News Koran burning?

[nath]

I am seeing your point, Scouse. There is a part in the back of my head that says "fuck them, if they're willing to overreact to an inflammatory issue *so* much, then fuckfuckingfuck them, let them do what they will". I see that.

The thing is, if it's likely that someone else will be harmed because of his actions, I think he better have a bloody good reason for doing what he's doing. I really don't think that he does.

 

[Scouse]

Not if you know that it's a likely outcome.

If you know that by insulting someone they will do something bad; both bad.

Disagree.

If someone is using that information to supress actions of yours then they're (at best) a bully.

Bullies need to be fucked, hard, in the ass.

Yes, it can get messy - but you don't "back down" like you and nath are advocating. You "front up"...

...or you can spend the rest of your life cowering in fear of them.



Islamic extremists are not just bullies - they're motherfuckers. We fight against motherfuckers and the causes of motherfuckers where I'm from

 

[old.Tohtori]

Quite, bullies are bad. There's no need to change your views or actions according to bullies.

But, you should take some responsibility in not poking those bullies too.

In this koran instance for example; what does it bring to the table? Will it change things? Is it to showcase a point other then "F*ck you"?

I think not. I think it's an illwill action that has no point.

If he was to burn the books to show other nations how bad it feels to see a US flag burning, then there might be a point, but that point should be made very clear.

 

[nath]

That's all well and good mate, except he's not fronting up because HE'S not in danger. If HE was the one in danger, I'd say fucking go for it you nazi twat.

HE'S not in danger. Other people are. Burning books is fucking stupid.

If my position is as you make it out to be, I'd have suggested Salman Rushdie never release The Satanic Verses, but I would say fucking go for it you beardie spaz with a hot wife.

 

[Scouse]

The thing is, if it's likely that someone else will be harmed because of his actions, I think he better have a bloody good reason for doing what he's doing. I really don't think that he does.

I agree. He's a twat and doing it for his own reasons.

TBFH - you have to be a bit of a twat to do what he's doing so brazenly. But look at it this way: It's fucking handy that someone's such a massive twat - this sort of thing needs to happen

 

[nath]

I agree. He's a twat and doing it for his own reasons.

TBFH - you have to be a bit of a twat to do what he's doing so brazenly. But look at it this way: It's fucking handy that someone's such a massive twat - this sort of thing needs to happen

I can see why you'd say that, putting a spotlight on extremists is good but burning a book is not a decent way to do that. Personally I think the Mohammed cartoon that did the rounds a few years back is far better. Satire > book burning.

 

[MYstIC G]

Edit: And nath, I think your distaste for this may be a tad misplaced. With UK and US troops tooling it around the planet killing people left, right and centre, including women and children and with little regard as to whether they actually should be killed, I don't think a little book burning will be the thing that tips them over the edge.

It doesn't matter what religion you are when you're being blown apart. (PS: This is also your own arguement )

 

[Scouse]

But, you should take some responsibility in not poking those bullies too.

Disagree again. Bullies need to be destroyed. The way to do that is to demonstrate that what they think/say/do will have no effect on your actions.

HE'S not in danger. Other people are.

I'd have thought the most likely outcome is the issuance of a fatwah against him?

Either way, when you fight bullies you have to accept that there's the possibility that someone'll get hurt. You can't let the tactic of "I'll hurt someone random" afford said massive c*nt bully some level of protection - or he's already won.


And has Salman Rushdie got a hot wife?!

 

[nath]

Either way, when you fight bullies you have to accept that there's the possibility that someone'll get hurt. You can't let the tactic of "I'll hurt someone random" afford said massive c*nt bully some level of protection - or he's already won.

I agree with all of that, I just don't think it applies to burning a book. It applies to making an inflammatory cartoon, or writing an inflammatory book or film. Well, I guess if it's a rule it applies to all, I just think the guy should use some common sense and not do it.

Although the more I think about it the more my anti-bully reflex kicks in and I come round to your way of thinking. "Fuck them, do it". I still think he shouldn't though.

And has Salman Rushdie got a hot wife?!

Yes.

 

[Krazeh]

Disagree again. Bullies need to be destroyed. The way to do that is to demonstrate that what they think/say/do will have no effect on your actions.

Either way, when you fight bullies you have to accept that there's the possibility that someone'll get hurt. You can't let the tactic of "I'll hurt someone random" afford said massive c*nt bully some level of protection - or he's already won.

I wouldn't be suprised if the muslims this "protest" is clearly aimed at felt exactly the same way about the western world. They see us as a massive c*nt bully who can't stop interfering in their countries/affairs or killing their loved ones.

The fact is just because someone is allowed to burn the Koran doesn't mean they should. All they are doing is creating needless provocation and potentially putting people's lives at risk just so they can get 5 minutes of fame. He's not doing this to "front up" to anyone, he's doing it because it'll get a reaction and put him and his nutjob church in the news for a few days. He's no different from that Fred Phelps and his religious nutters who go to the funerals of soldiers in the States and hurls abuse at them.

 

[dysfunction]

The way to do that is to demonstrate that what they think/say/do will have no effect on your actions.

And you think that will have an effect on the fanatical Islamic extremists??
I don't think so!

This will just fuel their desire to do more harmful things...

There is no good way to deal with extremists, unfortunately

 

[nath]

He's no different from that Fred Phelps and his religious nutters who go to the funerals of soldiers in the States and hurls abuse at them.

Except there's that ex-vets biker gang that follows them around and stands infront of their little demonstration to shield the mourners from their bullshit.

Top fucking geezers.

 

[Scouse]

I don't necessarily disagree with much that you say there Krazeh. (Although burning a book isn't the same as abusing the relatives of the recently deceased)

However, the twat IS going to burn the book and regardless of his motivations (which, I admit, are daft) I think it's not too bad a thing tbfh

 

[old.Tohtori]

Disagree again. Bullies need to be destroyed. The way to do that is to demonstrate that what they think/say/do will have no effect on your actions.

The way to do it is to take them down for their own actions, not trap them into doing something that will harm others.

The people who will harm other nations will do so eventually, that's given, the people who hate UK/US for example will hate you no matter how many books you burn. Doing this kind of thing though, note this; will add X number of MORE bullies into that group.

Is that wise? Angering -more- people on the accord that some already are angry?

I have to come back to; what's the use of this book burning? I doubt the extremists are thinking "Hah! The US/UK pigs are under our thumb!".

 

[ford prefect]

This guy is obviously going out of his way to insult Muslims. It would be a bit like standing outside his church burning bibles and telling the guy all Bible belt Christians are like David Koresh.

This isn’t a question of legal or not, it is not even a question of America vs Islam. This is a very personal attack by a man who claims to be a man of God. A man whose own “Good Book” claims an eye for an eye will send the whole world blind, from a country that supposedly has the founding ethos of all men born equal under one God. What he is doing is unpatriotic and against his supposed faith – and for that he should be held up as a shining example of what if fundamentally wrong with extremism and the skewered ideas on fundamentalism that many Christians, Muslims and other faiths cling to.

 

[Scouse]

Yes.

:eek2:

 

[Scouse]

The way to do it is to take them down for their own actions, not trap them into doing something that will harm others

You're a funny one Toht. Strange way of looking at things.

How are they "trapped" into doing something that will harm others?

It's their choice.

 

[nath]

I don't necessarily disagree with much that you say there Krazeh. (Although burning a book isn't the same as abusing the relatives of the recently deceased)

Why is that? Obviously I feel that way too but it seems to me to be an entirely relative thing. We're talking about taking offence here so there's no scientifically correct answer.

 

[Krazeh]

(Although burning a book isn't the same as abusing the relatives of the recently deceased)

To me and you no it isn't the same, but to people who strongly believe in Islam I would argue that it's just as big an insult or level of abuse.

However, the twat IS going to burn the book and regardless of his motivations (which, I admit, are daft) I think it's not too bad a thing tbfh

If there was a serious point or reason behind it then I might agree that it's not a bad thing to do but the problem is there isn't. Burning an item that a large number of people hold to be sacred and extremely important to them just to get your 5 minutes of fame and/or upset people is never a good thing to do, and I don't see that as intelligent rational people we should be condoning his actions.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Anyone else find it rahter amusing, cockle tickling if you will, that there's discussion of hot women in the same thread as christians vs muslim extremists.

It's a far fetched tickle, but i find it funny

You're a funny one Toht. Strange way of looking at things.

How are they "trapped" into doing something that will harm others?

It's their choice.

Similar way that police trap drug dealers really. You poke them, then poke some more, wait for them to do the deed and then go "A ha!", when without the poking, nothing may or may not have happened.

You did miss my point about "Doing this will increase angry people from the number of -anyway- angry people, and it's useless."

 

[nath]

Anyone else find it rahter amusing, cockle tickling if you will, that there's discussion of hot women in the same thread as christians vs muslim extremists.

It's a far fetched tickle, but i find it funny

Yeah but she's really hot.

 

[Dukat]

With UK and US troops tooling it around the planet killing muslims left, right and centre, including women and children and with little regard as to whether they actually should be killed

Say what

 

[Scouse]

Why is that? Obviously I feel that way too but it seems to me to be an entirely relative thing. We're talking about taking offence here so there's no scientifically correct answer.

Well, taking into account that offence is taken, not given, and one man's poison is another man's food (or whatever). And the fact that emotion is a hugely grey area. yadda, yadda, yadda.

I, personally, think that winding up people at a funeral (where they're distraught already) and winding up people for holding a set of beliefs (where, presumably, they're strong and at one with their faith, probably relatively happy etc), are massively different things.

However, whilst I agree with the sentiment of these fuckers at the funerals - that soldiers are murderers - I'd never ram it down the throats of their mothers

But like I said - it's all grey area. I'd find it distasteful, the people who act this way obviously don't. I think they're a bunch of c*nts - but I wouldn't legislate against them.

I guess we need to learn how to put up with twats a bit better really.

 

[Scouse]

Say what

Answered in my last post Dukat old bean.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not some hater of soldiers (I do have friends in the military). I dislike the choice that they've made from an intellectual standpoint.

The choice being that they're ok with killing someone simply because someone else told them to.

It's in the job description...



Edit: Actually, reading back, this has nothing to do with what you said. And yes. Fuckloads of innocents have died at the hands of western troops.

 

[Scouse]

Similar way that police trap drug dealers really. You poke them, then poke some more, wait for them to do the deed and then go "A ha!", when without the poking, nothing may or may not have happened.

I don't get this. Police "trap" drug dealers by catching them dealing?


And I didn't miss your other point. I disagree with some of it, but tbfh, I'm at work so I can't answer everything.

Speaking of which *ahem*....

 

[Krazeh]

But like I said - it's all grey area. I'd find it distasteful, the people who act this way obviously don't. I think they're a bunch of c*nts - but I wouldn't legislate against them.

I'm not sure anyone has been arguing that we should legislate to stop people like Terry Jones. I certainly don't think that's the answer as when you start curtailing people's freedoms you usually end up with more problems than you solve, but just because someone is allowed to do something doesn't mean that they should do it. Legally everything he does may be completely fine but I still don't think he should be doing for the simple reason that it's designed solely to provoke muslims and get him in the news for a few days.

 

[old.Tohtori]

I don't get this. Police "trap" drug dealers by catching them dealing?

And I didn't miss your other point. I disagree with some of it, but tbfh, I'm at work so I can't answer everything.

Speaking of which *ahem*....

No, police in some countries trap criminals by making them do the crime.

Cop goes undercover, wants to buy drugs, they sell drugs and then get busted.

Same thing here; the burning is to piss people off and eventually when shit happens because of it, they can go "Ha ha, you're doing bad stuff.". That's not constructive and it's not how to deal with bad guys.

Especialyl, when takingmy other point into account, you're actively increasing the number of possible threats and actions.

 

[yaruar]

No, police in some countries trap criminals by making them do the crime.

Cop goes undercover, wants to buy drugs, they sell drugs and then get busted.

Fortunately in most civilised countries that's entrapment and invalidates their case.

On topic though i think someone needs to go to the preachers house and wipe their arses on some good old US of A flags whilst bumming someone dressed as Fred Phelps (you do realise those two are bezzie mates...) I mean he's not a fanatic he won't get his buddies to beat you up and lynch you whislt wearing their big white robes or anything.

 

[Scouse]

Like it yaruar


And Toht. Nah, there's a whole host of things wrong in the parallel you're attempting to draw. Maybe I'll address them when I get home, but don't hold your breath or anything

 

[Dukat]

I dislike the choice that they've made from an intellectual standpoint.

The choice being that they're ok with killing someone simply because someone else told them to.

It's in the job description...



Edit: Actually, reading back, this has nothing to do with what you said. And yes. Fuckloads of innocents have died at the hands of western troops.

I don't want to derail this thread, but I'm really quite shocked to hear something like this from you - have you ever actually read the 'job description' of a soldier?

Do you have any idea, any at all as to how military law and ethics work? Because right now you really aren't sounding like it - "simply because someone else told them to", I mean really, come on scouse.

Maybe a discussion for another thread, but honestly am pretty damn shocked anyone still thinks like that in this day and age.