace in OYO Ile to the present day Alaafin's residence. Better yet, read about the conquest of the Caliphates. Yes, The four Caliphates that ruled after the death of Muhammed and read about how they conquered lands and spread religion. Where was the Crusade fought? In Mecca or in Europe? Was the Caliphate and his army teleported to Europe? They fought wars, conquered lands and established kingdoms. Also, have you ever sat yourself down to reason how come a mosque sits on the Temple Mount? A Place that had housed two separate temples built by the Children of Israel to worship God. Did the Mosque disappear from Saudi Arabia to the Temple Mount? Was it not built after one of the Caliphates conquered and ruled over Jerusalem? Pointing at the details of wars fought, won and lost by the Israelite as a yard stick in our modern age is simple being hypocritical of sensible reasoning and common sense.[/Quote]First verse of Surah Isra [Children of Israel] will educate you, plenty. Please pick up the Quran and read.



[Quote]Now to the verses from Quran. After reading the above do you really still seriously think we should dive into that? really, do you think you can walk the work with me?

One last note, I'm deeply sorry if I sounded rude or disrespectful in anyway in the above post. Sincerely I am but that wont stop me from taking you head on though should you want us to kick ourselves in the balls and see who's gonna hurt the most. Grin[/Quote]No groin kicking. You may die by the first blow. Please approach the Quranic verse. I am waiting.

@Sweetnecta

this is getting interesting.

To say the Palestinians were the philistines is not only wrong but totally ridiculous. Now, Ismael was circumcised I bet you agree with that right?

Here's 1 Samuel 17 vs 26 "David asked the men standing near him, "What will be done for the man who kills this Philistine and removes this disgrace from Israel? Who is this UNCIRCUMCISED Philistine that he should defy the armies of the living God?" - Thank God for the Bible

But Ismael was circumcised. How come the Philistines at the time of David weren't if truly they were the descendants of Ismael? Circumcision was a covenant between God and Abraham and Abraham's descendants.

If Muslims wanted to justify their claim, they ought to have a story about Ismael and his children. Isaac and Ismael are step brothers, Isaac gave birth to Jacob (Israel) and Esua. Moses' father was from the house of Levi, one of the twelve sons of Jacob whose grand father was Isaac the step-brother of Ismael. Since Arabs claim to be from Ismael, why isn't that Arabs have stories about Ismael and his descendants. Why include the story of Moses in the Quran, why include the story of David, Solomon etc Oh, God totally forgot that they existed but when he got tired of the stiff-neckedness of the Children of Israel, decides it was time to revisit the descendants of Ismael from outta the blue?

Even if Arabs claim to be the descendant of Esua, the step brother of Jacob (Israel), they still do not have any right to the linage of Jacob's children. The prophets you claim were disobeyed and killed, where they from the descendants of Ismael or Esua or from the direct linage of Jacob (Israel)? And if Arabs were truly descendants of Ismael, should they not have a story about their own ancestors as well? Why would Allah felt it was best to recount an half-baked story of the children of Israel when he could easily have told Muhammed everything about Ismael and how the descendants of Ismael lived?

Who's telling the side of the story of Ismael's generations? Did they fight wars like the Children of Israel, which land did they occupy? Who were their kings? who were their prophets? Did the descendants of Ismael ever peaceful with all their neighbours, were they only worshiping the God Abraham was at the time of Muhammed? Was that why God decided he was done with the Children of Israel and move over to the supposedly Children of Ismael? reply!!!

Is it a must that Muslims have to switch to the TV channel showing the book get burnt? Is it? Could they not just have hissed at the man's attitude and flick the channel somewhere else. Use your common sense!!! please, because I see someone burning a Bible on CNN, the next step of action is to take to the street and start killing anyone from the same country where the Bible was burnt? In what manner did it incite people? That he went inside a mosque to burn the Quran? What would have happened if it was a Mosque that got burnt?

apparently some has a lose bolt somewhere in his brain, as where did my entire reply call for killing people in retailitationn for Burning the Qur'an? Your infinite stream of Fallacious replies and Comparison is becoming mind boggling, It seems you are only inetrested in rambling rather than making coherent argument.

What coherent argument?

That I follow suit in your reasoning. TheHomer asked you a question you refuse to answer so here is it, again;

It seems that you only condemn this action because aid workers were killed. Would you support this action if the pastor was killed?

Last year when the man incited the Burn the Quran day, lots of Christian organizations came out openly to condemn his plan. That speaks volume about how majority of us Christians feel about his actions. However, that still doesn't justify the actions of the lunatics that went on a killing spray. You asked (as where did my entire reply call for killing people in retaliation for Burning the Qur'an?) Apparently, TheHomer as well sees through the lines of your writing. Its the reason he asked that very simple question you have failed to answer.

How better a coherent argument do you want than ask if it is too much for someone in Iran or Iraq to simply switch to a local channel not showing a man in USA burning a copy of the Quran? Why couldn't they utter the words "HARAM" and flick to another channel.

No country permits the killing of people at the slightest provocation?

No country does but how many of these crooks in the middle east have been brought to book? And how many of you their counterparts in the west will not stop at saying that the man who burnt a book in USA is the one to be blamed for the deaths of people killed in the middle east.

Now whose got a lose bolt somewhere in his brain?

Your infinite stream of Fallacious replies and Comparison is becoming mind boggling. yes you are right

vedaxcool:

Is it a must that Muslims have to switch to the TV channel showing the book get burnt? Is it? Could they not just have hissed at the man's attitude and flick the channel somewhere else. Use your common sense!!! please, because I see someone burning a Bible on CNN, the next step of action is to take to the street and start killing anyone from the same country where the Bible was burnt? In what manner did it incite people? That he went inside a mosque to burn the Quran? What would have happened if it was a Mosque that got burnt?

apparently some has a lose bolt somewhere in his brain, as where did my entire reply call for killing people in retailitationn for Burning the Qur'an? Your infinite stream of Fallacious replies and Comparison is becoming mind boggling, It seems you are only inetrested in rambling rather than making coherent argument.

Wow so much venom and frothing at the mouth.
It seems you're still unable to answer the simple questions posed to you about your personal stance on this issue.
Why don't you point out the "infinite stream of fallacious replies"?
The argument is quite coherent.
We see a man burning a book, we see adherents of the book killing people not directly related to the action.
We do not see other adherents of the book condemning the murder of these people and we do not see adherents of the book showing understanding of the fact that humans have the rights of free expression and the right not to be murdered for perceived religious slight.
Why is this so?

thehomer:

Wow so much venom and frothing at the mouth.
It seems you're still unable to answer the simple questions posed to you about your personal stance on this issue.
Why don't you point out the "infinite stream of fallacious replies"?
The argument is quite coherent.
We see a man burning a book, we see adherents of the book killing people not directly related to the action.
We do not see other adherents of the book condemning the murder of these people and we do not see adherents of the book showing understanding of the fact that humans have the rights of free expression and the right not to be murdered for perceived religious slight.
Why is this so?

Simple, they are FANatics, When I wore a Barca Jersey to watch the Finals at the galleria where Arsenal Fanatics bled to stupidity after losing. lo and behold as we left the hall, it started with a bump, then a jeer, then it really got heated outside when area boys from the onikan environs were spilling all over the streets. I barely got away. adherents are fanatical about their religion and when you become more than a fan, reason goes out the window. tis from this root you get genocidal religious killings (i.e Jos), terrorists and soldiers of God. the fatal consequences are just as natural as collateral damage a flood does to a settlement. there is no one is to blame not even God whose Fanatics went on a rampage.

@Thehomer; If he done what he did without the public knowing, regardless of how bad it is, no one will kno about his evil.

The moment it became a public information, some portion out of the 1.5 billions people will not take it lying dawn. If no one had reacted to it as people react to 'mama jokes', where s there a possible 'you have gone too far' or what can we expect next time from a worse person than the pastor?

the pastor is supposed to be a person of higher moral value, so tell me what a person with less morality may do?

Sweetnecta:

@Thehomer; If he done what he did without the public knowing, regardless of how bad it is, no one will kno about his evil.

Many of us do not see that as evil. We see it as a man freely expressing his rights.

Sweetnecta:

The moment it became a public information, some portion out of the 1.5 billions people will not take it lying dawn. If no one had reacted to it as people react to 'mama jokes', where s there a possible 'you have gone too far' or what can we expect next time from a worse person than the pastor?

Many of us do not respond to "yo mama" jokes with killing people. Even if someone reacted that way, such a person will be condemned even by their own mother but we do not see condemnation of such actions. Some even kill others for expressing an opinion of opposition to blasphemy without condemnation or in some cases, support for such a dastardly act. Why? And why should this consistently be seen across certain groups?

Sweetnecta:

the pastor is supposed to be a person of higher moral value, so tell me what a person with less morality may do?

I don't see what morals has to do with this. I don't think there is anything actually immoral about one expressing their rights of free speech. Besides, being a religious person does not mean a person has higher morals. The fact that their adherents may think so doesn't mean they are. Generally, issues of morality are decided based on the actions and the intent behind them.
I also think that the fact that a group of people hold an object above human life to me is a core problem which needs to be addressed by discussion and desensitization because the future of the earth depends on it.

lagerwhenindoubt:

Simple, they are FANatics, When I wore a Barca Jersey to watch the Finals at the galleria where Arsenal Fanatics bled to stupidity after losing. lo and behold as we left the hall, it started with a bump, then a jeer, then it really got heated outside when area boys from the onikan environs were spilling all over the streets. I barely got away. adherents are fanatical about their religion and when you become more than a fan, reason goes out the window. tis from this root you get genocidal religious killings (i.e Jos), terrorists and soldiers of God. the fatal consequences are just as natural as collateral damage a flood does to a settlement. there is no one is to blame not even God whose Fanatics went on a rampage.

Fanatics with a core difference. People who commit such actions are condemned, arrested and tried. But in this case, for some reason the ability for some to clearly see this issue is clouded due to the association with religion.
What would a fanatical Jain do?
Will a fanatical professor who kills a man for disagreeing with him in print be condemned?

That I follow suit in your reasoning. TheHomer asked you a question you refuse to answer so here is it, again;

It seems that you only condemn this action because aid workers were killed. Would you support this action if the pastor was killed?

[b]How does the Pastor being killed in America and people that died in Afganishtan match? I see you and your Protege-homer (Simpsons) are only interested in asking fictional questions that have little or no semblance to coherent thinking, I prefer answering sensible and coherent questions, I see by yourself you are incapable of making coherent question and have to rely on the Blindest Arguer in the world by restating his points - can two blind men guide each other aright?, to answer a question of Jejune calibre, my refusal to answering his question is simply because the questions are idiotic and mimics foolery, first and foremost  I never knew atheist were psychics, who could read people's thoughts and in this case hommer Simpsons read wrong, when an individual writes simply wrote for the mere fact that they are not remotely involved with the burning of the Qur'an  is enough reason to condem it utterly, you asked if the pastor was killed will i support it? I asked does the american law allow the killing of individuals that burn the Qur'an? I support people being trialled and given the chance to defend themselves rather than a mob that is acting irrationally to carry the law into the hands. If the law of the land makes the pastor liable for death so be it, your atheistic master should atleast be psychic enough to have read that. [/b]


Last year when the man incited the Burn the Quran day, lots of Christian organizations came out openly to condemn his plan. That speaks volume about how majority of us Christians feel about his actions. However, that still doesn't justify the actions of the lunatics that went on a killing spray. You asked (as where did my entire reply call for killing people in retaliation for Burning the Qur'an?) Apparently, TheHomer as well sees through the lines of your writing. Its the reason he asked that very simple question you have failed to answer.

Second lesson, you should learn thou shall not be dumb, since I condem such actions you need to put your brain into good use, instead of repeatingthe same daft questions pover and over .   .   . again as nnowhere did i support such actions, you wrotye that hommer simpson see through my writing, but i asked what did you see, learn to use your sense atleast once before you die, I find people who closely follow foolishness irritating just like your following of hommer simpsons. - you need to watch the simppsons to know what I am talking about.



No country permits the killing of people at the slightest provocation?

No country does but how many of these crooks in the middle east have been brought to book? And how many of you their counterparts in the west will not stop at saying that the man who burnt a book in USA is the one to be blamed for the deaths of people killed in the middle east.

Some one need to fix a bolt falling from his head, you wrote with no proof that muslims in the west hold the man responsible for the killings, something even western leaders warned will happen yet now @intelligently" linked it with support for killings at the slightest provocation, talk of a broken record you can't help but point at this loony, as blaming some one for the killings is not the same as supporting the killing, even if hommer Simpson think there are.

As for hommer simpsons, I think the hypocritical atheist that lives in you should atleast let you know that even the west holds certain things sacred, like the Holocaust, they due to their apparent regret over the deaths of Jews usually gag people that openly deny such an event, the question is where is the freedom of expression, even in Germany, I dare you hommer to go and proclaim that the Holocaust never happened the way we think, then the law will lock you up-celebrate your freedom of expression. It is simply classical stupidity that makes an individual make foolish case about freedom of expression, every society have restrictions on  expression, because you blaspheme in private is enough those not make it an acceptable behaviour in the society.l

vedaxcool:

That I follow suit in your reasoning. TheHomer asked you a question you refuse to answer so here is it, again;

It seems that you only condemn this action because aid workers were killed. Would you support this action if the pastor was killed?

[b]How does the Pastor being killed in America and people that died in Afganishtan match? I see you and your Protege-homer (Simpsons) are only interested in asking fictional questions that have little or no semblance to coherent thinking, I prefer answering sensible and coherent questions, I see by yourself you are incapable of making coherent question and have to rely on the Blindest Arguer in the world by restating his points - can two blind men guide each other aright?, to answer a question of Jejune calibre, my refusal to answering his question is simply because the questions are idiotic and mimics foolery, first and foremost  I never knew atheist were psychics, who could read people's thoughts and in this case hommer Simpsons read wrong, when an individual writes simply wrote for the mere fact that they are not remotely involved with the burning of the Qur'an  is enough reason to condem it utterly, you asked if the pastor was killed will i support it? I asked does the american law allow the killing of individuals that burn the Qur'an? I support people being trialled and given the chance to defend themselves rather than a mob that is acting irrationally to carry the law into the hands. If the law of the land makes the pastor liable for death so be it, your atheistic master should atleast be psychic enough to have read that. [/b]

Why are you so angry? Please take it easy.
Now you are able to answer that question, here's the next one.
How does the fact that the law does not see the Qur'an burning as a crime factor into this?

vedaxcool:

Last year when the man incited the Burn the Quran day, lots of Christian organizations came out openly to condemn his plan. That speaks volume about how majority of us Christians feel about his actions. However, that still doesn't justify the actions of the lunatics that went on a killing spray. You asked (as where did my entire reply call for killing people in retaliation for Burning the Qur'an?) Apparently, TheHomer as well sees through the lines of your writing. Its the reason he asked that very simple question you have failed to answer.

Second lesson, you should learn thou shall not be dumb, since I condem such actions you need to put your brain into good use, instead of repeatingthe same daft questions pover and over .   .   . again as nnowhere did i support such actions, you wrotye that hommer simpson see through my writing, but i asked what did you see, learn to use your sense atleast once before you die, I find people who closely follow foolishness irritating just like your following of hommer simpsons. - you need to watch the simppsons to know what I am talking about.



No country permits the killing of people at the slightest provocation?

No country does but how many of these crooks in the middle east have been brought to book? And how many of you their counterparts in the west will not stop at saying that the man who burnt a book in USA is the one to be blamed for the deaths of people killed in the middle east.

Some one need to fix a bolt falling from his head, you wrote with no proof that muslims in the west hold the man responsible for the killings, something even western leaders warned will happen yet now @intelligently" linked it with support for killings at the slightest provocation, talk of a broken record you can't help but point at this loony, as blaming some one for the killings is not the same as supporting the killing, even if hommer Simpson think there are.

As for hommer simpsons, I think the hypocritical atheist that lives in you should atleast let you know that even the west holds certain things sacred, like the Holocaust, they due to their apparent regret over the deaths of Jews usually gag people that openly deny such an event, the question is where is the freedom of expression, even in Germany, I dare you hommer to go and proclaim that the Holocaust never happened the way we think, then the law will lock you up-celebrate your freedom of expression. It is simply classical stupidity that makes an individual make foolish case about freedom of expression, every society have restrictions on  expression, because you blaspheme in private is enough those not make it an acceptable behaviour in the society.l

A usual attempt of shifting the focus of the discussion. This discussion is on the Qur'an burning in the U.S and the subsequent revolt and murders perpetrated by Muslims in Afghanistan.
Next time to clearly state that you condemn the murder of people over the burning of the Qur'an. I notice the way you slipped it in there while wailing all over the place.
Also note that people are free to burn copies of books they own.
Please let your fellow Muslims know that you strongly condemn the murder of people due to books being burnt.
I noticed that you have as usual failed to back up your usual senseless claims with any evidence.
I advice you to please stop making yourself appear mentally unstable with the way you respond.

Vedaxcool !!! 

The first thing that needs to be made clear is the fact that a few years back, you (muslims) wrote to Seun Osewa with a polite but clear message, do something about what's been said about Islam on Nairaland, or a Fatwa will be issued on you. Have seen Seun Osewa say lots of total rubbish about Christianity but not once has he dared comment on anything pertaining to Islam - "his usual dumb reply would be I don't know anything about the religion". The Fatwa message prompted the "Islam for Muslims Board". Now, theirs something called decorum - an observance or requirement of polite society. You (Muslims) were the ones that decided to isolate yourself away from the general religious section and I'm certain that people who don't share your faith hardly go to your section to post on stuffs not even controversial in nature.

Where decorum comes in is that since you came to this board, remember Muslims are the only ones with a separate board because they could tolerate what was been written about Islam, and identify yourself as a Muslim and its Muslims that have taken lives of innocent people over the issue of quran burning, mere common sense demands that you be very sympathetic in a board as this. Now, before you go cause further damage to your health  with a high blood pressure, what I imply is the fact that you need not come here and explicitly spit on all our faces with statements like this "In my opinion, a healthy limit has to be placed on this priceless liberty and in this case its an expression of hatred. burning a relic of their faith and purpose to their lives. Its similar to Nazi propaganda." by Kay_17 and this; "blaming some one for the killings is not the same as supporting the killing" from a very confused YOU You should blame the killers but not support the burning.

The same decorum that wouldn't let you fart in a board meeting or at the dinning at your inlaws', or one that would let you tell your host to his face that his wife is the worst cook you've ever tasted applies that when you come to the general religious section on Nairaland, since you demanded for a separate board for Islam, you watch your words and be sympathetic to issues. If this same thread had been posted in the Islam for Muslims' board, I'd care less about what you muslims think, but out here is a lot of us who remember things you muslims seem to forget at will.

Do you remember the Theodoor "Theo" van Gogh's story a few years back? He was shot eight times by a muslim who then attempted to decapitate him with one knife, and stabbed him in the chest with another. WHY? because Theo produce the film "Submission", which was critical of the treatment of women in Islam. Yet there was the Da Vinci Code and not one Christian burnt any body's effigy. Many Christians attacked back by writing books, video productions etc. Anything but Violence as retaliation. Imagine if Van had done a movie about Muhammad and Islam itself, what would have happened? World war III. What tolerance lies in your actions?

Only if you'd written something as sensible as this in your very first post; I support people being trialed and given the chance to defend themselves rather than a mob that is acting irrationally to carry the law into the hands. If the law of the land makes the pastor liable for death so be it. and nothing more, you wouldn't be gasping for breath from being so bitter. But you went on about how people were trying to do this and that to Islam. As well, KAY_17 would have done well if he'd stopped at "In my opinion, a healthy limit has to be placed on this priceless liberty and in this case its an expression of hatred. but he didn't, why he would mess up such wonderful line with burning a relic of their faith and purpose to their lives. Its similar to Nazi propaganda.

The western world didn't want the book burning to go on because they are aware that majority of muslims in the middle east are like dogs on a leach waiting for the slightest opportunity to bite. Why can't you all just prove the rest of us world wrong by pretending to be the religion of peace that you falsely claim to be.

NB; could you kindly put all the venom all in one paragraph and the bit sensible things you have to say on another should you want to reply next.  Thanks

You (Muslims) were the ones that decided to isolate yourself away from the general religious section and I'm certain that people who don't share your faith hardly go to your section to post on stuffs not even controversial in nature.


You certainly Ignorant, as non- Muslims frequent the 'Islam for Muslims' sections and do all sort of things there. It is very apparent that you are in the habit of making off sense statements. it seems all your venomous statements made previously has eluded your ever "remembering brain" which seems more fixated when you are given back your dish.

Evidently I am not going to elevate you brainless assertions and that of homer Simpson with any reply as you are only interested in listening to yourselves, something you and Mr. Blind arguer should know is that I don't go in circles foolishly, that is meant for dogs who chase their tail.

On freedom of expression.

It should be noted that certain western countries have placed restrictions on what you can say about the holocaust:

Holocaust denial is illegal in a number of European countries.[1] Many countries also have broader laws that criminalize genocide denial. In addition, the European Union has issued a directive to combat racism and xenophobia, which makes provision for member states criminalising Holocaust denial, with a maximum prison sentence of between one and three years. Also, the Council of Europe's 2003 Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cyber Crime, concerning the prosecution of acts of a racist and xenophobic nature committed through computer systems includes an article entitled Denial, gross minimisation, approval or justification of genocide or crimes against humanity, although this does not have the status of law. Of the countries that ban Holocaust denial, a number (Austria, Germany, Hungary, and Romania) were among the perpetrators of the Holocaust, and many of these also ban other elements associated with Nazism, such as Nazi symbols.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_against_Holocaust_denial

I only hope Twiddle dumb and Twiddle daft can read.

vedaxcool:

You (Muslims) were the ones that decided to isolate yourself away from the general religious section and I'm certain that people who don't share your faith hardly go to your section to post on stuffs not even controversial in nature.


You certainly Ignorant, as non- Muslims frequent the 'Islam for Muslims' sections and do all sort of things there. It is very apparent that you are in the habit of making off sense statements. it seems all your venomous statements made previously has eluded your ever "remembering brain" which seems more fixated when you are given back your dish.

Evidently I am not going to elevate you brainless assertions and that of homer Simpson with any reply as you are only interested in listening to yourselves, something you and Mr. Blind arguer should know is that I don't go in circles foolishly, that is meant for dogs who chase their tail.

On freedom of expression.

It should be noted that certain western countries have placed restrictions on what you can say about the holocaust:

Holocaust denial is illegal in a number of European countries.[1] Many countries also have broader laws that criminalize genocide denial. In addition, the European Union has issued a directive to combat racism and xenophobia, which makes provision for member states criminalising Holocaust denial, with a maximum prison sentence of between one and three years. Also, the Council of Europe's 2003 Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cyber Crime, concerning the prosecution of acts of a racist and xenophobic nature committed through computer systems includes an article entitled Denial, gross minimisation, approval or justification of genocide or crimes against humanity, although this does not have the status of law. Of the countries that ban Holocaust denial, a number (Austria, Germany, Hungary, and Romania) were among the perpetrators of the Holocaust, and many of these also ban other elements associated with Nazism, such as Nazi symbols.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_against_Holocaust_denial

I only hope Twiddle dumb and Twiddle daft can read.

A minor shift but a shift nonetheless from mentally unstable to mentally challenged. I guess it is a shift for the better. I notice your attempt to dance and sway across the topic but it is not a good sign. The point is that the pastor burnt the Qur'an in the U.S where it is not illegal to burn it. Where he actually has the right to burn it. Yet others took that as a sign for them to go on a murder spree.
The question is this. Do you feel the pastor has a right to do so? Is he to be blamed for what happened? That's what the topic is supposed to address. So what is the relevance of whether or not holocaust or genocide denial is illegal in some European countries when we are talking about a burning incident in the U.S?
Please go through a further shift in the appropriate direction.

@Vedaxcool; Apparently you've totally lost foot in the whirlwind of Islamic ideology and you're grabbing at every ocean current to stay afloat. Holocaust to Quran burning? I feel pity for you Vedaxcool. Really I do. It shows you are really a lover of your faith. I'm sure you are naturally a good fellow in a wrong cause. You should really not reply again. Safe your pride, whatever is left of it anyway. Even the devil's advocate walked out on a case once it dawned on him it was to his peril. I'll pray for you as I'd do to TheHomer as well. I look forward to exchanging ideas with you on any other board. Should you have any question as regards the Christian faith, feel free to ask. I'm certain there are lots of Christians here filled full with the Word of God to reply. Jesus loves you and he longs for you to know him and accept him as your Lord and Savior. Same goes for you TheHomer.

Accept my sincere apology for any derogatory word I might have used in any of my posts to you. I get caught up in the heat of things, sometimes, when I see a very good motorist driving on the wrong lane. Cheers bro

oritameta:

. . . .I'll pray for you as I'd do to TheHomer as well. . . .

Thanks a lot. Please add some fasting to it too.
I'll consider killing a turtledove for you.

I'll consider killing a turtledove for you.

for a whole (small) me?

oritameta:

for a whole (small) me?

Of course. As soon as I can find one.

h h, apparently a schizophrenic is looking for attention, pls tell homer simpson to just pick up the phone and call his doctor, i cannot help his retarded question any more .

Freedom of expression challenged?

living in a world ever changing ideas. Freedom of expression has long been seen by misguided and poorly informed individuals as absolute, yet such absolution is only when the common enemy is being confronted by western nation, an application of common sense seems to permeate whenever their sordid deed of the Holocaust is brought to bare, but when it involves things more sacred they immediately invoke freedom of expression, such duplicity only makes one wonders what is really going on? One could remember the cartoons drawing that again was a clear show by some individual to celebrate their freedom of expression yet this individuals failed to show us or explain to us how they could easily have celebrated their freedom of nuisancity sorry expression by simply questioning the Holocaust - a law that gags those that questions it clearly  stifles freedom of expression, even questioing the number of dead could land you in a dark cell ,  this a sign for those with common sense that society have sensitivities that must not be trampled, but a society that allows the attack other peoples' sensitivity is definitely hypocritical, even the article i sighted earlier shows that the EU is planning to enforce such law on the net, in fact the people from other countries are expected to respect the Holocaust the same way the western nations do, to cap it all there has been a continuous push by anti Islamic fundamentalist to discredit the religion by defacing, misinforming and now burning the Qur'an, but like ALLAH equivocally stated " they seek to extinguish the light of ALLAH yet ALLAH perfects it even more", at the en of the day the muslim ummah must reawaken our commitment to the deeen and evoke our higher moral standards by obeying the Qur'an, which does not support nor condone mob violence and dissension, even if a misguided paraplegic atheist thinks burning the Qur'an is a right, it does not make it right, as  i was saying killings must be left to the apparatus of the state to determine no to mob rule.

@oritameta, comparison of the burning incident to the Holocaust denial stems from the fact that these are things consider sacred in both societies and that in western society there is still that limitation they place on what you can actually say.  how a minute particule of truthfulness exist within you, remember your strange statement that u made with certainty, non - muslims don't go to 'Islam for muslims' section, yet after i indicated to you that they do, no apology for this apparent lie you flushed from your bowels, this only indicates how strong headed you are in admitting your mistake, (well in this case lie . But not to worry though your secrete is safe with me and the whole of NL, ouch

@Vexdacool: My statement read;

I'm certain that people who don't share your faith[b] hardly[/b] go to your section to post on stuffs not even controversial in nature.

Hardly isn't the same as Don't go! I'm certain you are well read enough to know that. Scroll back up to refresh your memory.

Why the Holocaust can't be compared in any way is the mere fact that the Holocaust wasn't just about burning the Jewish sacred book but the awful, dehumanizing tragic experience of a Jewish people. The primary objective of the Holocaust was to wipe out the Jews from the face of the earth. It wasn't the Jewish Torah that was been burnt, it was their lives that were been taken for the fact that they were Jewish. 3 million died in gas chambers alone. Holocaust is a crime against humanity. It directly involved HUMAN life. To compare the Holocaust and the Quran burning would mean you are equating the value of life and book as the same. Another copy of the Quran can be made, but a single life taken is lost forever. The Quran doesn't breath, has no blood flowing through it, does not procreate. That burnt copy of the Quran hasn't left behind a father or a mother or siblings. The Quran is an IT meaning a NON-LIVING THING. The two don't just go along. If the Holocaust had simply been about the Jewish Torah been burnt, then maybe the two could be comparable but as it stands, they don't in any way. I totally disagree with you!

vedaxcool:

h h, apparently a schizophrenic is looking for attention, pls tell homer simpson to just pick up the phone and call his doctor, i cannot help his not-so-smart question any more .

Freedom of expression challenged?

living in a world ever changing ideas. Freedom of expression has long been seen by misguided and poorly informed individuals as absolute, yet such absolution is only when the common enemy is being confronted by western nation, an application of common sense seems to permeate whenever their sordid deed of the Holocaust is brought to bare, but when it involves things more sacred they immediately invoke freedom of expression, such duplicity only makes one wonders what is really going on? One could remember the cartoons drawing that again was a clear show by some individual to celebrate their freedom of expression yet this individuals failed to show us or explain to us how they could easily have celebrated their freedom of nuisancity sorry expression by simply questioning the Holocaust - a law that gags those that questions it clearly  stifles freedom of expression, even questioing the number of dead could land you in a dark cell ,  this a sign for those with common sense that society have sensitivities that must not be trampled, but a society that allows the attack other peoples' sensitivity is definitely hypocritical, even the article i sighted earlier shows that the EU is planning to enforce such law on the net, in fact the people from other countries are expected to respect the Holocaust the same way the western nations do, to cap it all there has been a continuous push by anti Islamic fundamentalist to discredit the religion by defacing, misinforming and now burning the Qur'an, but like ALLAH equivocally stated " they seek to extinguish the light of ALLAH yet ALLAH perfects it even more", at the en of the day the muslim ummah must reawaken our commitment to the deeen and evoke our higher moral standards by obeying the Qur'an, which does not support nor condone mob violence and dissension, even if a misguided paraplegic atheist thinks burning the Qur'an is a right, it does not make it right, as  i was saying killings must be left to the apparatus of the state to determine no to mob rule.

@oritameta, comparison of the burning incident to the Holocaust denial stems from the fact that these are things consider sacred in both societies and that in western society there is still that limitation they place on what you can actually say.  how a minute particule of truthfulness exist within you, remember your strange statement that u made with certainty, non - muslims don't go to 'Islam for muslims' section, yet after i indicated to you that they do, no apology for this apparent lie you flushed from your bowels, this only indicates how strong headed you are in admitting your mistake, (well in this case lie . But not to worry though your secrete is safe with me and the whole of NL, ouch

The deranged one is back with his attempt at changing the topic of discussion. Please stick to the topic. Besides as has been pointed out to you by oritameta, there is a difference between mass murder and a book burning. Also keep in mind that holocaust denial is also protected speech in the U.S. so as usual, your argument falls flat.

^^^  Jon.bee ibn vedaxcool    , O tun ti gbe ise e de'bi!    I am laughing so hard! God help you , Bro!  Ni'joo lo o to w'eko yi re China gege bi won ti ni ki e wa?

Freedom of speech or expression, if left unguarded and absolute could be harmful to the rights of others. Such inciting ethnic violence or hate speech towards an ethnic group or religious group. Their right to life is threatened, like religious freedom. Unwarranted disrespect and disregard for people's religions violates their right to religious freedom.

The Quran is not placed or open to a public contest, rather it is a personal symbol of their sacred faith.

Kay 17:

Freedom of speech or expression, if left unguarded and absolute could be harmful to the rights of others. Such inciting ethnic violence or hate speech towards an ethnic group or religious group. Their right to life is threatened, like religious freedom. Unwarranted disrespect and disregard for people's religions violates their right to religious freedom.

The Quran is not placed or open to a public contest, rather it is a personal symbol of their sacred faith.

I disagree with this. There are major differences between inciting ethnic violence and burning of one's copy of a book.
Religious ideas are simply ideas like others which in a free society must be open to criticism and discussion. Criticizing a religion does not violate a person's right to religious freedom because a criticism does not stop the person from practicing their religion.
And unwarranted respect and regard for some religious views can lead to murders, child abuse and discrimination.

Hardly isn't the same as Don't go! I'm certain you are well read enough to know that. Scroll back up to refresh your memory.

even at that it is a common occurence, which you are hardly knowledgeable of.

@Orimeta

you can feeel free to disagree, but note the following:

it seems you boss, homer simpsons has suffered a mental breakdown and has been left begging for atttension, pls do advise him, i believe he sees you as his boss and holds you in high esteem, to see his doctor as his questions have no place in a sane thinking mind

that the holocaust happened the way it was reported is very much debatable, as historical events are usually questioned even the existence of jesus is questioned, for instance the armenia Genocide is very much challenged by its opponents who claimed that armenians were not killed in such large numbers, so to claim because human life is involved in an issue is enough reason to stiffle debate is a cheap lie and poor excuse for such defense. It is simple a govt holds an official view on an a historical event citizen X questions such view, then the govt erects a law that stops citizen X from questioning its views on such an event, like i said this only shows a double standard, this laws are merely to preserve the sensitivity of the Jews who will definately find such questions offensive, my linking to this issue as I have explained earlier freedom of expression is never absolute,as some people that question the Holocasut merely questions how many people actually die but no, the Western govts are nt ready for such laxity towards an axiomatic truth, imagine you cannot say 5,999,999 people actually died not 6 millions people died. The tragedy of the entire event that this are not good times for Muslim - western relations yet we have a retard who prefers stocking up fire rather than promoting tolerance, no amount of a foolish atheist thoughts really count here, as freedom has its' restrictions.

vedaxcool:

Hardly isn't the same as Don't go! I'm certain you are well read enough to know that. Scroll back up to refresh your memory.

even at that it is a common occurence, which you are hardly knowledgeable of.

@Orimeta

you can feeel free to disagree, but note the following:

it seems you boss, homer simpsons has suffered a mental breakdown and has been left begging for atttension, pls do advise him, i believe he sees you as his boss and holds you in high esteem, to see his doctor as his questions have no place in a sane thinking mind

that the holocaust happened the way it was reported is very much debatable, as historical events are usually questioned even the existence of jesus is questioned, for instance the armenia Genocide is very much challenged by its opponents who claimed that armenians were not killed in such large numbers, so to claim because human life is involved in an issue is enough reason to stiffle debate is a cheap lie and poor excuse for such defense. It is simple a govt holds an official view on an a historical event citizen X questions such view, then the govt erects a law that stops citizen X from questioning its views on such an event, like i said this only shows a double standard, this laws are merely to preserve the sensitivity of the Jews who will definately find such questions offensive, my linking to this issue as I have explained earlier freedom of expression is never absolute,as some people that question the Holocasut merely questions how many people actually die but no, the Western govts are nt ready for such laxity towards an axiomatic truth, imagine you cannot say 5,999,999 people actually died not 6 millions people died. The tragedy of the entire event that this are not good times for Muslim - western relations yet we have a not-so-smart person who prefers stocking up fire rather than promoting tolerance, no amount of a foolish atheist thoughts really count here, as freedom has its' restrictions.

Uh oh. The mentally unbalanced character is now instead slipping into mental derangement. Note the way his presentation has evolved.
He now wishes to shift the discussion on the barbaric acts of murdering people for a book burning that occurred on another side of the globe. This is very bad. And keep in mind that the country in question does not lock people up for what he is saying. He is simply dabbling in the red-herring fallacy because neither the holocaust nor speech surrounding the holocaust is in question.

AYA, a mad man is pleading for attention , but surely he can only get such attension in Yaba ward 9.

I prefer dealing with your boss orimeta over to you.

vedaxcool:

AYA, a mad man is pleading for attention , but surely he can only get such attension in Yaba ward 9.

I prefer dealing with your boss orimeta over to you.

This mentally unbalanced fellow just randomly assigns posts to people. It's a sad case to see. Try to keep your mind on the topic at hand.

Alright! There were two individuals that both brought a loaf of bread at two different vendors at approximately the same time. Lets say this is hypothetical; individual A and individual B.

Individual A was walking home in delight, had just brought a loaf of bread to share with family for breakfast and all of a sudden someone brushes past him and the loaf falls into a muddy puddle. Individual A is now full of rage and chases the culprit down ending up beating the person senselss.

Individual B was walking home in delight, had just brought a loaf of bread to share with family for breakfast and all of a sudden someone brushes past him and the loaf falls into a muddy puddle. Individual B is now full of rage but stops to think and decides to turn around, go home empty handed and explain to the family his ordeal.

Now lets stop right here.

Would you blame the loaf of bread for the actions of either of these individuals or the individuals themselves?

^^^ That loaf of bread had to be one inconsiderate fascists not to make any attempt at dodging the puddle knowing full well that it can result in cataclysmic conflagration for either Individual A or Individual B. We must seek to ban over-zealous loaves of bread especially ones from the fascists north just kidding election disappointment is ruining my muse

lagerwhenindoubt:

^^^ That loaf of bread had to be one inconsiderate fascists not to make any attempt at dodging the puddle knowing full well that it can result in cataclysmic conflagration for either Individual A or Individual B.

lol