Sudan arrests British teacher for naming bear Mohammed

I have condemnation for such mob mentality and my heart and prayers go out to Gillian Gibbons. But whilst we have a segment of a population of the a country clamouring for her execution, we also have a large worldwide majority condemning such call. So, on a global scale, 1% of mob Muslims call for her death whilst a global Muslim percentage far greater than that condemns the Sudanese government. Yet, certain quarters only see that 1% and quite liberally put blame on the entire faith.


But D-Mouse........honestly

Why is it even ONE percent (if that's even a true number)??? Do you know what one percent of a billion is??? :csad: Why this at all...on any scale?? That is not acceptable in my mind and it shouldn't be in yours or any "sane" person. The "yeah but" excuses are old now.

Either your facts are wrong on zealots vs moderates or the moderates are secretly cool with it or just powerless..


And this is not an isolated incident.
 
But D-Mouse........honestly

Why is it even ONE percent (if that's even a true number)??? Do you know what one percent of a billion is??? :csad: Why this at all...on any scale?? That is not acceptable in my mind and it shouldn't be in yours or any "sane" person. The "yeah but" excuses are old now.

Either your facts are wrong on zealots vs moderates or the moderates are secretly cool with it or just powerless..

And this is not an isolated incident.
10 Million people is 1% of 1 Billion.
 
What praytell WarCrimes are those? The United States was within its International Right when it went to war with Iraq. Have you heard of the 17 UN Resolutions that allowed any Country to attack Saddam Hussien for War Crimes/Human Rights Violations after the Kuwaiti War in the Early 90's. Namely UN Resolution #687. Did you not see that President Clinton Attacked Iraq in 1998 without Congressional Approval? The Bush Administration had at least a 2/3rds vote to go into Iraq. So how is Bush a war criminal?

the US president is the commader in chief of the armed forces, correct?
Responsible for the behaviour of those under his command?
How about mistreatment of prisoners of war?
and Ignorance is no defence in law, so you cant claim he didnt know about it.


ahh thats highly tenuous, i know, but its true.
 
No, it was me expressing horror about all the psycho, deluded ass****s who want to kill anyone who doesn't believe exactly as they do....that want to kill me because I don't revere their imaginary friend.

Do you understand now?

you know whats really scary: the only reason certain people kick up so much about radical muslims isnt because they want a theocracy. Its because they (the muslims) want a theocracy based on a different religion to theirs.
 
Sad! You have an entire Sudanese government bringing down Islamic wrath on a 54 year-old British woman......maniacs outside the courthouse waving knives calling for her death and all you can pull out is some militia in Sudan who say they are raping and pillaging for the Ten Commandments??

Have you ever read the 10 commandments??? And not once are they mentioned as Christians.

This equivalency thing is tired. There is no comparison to what I can turn on my TV and see almost everyday.

Oh...guess what?? Bin Laden just put out another tape threatening Europe to stop partnering with America! The hits just keep on coming.

Moderates need to speak up. London should go in there with military force after she is released. If they did it now, they would just kill her. :dry:

you know what this post sounds like?

someone trying to defend the behaviour of a radical Muslim group.


Just swap them over
you are as bad as the muslims who pretend that no muslim can do wrong.
 
you know whats really scary: the only reason certain people kick up so much about radical muslims isnt because they want a theocracy. Its because they (the muslims) want a theocracy based on a different religion to theirs.

Damn man you're hitting them out of the park.
 
the US president is the commader in chief of the armed forces, correct?
Responsible for the behaviour of those under his command?
How about mistreatment of prisoners of war?
and Ignorance is no defence in law, so you cant claim he didnt know about it.

ahh thats highly tenuous, i know, but its true.
The Geneva Conventions dicate that a Uniformed Enemy Combatants are to be treated a certain way. Pretty much "Golden Rule" kind of way. Since these people who were detained were not Uniformed or in other words, Not organized under a Nation's Military, they are not subject to they exact same rules as the Geneva Conventions. If you are referring to Abu Girab, the people that were responsible for that were punished. If you are talking about Gitmo, actually read what happens there. Its a "country club" that is far better than most Prisons in this country. You can't hold the President directly responsible for the Actions of the people in the Armed Forces. If that is true, then I guess it's Clinton's Fault that I puked after Drinken too much with my recruiter. :yay:
 
they should send the British army in to break her out and take her home.


that would be an awesome news story
 
Sad! You have an entire Sudanese government bringing down Islamic wrath on a 54 year-old British woman......maniacs outside the courthouse waving knives calling for her death and all you can pull out is some militia in Sudan who say they are raping and pillaging for the Ten Commandments??

Have you ever read the 10 commandments??? And not once are they mentioned as Christians.

This equivalency thing is tired. There is no comparison to what I can turn on my TV and see almost everyday.

Oh...guess what?? Bin Laden just put out another tape threatening Europe to stop partnering with America! The hits just keep on coming.

Moderates need to speak up. London should go in there with military force after she is released. If they did it now, they would just kill her. :dry:
...and the master of changing the subject strikes again! I'm not arguing this point, Slim: what they're doing is ridiculous. I'm not saying they're Christians, either. Hell, I'm not even saying that there isn't a higher percentage of violent, fundementalist Muslims than there are violent, fundementalist Christians.

All I've said is that:

A) The moderates are speaking out and have spoken out in the past (which has been demonstrated to you over and over again in this thread), and

B) Your comment that implied that this is confined to this particular religion is absolute horse****.

Prove me wrong or GTFO of the discussion.
 
I think this whole situation really proves what happens when an entire region bases its law system around a religion. Laws become rubber and the new "law" of the god is not decided by the holiest people in town, but instead it is decided by the loudest thug.
 
I think this whole situation really proves what happens when an entire region bases its law system around a religion. Laws become rubber and the new "law" of the god is not decided by the holiest people in town, but instead it is decided by the loudest thug.


That's too broad a statement.

Do you see this kind of thing in regions dominated by Budhists?

Hindu regions going up in arms??

Christian (Protestant & Catholics)?

No, you do not. So it's not that religion being the basis for the laws that's the problem. It's what that religion teaches.
 
So it's not that religion being the basis for the laws that's the problem. It's what that religion teaches.

Slim you have no idea what Islam teaches.

You have no knowledge and understanding of the Quran. None whatsoever but yet you portray yourself as some authority of Islam on the Hype and use it in your crusade against Islam and Muslims.

Your understanding of Islam is as warped as the fanatics and extremists calling themselves Muslims and using Islam to justify their actions.

I am not defending what is happening in many of these Muslim countries but I will not let you simply blame the mentality and actions of these governments and the masses on Islam as the sole cause.

That would be as idiotic as me pointing to all of the violence that takes place in the U.S. on a daily basis and say its because the people are predominately Christian and its Christianity that teaches and eye for an eye or discrimination against Homosexuals.



As long as you continue your crusade against Islam I will be there to defend it.

You really shouldn't talk about what you don't know and understand.
 
it may sound heartless and i hope everything works out for this poor woman but come on seriously

1. she knew what country she was in, therefore she should have known what was not really acceptable withen that country.

2. as sad and as strange the laws of country. all these people who are claiming she is being wrongly accused are the same people who expect foreigners to drop all elements of there culture and adopt everything about ours.

3. common bloody sense. come on did bells not go off when the name was put forward. i mean i go to work in Tibet and someone suggests naming a dog buddha. no that's gonna piss off the wrong people
 
it may sound heartless and i hope everything works out for this poor woman but come on seriously

1. she knew what country she was in, therefore she should have known what was not really acceptable withen that country.

2. as sad and as strange the laws of country. all these people who are claiming she is being wrongly accused are the same people who expect foreigners to drop all elements of there culture and adopt everything about ours.

3. common bloody sense. come on did bells not go off when the name was put forward. i mean i go to work in Tibet and someone suggests naming a dog buddha. no that's gonna piss off the wrong people

Those are some very good points. QFT.
 
it may sound heartless and i hope everything works out for this poor woman but come on seriously

1. she knew what country she was in, therefore she should have known what was not really acceptable withen that country.

2. as sad and as strange the laws of country. all these people who are claiming she is being wrongly accused are the same people who expect foreigners to drop all elements of there culture and adopt everything about ours.

3. common bloody sense. come on did bells not go off when the name was put forward. i mean i go to work in Tibet and someone suggests naming a dog buddha. no that's gonna piss off the wrong people

1. She shouldn't have to fear for her life for making a mistake as she did.
2. Well, I really can't argue with you on that one. Refer to #1.
3. It is not common sense. I did not know that you can't name a teddy bear Mohammed. I knew you shouldn't name a mound of ***** mohammed, but that's just me. Extra information: Buddhists are not going to call for your head if you name anything buddha. They idolise idols, and promote peace. Monks don't even kill bugs, let alone cut the heads off of infidels. Buddha is also a position you attain, in Buddhism, not a person. Shame on you for your lack of respect to a culture not your own.

Last line is sarcasim
 
Muslims: Teddy Bear Protesters Don't Represent Us

Muslim Moderates Speak Out Against the Conviction of a British Teacher in Sudan





Moderate Muslims have been swift to condemn the events in Sudan. Daisy Khan, director of the American Society for Muslim Advancement, spoke to Bill Weir on "Good Morning America Weekend Edition" about how a school project escalated into a crisis over the Christian and Muslim cultural divide and why it should be seen only as fringe extremism.

Heresy or 'Faux Pas'?

"What we're looking at here is a cultural 'faux pas,' and there's a political undercurrent that's running through this furor," said Khan.

She rejected the idea that naming the Teddy Bear Muhammad was inherently blasphemous.

"There is nothing sacred about the name Muhammad and anybody can use that," she said.

Calls for Moderation

Khan rejected the idea that the protestors' actions were appropriate for devout believers.

"The Sudanese people need to be reminded that the prophet always said that the greatest gift you can give your children is the gift of education," Khan said.

In the United Kingdom, Muslim leaders were horrified about the incident.


"It's very, very sad, very embarrassing for us," said Dr. Ghayasuddin Siddiqui, leader of the Muslim Parliament in Great Britain, earlier this week. "The Muslim community here has also expressed that this is simply unacceptable behavior from the Sudanese government, and I think the Sudanese have got to realize that this episode is doing immense damage to their credibility outside."

Even in the Sudan, Islamic leaders have been speaking out.

"The greatest scholar in Sudan, Dr. Hassan al-Turabi, has himself condemned this," Khan said. "I think that's an indication that Muslims no longer want to remain silent and do not believe in these extremist views."




http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/Story?id=3940765&page=2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_ultimate_evil
it may sound heartless and i hope everything works out for this poor woman but come on seriously

1. she knew what country she was in, therefore she should have known what was not really acceptable withen that country.

2. as sad and as strange the laws of country. all these people who are claiming she is being wrongly accused are the same people who expect foreigners to drop all elements of there culture and adopt everything about ours.

3. common bloody sense. come on did bells not go off when the name was put forward. i mean i go to work in Tibet and someone suggests naming a dog buddha. no that's gonna piss off the wrong people


Raybia :Those are some very good points. QFT.


Okay.....you're saying that she's in a land dominated by the religion of peace. BUT she should have known better than let her students name the bear Mohammed for FEAR of her life?

You can't have it both ways, Ray.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_ultimate_evil
it may sound heartless and i hope everything works out for this poor woman but come on seriously

1. she knew what country she was in, therefore she should have known what was not really acceptable withen that country.

2. as sad and as strange the laws of country. all these people who are claiming she is being wrongly accused are the same people who expect foreigners to drop all elements of there culture and adopt everything about ours.

3. common bloody sense. come on did bells not go off when the name was put forward. i mean i go to work in Tibet and someone suggests naming a dog buddha. no that's gonna piss off the wrong people
Dude.....what is wrong with us demanding that they leave the death threats back home and adopt a more civilized way of settling offenses?? Are you saying that 40 lashes for this crap is called for??? Are you serious?

It is reasonable and just plain HUMANE to tell these fools to leave that crap in the 12th century.
 
Terrorists are ******ed. Know how to tell the difference between a terrorist and a toddler? on a terrorist, the diaper is on the head, yet both diapers are full of crap.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_ultimate_evil
it may sound heartless and i hope everything works out for this poor woman but come on seriously

1. she knew what country she was in, therefore she should have known what was not really acceptable withen that country.

2. as sad and as strange the laws of country. all these people who are claiming she is being wrongly accused are the same people who expect foreigners to drop all elements of there culture and adopt everything about ours.

3. common bloody sense. come on did bells not go off when the name was put forward. i mean i go to work in Tibet and someone suggests naming a dog buddha. no that's gonna piss off the wrong people





Okay.....you're saying that she's in a land dominated by the religion of peace. BUT she should have known better than let her students name the bear Mohammed for FEAR of her life?

You can't have it both ways, Ray.

No I never said she is in a land dominated by the religion of peace. You are saying that.

I'm saying she is in a country with an authoritarian government and for that she shouldn't even be living in Sudan.

First of all Sudan doesn't have an Islamic government or laws based on Sharia.

Sudan's government is a National authoritarian Government. Also the ruling party, the National Congress is comprised of both Muslims and non-Muslims.

She is in a land with a history of human rights violation.

A letter dated August 14, 2006 from the Executive Director of Human Rights Watch found that the Sudanese government is both incapable and unwilling to protect its own citizens in Darfur and that its militias are guilty of crimes against humanity. The letter added that these human rights abuses have existed since 2004.

Some reports attribute part of the violations to the rebels as well as the government and the Janjaweed. The US State Department's human rights report issued in March 2007 claims that "All parties to the conflagration committed serious abuses, including widespread killing of civilians, rape as a tool of war, systematic torture, robbery and recruitment of child soldiers.

Both government forces and militias allied with the government are known not only to attack civilians in Darfur, but also humanitarian workers. Sympathizers of rebel groups are arbitrarily detained, as are foreign journalists, human rights defenders, student activists, and displaced people in and around Khartoum, some of whom face torture. The rebel groups have also been accused in a report issued by the American government of attacking humanitarian workers and of killing innocent civilians.

Based on this knowledge and the current environment of Sudan alone even I as a Muslim would not step foot in this backward country.
 
No I never said she is in a land dominated by the religion of peace. You are saying that.

I'm saying she is in a country with an authoritarian government and for that she shouldn't even be living in Sudan.

First of all Sudan doesn't have an Islamic government or laws based on Sharia.

Sudan's government is a National authoritarian Government. Also the ruling party, the National Congress is comprised of both Muslims and non-Muslims.

She is in a land with a history of human rights violation.

A letter dated August 14, 2006 from the Executive Director of Human Rights Watch found that the Sudanese government is both incapable and unwilling to protect its own citizens in Darfur and that its militias are guilty of crimes against humanity. The letter added that these human rights abuses have existed since 2004.[35]

Some reports attribute part of the violations to the rebels as well as the government and the Janjaweed. The US State Department's human rights report issued in March 2007 claims that "All parties to the conflagration committed serious abuses, including widespread killing of civilians, rape as a tool of war, systematic torture, robbery and recruitment of child soldiers"[36]

Both government forces and militias allied with the government are known not only to attack civilians in Darfur, but also humanitarian workers. Sympathizers of rebel groups are arbitrarily detained, as are foreign journalists, human rights defenders, student activists, and displaced people in and around Khartoum, some of whom face torture. The rebel groups have also been accused in a report issued by the American government of attacking humanitarian workers and of killing innocent civilians.

Based on this knowledge and the current environment of Sudan alone even I as a Muslim would not step foot in this backward country.



So what's Holland's excuse? Remember the Dutch cartoonist? Is Holland backward too?

What about Turkey?? Remember the Pope being threatened?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"