Black Swan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ^ Sameer, > > Iteracom’s comparison is fair, how is you killing > a crab he worships an offense any less criminal > than someone burning a bunch of printed pages > someone else worships? Or is “freedom” of speech > something that only applies to what you believe > should be protected? because when I publicly burn a religious document revered by a significant proportion of the world’s population I know it is going to have a reaction yet I do it anyway, that is provocation. People should be held accountable for their actions do you not agree? This fool and other like him hide behind their ‘rights’ and say that they have no regrets when they have blood on their hands.
Black Swan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > sameeragarwal Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > the whole argument is centered around that > > worshipping something is personal choice, I > dont > > think thats true. > > ^ Not personal choice? No wonder your region is > full of dictators, you’re born with a slave > mentality and a convenient excuse for your actions > or lack thereof. > > > When I know my forefathers paid > > so much respect to the book and it is burnt in > > front of my eyes, I would like to stop that. > > ^ Burnt in front of your eyes? You were there? > Of course not, you’re just spewing empty bullsh*t. > No crap you’d like to stop it, that’s the whole > point of freedom of speech, you may see or hear > things you don’t like, but you tolerate their > right to say those things…like an adult. It’s a > two way street, without the graces of freedom of > speech / religion, I’m pretty sure Muslims would > be locked out of the western world by now. You > know how a respectable human like maybe Gandhi > would have stopped it? By not behaving like a > freaking animal and giving people more cause to > burn more Korans. > > > Freedom to burn the book? Book is not yours. > > ^Uh, yeah it is. I’m pretty sure that pastor paid > for the book, making it his. Everyone knows > steeling is wrong… All of your arguments come > down to meaningless rhetoric, frankly I don’t see > how the fundamentalist Christians and Muslims > don’t get along, at least they have that in > common. > > > > You cannot burn it. > > ^ Actually he did. And like total idiots, Muslims > responded by killing unrelated innocents who were > trying to provide aid, using brutal methods. So > the pastor won, because the Muslims fulfilled the > world’s expectations with their actions and more > people won’t be receiving UN aid in that region. > > Also, from studying the Koran, I happen to know > there is not one sentence in that book that > promotes the sort of actions and lack of self > discipline and hatred as well as harming of > INNOCENT PEOPLE that took place at Muslim hands. > Regardless of what “crime” was committed. If you > were even half the Muslim you seem to think you > are, you’d have realized that by now rather than > getting caught up in your own feelings. > > > And if I dont do anything then next day he will > burn my temple. If still I dont do anything > he > might burn me. > > ^ And so we end with it, the fearful rambling > rhetoric of a grovelling brainwashed zealot, again > devoid of any real logical content whatsoever. > Glad to see what we’re really dealing with here. > I don’t think I need to point out the clear > difference between 1) setting on fire pieces of > paper with letters that you purchased at Barnes > and Noble and 2) torching innocent people and > their homes. But for the sake of clarity I > will… action #1 could be an expression of > (perhaps) misguided opinion that harms no one. > Action #2 would be undertaken by a grovelling > lunatic that deserves to live and die under the > rule of a regime, the kind of vomit who beheads an > innocent UN worker for crimes they did not commit > and who most likely is on their side. Hmm speaking of intolerant…
Sameer Agarwal -So when the Taliban destroyed the statues in Bamiyan, would it have been justified for Buddhists to go around massacring Muslims? In KSA, it is illegal to publicly practice another religion besides Islam. So in retaliation, would you justify a “reaction” to this “provocation”? Maybe you should try to build a Hindu temple or a Synagogue in Jeddah. Let me know how that works out. To me it’s a question of differing values. I see the two cultures as having markedly different values that are in conflict. If we value freedom of speech, we have to accept that others will retaliate, but we shouldn’t give up our values.
I am an advocate of free speech too but - 1. You seem to think that you can understand the emotions of muslims when they hear/see/read about burning the book. I am not too sure of that. You might very well say that I am as much offended when my national flag is burnt or when a crab is killed. But how do you know? 2. Stopping a single person is not equivalent bombing the whole country, as someone suggested. I am not blaming him though
I read all that. Lot is being said about me. Black Swan Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > sameeragarwal Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > the whole argument is centered around that > > worshipping something is personal choice, I > dont > > think thats true. > > ^ Not personal choice? No wonder your region is > full of dictators, you’re born with a slave > mentality and a convenient excuse for your actions > or lack thereof. 1. I dont understand how religion can be a personal choice. I was born with a religion (and slave mentality). Yeah I can go ahead and convert myself but generally people dont do that here. May be it is different elsewhere. My region is full of dictators? Depends what is my region. My boss seems amenable to me. > > > When I know my forefathers paid > > so much respect to the book and it is burnt in > > front of my eyes, I would like to stop that. > > ^ Burnt in front of your eyes? You were there? > Of course not, you’re just spewing empty bullsh*t. > No crap you’d like to stop it, that’s the whole > point of freedom of speech, you may see or hear > things you don’t like, but you tolerate their > right to say those things…like an adult. It’s a > two way street, without the graces of freedom of > speech / religion, I’m pretty sure Muslims would > be locked out of the western world by now. You > know how a respectable human like maybe Gandhi > would have stopped it? By not behaving like a > freaking animal and giving people more cause to > burn more Korans. > I am not sure what are you saying but what can be so terrible in stopping a man from burning the most wholy symbol of half of the world population? > > Freedom to burn the book? Book is not yours. > > ^Uh, yeah it is. I’m pretty sure that pastor paid > for the book, making it his. Everyone knows > steeling is wrong… All of your arguments come > down to meaningless rhetoric, frankly I don’t see > how the fundamentalist Christians and Muslims > don’t get along, at least they have that in > common. > To you rhetoric might it be. But here people encroach sensing weakness. > > > You cannot burn it. > > ^ Actually he did. And like total idiots, Muslims > responded by killing unrelated innocents who were > trying to provide aid, using brutal methods. So > the pastor won, because the Muslims fulfilled the > world’s expectations with their actions and more > people won’t be receiving UN aid in that region. > > Also, from studying the Koran, I happen to know > there is not one sentence in that book that > promotes the sort of actions and lack of self > discipline and hatred as well as harming of > INNOCENT PEOPLE that took place at Muslim hands. > Regardless of what “crime” was committed. If you > were even half the Muslim you seem to think you > are, you’d have realized that by now rather than > getting caught up in your own feelings. > > > And if I dont do anything then next day he will > burn my temple. If still I dont do anything > he > might burn me. > > ^ And so we end with it, the fearful rambling > rhetoric of a grovelling brainwashed zealot, again > devoid of any real logical content whatsoever. > Glad to see what we’re really dealing with here. > I don’t think I need to point out the clear > difference between 1) setting on fire pieces of > paper with letters that you purchased at Barnes > and Noble and 2) torching innocent people and > their homes. But for the sake of clarity I > will… action #1 could be an expression of > (perhaps) misguided opinion that harms no one. > Action #2 would be undertaken by a grovelling > lunatic that deserves to live and die under the > rule of a regime, the kind of vomit who beheads an > innocent UN worker for crimes they did not commit > and who most likely is on their side. Lots there. Someone burnt the book. I could not stop him. I cannot even harm him after the incident. I have to do something. I cannot tolerate this insult on my religion. I will harm anyone who looks remotely similar to him.
Pastor is as idiotic as pakistan’s blastphemy laws … at least the pastor is open for discussion.
“Someone burnt the book. I could not stop him. I cannot even harm him after the incident. I have to do something. I cannot tolerate this insult on my religion. I will harm anyone who looks remotely similar to him.” Hearing these things makes me glad we’re out of Libya. Let the dumb b*stards render themselves extinct.
“Someone burnt the book. I could not stop him. I cannot even harm him after the incident. I have to do something. I cannot tolerate this insult on my religion. I will harm anyone who looks remotely similar to him.” Savage, Good thing my superior culture has your ass backwards primitive culture outgunned.
bodhisattva Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > All I said is that there are consequences to free > speech and those consequences should be taken into > account prior to exercising that right. > > Also put all that tough guy bullshit away you > aren’t impressing anyone. If you are so convicted > then I suggest you call the next thug you see on > the street a rat punk and then it will be you that > faces the consequence of free speech. ^Agreed. Free speech is overrated. Look what happened to John Galliano…
> Look what happened to John Galliano… How many UN workers died because of that ??
Tim Rutten (LA Times) : Florida pastor Terry Jones and the far reach of free speech: “The issues raised by these events are not a challenge to our conception of free speech, but to our collective conscience. The question that ought to be asked isn’t whether the wretched Jones’ repellant theater is protected speech, but why the United States continues to produce as many people who speak and act as he does about Muslims?” Food for thought??
“Someone burnt the book. I could not stop him. I cannot even harm him after the incident. I have to do something. I cannot tolerate this insult on my religion. I will harm anyone who looks remotely similar to him.” Thats the reasoning behind hate crimes. However I am neither the victim nor the perpetrator of any. Some wonder why people do such things, I wonder why do they wonder.
>Food for thought?? uhmmm … Nah Whats your point?
samakh Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Tim Rutten (LA Times) : Florida pastor Terry Jones > and the far reach of free speech: > > “The issues raised by these events are not a > challenge to our conception of free speech, but to > our collective conscience. The question that ought > to be asked isn’t whether the wretched Jones’ > repellant theater is protected speech, but why the > United States continues to produce as many people > who speak and act as he does about Muslims?” > > Food for thought?? Here: “Someone burnt the book. I could not stop him. I cannot even harm him after the incident. I have to do something. I cannot tolerate this insult on my religion. I will harm anyone who looks remotely similar to him.” Perhaps you shouldn’t focus on one guy who burns pieces of paper, but ask yourself why Muslims go out and behead people who had nothing to do with this. Even if they somehow did, murdering someone let alone causing harm to them physically is nothing short of barbaric.
sameeragarwal I dont understand how you cant take religion as a personal choice. It is nothing but a personal choice, one person decides what he beleives, and thats his/her choice, the idea of anyone or group deciding upon your religion is absurd. I mean even if your country is predominantly muslim and your family is muslim does not mean that you have to be muslim aswel. Im sure your brain is capable of making decisions for yourself, and deciding if you beleive something or not. I mean when I grew up in Ireland everyone was catholic and my primary school and secondary school was catholic, and also my parents took me to church every sunday, I decided from a young age that I didnt realy beleive in any of it, so I stopped going to church, and that was that end of story, still went to the catholic schools, but I wasnt alone there half the people in those schools didnt beleive in god, the schools didnt realy care either, because obviously denying someone their eduction because of their religious choice would have been crazy, and it would not have been accepted. Your previous posts are troubling, I mean you are not thinking logically about what your saying, it just doesnt make sense, its not your English, its the points that you are making that are illogical (Maybe a troll) . ‘Harming someone who looks remotely similar’, I mean thats just stupid, how the hell does that solve anything. As for the free speech thing, I think Americans bang on and on about free speech because it is in their consititution or something, but seriously, anyone in western europe can go out onto the street and chant about anything they want, and they will get whatever response people walking by think is justified, however some response’s maybe unjustfied given what was done or said, like in this case. And as for ‘American values’, will somebody please give me a bullet list of what these values actually are?? Because if someone was to ask me what are the Irish values or European values, I just wouldnt have a clue.
Your previous posts are troubling, I mean you are not thinking logically about what your saying, it just doesnt make sense, its not your English, its the points that you are making that are illogical (Maybe a troll) . ‘Harming someone who looks remotely similar’, I mean thats just stupid, how the hell does that solve anything. That was in response to - Muslims hurt themselves by killing international agency personnel and subsequently denying any possiblilty of aid in future Do you think a mob which is very very angry has the capability of thinking that way? I am not condoning these crimes. Why do innocent people gets killed. If you are angry you can break the furniture when a mob is angry, it will do much worse. I am ashamed that communal riots happen. But I cannot wish them away. All the riots originate from something seemingly inconsequential.
“Someone burnt the book. I could not stop him. I cannot even harm him after the incident. I have to do something. I cannot tolerate this insult on my religion. I will harm anyone who looks remotely similar to him.” Wow. So Sameer has openly admitted that he will commit violence on people for their non-violent expressions or anyone who “looks remotely similar to him” which seems to be exactly what was done in Afghanistan. How revealing, Sameer. Now we know what you really are. “The issues raised by these events are not a challenge to our conception of free speech, but to our collective conscience. The question that ought to be asked isn’t whether the wretched Jones’ repellant theater is protected speech, but why the United States continues to produce as many people who speak and act as he does about Muslims?” This really doesn’t make a lot of sense. There is no one seriously discussing whether or not the pastor’s actions are protected free speech, there is no question that they are. Perhaps the question ought to be, why does the culture of the Middle East continue to produce as many people that support suppression of free speech through horrific violence? It seems to me to be a much more pressing question than why people theatrically burn books.
^^^ One of us is a moron and I know as per you its me
bodhisattva Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > All I said is that there are consequences to free > speech and those consequences should be taken into > account prior to exercising that right. No, you also said this, which is what set me off: > The consequences of this provocation may in fact make it > illegal in the same manner as yelling fire in a movie theatre. and then: > Hmm speaking of intolerant… Yes, I am intolerant of people who ignorantly behead innocent civilians. You got me. You win. I’m such a hypocrite.
I wonder what the digital analogue would be of burning the Koran, erasing your digital copy? What if you have that copy stored on the cloud? Will people get beheaded? Difficult issues… if you are an idiot stuck in the dark ages.