Iran trys to get holland to ban dutch mp's film about the "violence provoking koran"

[Arsalan]

That's a good start. But they'll have to do much more.

And people dotn like being told what to do. They can think on their own.

Because (a) it is most certainly not true. Arabic is not the mother of all languages. Ask any linguist.

Why cant it be true? Ill ask you since you seem to think it isnt.

(b) The notion that one language is better than another suggests that the people who speak that language are in some way better than other people. That their culture is better than other people. I for one think this the wrong direction to travel down.

No one said better than another. I believe Arabic is the mother of all languages because of everything it encompasses. Its got nothing to do with superiority. If we go assume that what youre saying is right, then Russians are superior than all others because they were the first in space etc etc. See how wrong that is? Were not talking about superiority, although you seem to associate superiority with the beginning of things. But then again, asked if whether Judaism is superior to Christianity since it was there first you would probably lol at me

he 4 women? Obviously this guy was an Islamic apologist - just not a very clever one. Why does the Qur'an advocate 4 wives per man? Simple, because there are 4 times as many women.

Pretty silly isn't it?

lol ya

That one reason I think education is a great way to inoculate the general public. When this kid was told there are 4xs as many women - how great would it have been if he had the balls (and the knowledge) to stand up and say: No there is not. You're just making this up as you go along aren't you? The reason why the Qur'an advocates 4 wives is because that was the custom at that time. It isn't anymore and it shouldn't be now. So lets not try to make it out that we should have polygamy because without doing so there'd be not enough men to go around for all the women! That's asinine!

You do know that marrying up to 4 wives is a restriction and not a permission right? Even the Quranic idiom supports that and the translations say that marrying one woman is better. There are strict circumstances and regulations for being allowed to marry more than one woman. A fact lost upon you and some Muslims as well.

 

[Arsalan]

Just to go back to the Arabic - you see, this is a major fault in what many many Muslims that I know tend to think. It's insidious. This whole notion goes so well with monotheism. "Our" language is God's language.

Not every Muslim speaks Arabic you know. Although they do have enough knowledge to read the Quran.

Only "Our" religion is the one true Religion.

Nope. Muslims believe that religions like Buddhism and Christianity, even the rligions of the Aborigines and the Inuits come from God. Its just that those religions promised a reformer and a Prophet and when he came a large part converted, another large part didnt.

"We" are superior somehow. This then leads to many convoluted historical fantasies. Everything from Islam was responsible for Opera to Arabs discovered zero.

Arabis didnt discover zero. It was just possible to spread it over the Muslim empire because of the common connection. And btw, who was Abbas Ibn Firnas? He did something a couple of years before Da Vinci, try to guess what.

Like Bin Laden's son said: We must protect Islam for Arabs and Muslims.

not: Muslims and Arabs - ARABS and Muslims.
not: We must protect Islam for Muslims.
It was: We must protect Islam for ARABS and oh yeah ... and other Muslims... I suppose.


Freudian Slip? I think not.

Anyway, if you don't get it or can't get it then don't worry about it.

Michael

I once said to a Japanese girl friend of mine: Holly Shit I didn't realize I was dating an Asian! She quickly replied: I'm not Asian I'm Japanese.

Same difference to me.

Get it?


Awful funny that a Religion that prides itself on supposedly having a Xian like Universality - that such racist bullshit can still be so evident - - huh?

First of all, Bin Ladens son is hardly an authority on Islam. He gave his opinion. Nothing wrong with that. Secondly, Jesus never said he was sent to anyone except the children of Israel and thereby the argument that Christianity is Universal is void.

 

[vincent]

OMG - what is your point? Ergo they deserve to be murdered? Are Muslims animals that can't deal with a bit of "provocation"?

Where was SAM when piss Christ was made?

So SAM - can we have a picture of piss-Quran? I actually own a Qur'an. Can I piss on it and take a photograph? Or is that too provocotive? What about a Piss-Mohammad? Is that OK? Or should such an artist be murdered?

As a catholic, i look at this picture & i see artwork, or someones own idea of art, i am not offended in the slightest by it, any belief i have in god, is with my mind & him, i dont get a hard on looking at bibles or crucifixes, as for flushing the Quran down toilets in guat bay or american universities, i am pretty damn sure you could flush a million bibles down british peoples toilets, our only concern would be about blocking the toilets.

I fail to see the value or mystic power in something made by man, look a naked woman on a beach in florida is art in the west, if she did it in iran or pakistan she could be killed for it.

 

[Michael]

Why cant it be true? Ill ask you since you seem to think it isnt.

I'll post it in linguistics.

Jesus never said he was sent to anyone except the children of Israel and thereby the argument that Christianity is Universal is void.

a) Jesus was never a real person.
b) At that time Judaism was evangelical proselytizing religion.
c) Universality was a corner tenant of Xitanity. Like it or not that's the History of the matter.

Not that I really care, you want to think that "Islam" reformed Abrahamism and "Islam" was the first to teach Universality - go right ahead. Just another fairy tale in a long line of others.

 

[Norsefire]

Do they deserve to be murdered? That IS what you're saying, isn't it?

No, what I am saying is if you are going to provoke people, be prepared for the consequences.

 

[iceaura]

No, what I am saying is if you are going to provoke people, be prepared for the consequences.

What Wilder is saying is that if you are going to let lots of Muslims into a country where there weren't many, be prepared for the consequences. You seem to agree.

 

[Norsefire]

What Wilder is saying is that if you are going to let lots of Muslims into a country where there weren't many, be prepared for the consequences. You seem to agree.

Well the consequence would simply be there are now alot of Muslims in that country, as there are Mexicans in America

 

[iceaura]

Well the consequence would simply be there are now alot of Muslims in that country, as there are Mexicans in America

As Denmark is discovering, the consequences are not limited to that -

Denmark must now prepare itself for the consequences of Muslims feeling provoked. Because Muslims get provoked by things like some bigot making a movie, which happens a lot in Denmark, and when Muslims get provoked they riot in the streets and kill their neighbors.

And this is something you find normal.

 

[Arsalan]

Is that right? Strange, im still sitting at home, relaxing...

 

[Norsefire]

As Denmark is discovering, the consequences are not limited to that -

Denmark must now prepare itself for the consequences of Muslims feeling provoked. Because Muslims get provoked by things like some bigot making a movie, which happens a lot in Denmark, and when Muslims get provoked they riot in the streets and kill their neighbors.

And this is something you find normal.

When some Muslims, certainly, as I'm sure if some Blacks in the US ridiculed and provoked whites, the KKK would be on their ass before you even read this.



Is provocation right? No, because it is INTENDED to spark violence.

 

[(Q)]

No, what I am saying is if you are going to provoke people, be prepared for the consequences.

That is an open threat. However, the movies gets released and millions watch it.

Now, define the consequences. What is it exactly that you think should happen? Should people get murdered for showing the film? Yes or no?

 

[(Q)]

Is provocation right? No, because it is INTENDED to spark violence.

THAT is where you are DEAD WRONG!

People act out violence on their own free will, a decision THEY make in which THEY are utterly and completely responsible and WILL face consequences for THEIR actions.

You really need to understand this.

 

[Norsefire]

THAT is where you are DEAD WRONG!

People act out violence on their own free will, a decision THEY make in which THEY are utterly and completely responsible and WILL face consequences for THEIR actions.

You really need to understand this.

Yes, but the provocation is intended to spark that violence in others. People don't get violence for no reason (normal people, at least). Provocation is specifically to get people angry.

 

[Norsefire]

That is an open threat. However, the movies gets released and millions watch it.

Now, define the consequences. What is it exactly that you think should happen? Should people get murdered for showing the film? Yes or no?

I don't know, that isn't up to me to decide. However, if they do get murdered, both the murderer AND the provoker should face trial.


woops, he's dead never mind, but if he weren't you knw what I mean

 

[Arsalan]

Compare the compassion of Pakistan banning the Da Vinci Code out of respect of its Christian inhabitants with a person intent on spreading lies and hatred about people and a religion he barely knows...

 

[iceaura]

When some Muslims, certainly, as I'm sure if some Blacks in the US ridiculed and provoked whites, the KKK would be on their ass before you even read this.

A lot of the stuff you're sure about is fairly bizarre. The KKK is not around much, these days - they get on no one's ass.

There are blacks in the US who have made lucrative careers out of ridiculing and "provoking" whites. They don't need police escorts to go shopping. But then, the whites they ridicule handle provocations of that kind more like reasonable people would.

Is provocation right? No, because it is INTENDED to spark violence.

And it works pretty easily on Muslims. Which is something to prepare for, if there's Muslims moving in - every time some bigot wants to provoke them, you'll be dealing with riots and murders. You'll have to muzzle every bigot - as defined by the newcomers - in town, just to keep people from setting fire to cars and murdering cartoonists.

Maybe they'll give you a list of the people you need to muzzle - that would make it easier. It's hard to guess in advance what's going to touch them off.

Compare the compassion of Pakistan banning the Da Vinci Code out of respect of its Christian inhabitants

Is that a joke !? Man, that's depressing. That's about as damning a proof of cluelessness among Islamic officialdom as I can imagine - and right at the center of trouble.

 

[Norsefire]

A lot of the stuff you're sure about is fairly bizarre. The KKK is not around much, these days - they get on no one's ass.

There are blacks in the US who have made lucrative careers out of ridiculing and "provoking" whites. They don't need police escorts to go shopping. But then, the whites they ridicule handle provocations of that kind more like reasonable people would.

The KKK, and other white supremacist groups ARE still around and they WOULD attack a black who did that.

And it works pretty easily on Muslims. Which is something to prepare for, if there's Muslims moving in - every time some bigot wants to provoke them, you'll be dealing with riots and murders. You'll have to muzzle every bigot - as defined by the newcomers - in town, just to keep people from setting fire to cars and murdering cartoonists.

Maybe they'll give you a list of the people you need to muzzle - that would make it easier. It's hard to guess in advance what's going to touch them off.

Then don't provoke them. Intelligent criticisms are one thing, but don't go be a moron.

 

[(Q)]

I don't know, that isn't up to me to decide. However, if they do get murdered, both the murderer AND the provoker should face trial.

The judge will toss the case of the 'provoker' out of court, there is no evidence of any criminal activity whatsoever. He is an innocent victim.

The murderer would probably fry.

 

[Norsefire]

The judge will toss the case of the 'provoker' out of court, there is no evidence of any criminal activity whatsoever. He is an innocent victim.

The murderer would probably fry.

So you're defending morons?

 

[iceaura]

The KKK, and other white supremacist groups ARE still around and they WOULD attack a black who did that.

Bullshit.

And how did you maange to get to the point of excusing Islamic thugs by saying they don't act any different than the KKK circa 1965? Is that kind of behavior OK with you ? Can we treat them the same, then ?

When the KKK guys got caught, not only were some perps jailed, but the organization in the US got sued, and they lost. Millions. One of their victims ended up owning their main meeting hall. How about the victims of this Muslim crap sue the local mosque ?

Come to think about it, maybe that's why we haven't had this kind of rioting in the US: the local mosque officials have had a quiet talk with their lawyers about the consequences of organizing and motivating felony crime.

Then don't provoke them. Intelligent criticisms are one thing, but don't go be a moron.

Your ideas of "intelligent" and mine vary considerably. There's always going to be morons around. Some Islamic punk torches my car because some moron I never heard of "provoked" him, I want the punk fined and jailed. Better: deported.