Koran burning day ?

[GOM]

If a 16 yr old Pakistani youth of limited opportunity sees foreigners insulting his religion, he may not use the same thought process as an 'educated'..... or at least, an individual that has been through a structured education system. He will be easily persuaded that the western 'christian' nations are attacking his culture and religion.

And who is doing the persuading ? Might it be others that are educated ?

 

[daveinprague]

By religious fundamentalists... whose only education is Madrassas. Nobody is saying they are right, but they will easily manipulate the uneducated, poor youth, when there is no other people to look up to.
Western 'Christians' have alternatives to being educated by only bible studies, and lets face it, theres a history of Christians attacking Muslims down the centuries..if you keep doing it..then people will see you as an aggressor, and a point will come when the young, poorly educated will just see constant attacks on their culture and religion, and be persuaded to fight against it.

 

[GOM]

As a civilised and tolerant people we accede to pressure and threats and
do as they want just to avoid trouble ?

The question still remains, at what point do you not give in for an easy life ?

 

[daveinprague]

As a civilised and tolerant people we accede to pressure and threats and
do as they want just to avoid trouble ?

The question still remains, at what point do you not give in for an easy life ?

Think they would be satisfied if we were not continually offending and going to war with them, and America stops funding
a Jewish state recently placed in the middle east surrounded by muslim countries.

The reasons for the attack on Afghanistan are a bit weak. The USA has funded terrorist groups, and 'liberation' armies, and set up training facilities, and supplied logistics and weaponry around the world to people they would rather see in power. They are hypocrits.
The less said about the ridiculous war in Iraq (the ONLY reason for the 7/7 attacks in London) the better.

 

[Bold Seagull]

So lets compare the scenarios, the one in question and yours.

A small time preacher in USA burns some copies of the Koran, and there are worries that all around the muslim world that there be rioting and death to westerners because of it.

An effigy of the Queen is burned and the result is rioting in this country and other commonwealth countries around the world during which dozens of muslims are murdered.

Now, which of the 2 scenarios is the most realistic ?

I guess how much someone is incited is dependent upon how much they want to be incited, therefore one rule of tolerance and civilisation for some and another for others.

You are welcome to stick with your, Ooh sorry sir I won't do that if it upsets you, appeasement, and call it civilisation. Where will you draw the line before you say NO. In 1939 we finally drew the line at Poland.

That is just ridiculous. Who is saying that there is a rule entitling the Muslim world to riot and kill westerners as a reaction? Of course no one is for a second suggesting that is acceptable. One rule for them, one for us? There is no rule for that and that's where your argument breaks down.

Also, research your history, Hitler and his nazi party started burning books, notably the Bible and Koran amoung other 'un-german' books as early as 1933 shortly after being elected. Had the rest of the world reacted immediately to those acts and what they represented, then maybe he would never had a chance to build an army in the first place!

I'm at a loss to know why you would think a universal condemnation of book burning is appeasement. It's nothing of the sort, it is solely an act to inspire hatred and generate fear. It doesn't matter what the text is whether Bible, Koran, whatever, it's wrong.

 

[bhaexpress]

I'm at a loss to know why you would think a universal condemnation of book burning is appeasement. It's nothing of the sort, it is solely an act to inspire hatred and generate fear. It doesn't matter what the text is whether Bible, Koran, whatever, it's wrong.

It is but don't you think that the building of a huge Mosque so close to Ground Zero might be considered just a little bit provocative ? It's not as though the US is short of land is it ?

 

[daveinprague]

no...

BECAUSE ITS NOT A MOSQUE.

its also no nearer the ground zero site than a proper mosque, that has been established in the area for a long, long time.

Its people using this argument as an excuse for their own agenda

 

[seven stands]

Demonstrators burned a US flag and chanted "Death to Christians".

BBC News - US Koran-burning protests sweep Afghanistan


but thats ok in the eyes of the rest of the world. ( im not saying they should burn the koran, just think its strange how when British flags and us flags get burnt no one bats an eyelid )

 

[daveinprague]

Whereas we only burn their cities, towns and villages with bombs and 'smart' missiles.

 

[seven stands]

Whereas we only burn their cities with bombs and 'smart' missiles.

they started it

 

[keaton]

It's not a f***ing mosque

 

[Bold Seagull]

Demonstrators burned a US flag and chanted "Death to Christians".

BBC News - US Koran-burning protests sweep Afghanistan


but thats ok in the eyes of the rest of the world. ( im not saying they should burn the koran, just think its strange how when British flags and us flags get burnt no one bats an eyelid )

I'm sorry, but where exactly have you come to the opinion that the rest of the world sees it as okay? I think many look at the news and see those acts as disturbing fearful images which is exactly the intent. But to say no one bats an eyelid, you are aware we have been involved in 2 wars in Muslim countries recently? Hardly batting an eyelid!

 

[Bold Seagull]

It is but don't you think that the building of a huge Mosque so close to Ground Zero might be considered just a little bit provocative ? It's not as though the US is short of land is it ?

Heaven forbid by that logic anyone decides to put a Catholic place of worship next to the Brighton Grand!

 

[bhaexpress]

no...

BECAUSE ITS NOT A MOSQUE.

its also no nearer the ground zero site than a proper mosque, that has been established in the area for a long, long time.

Its people using this argument as an excuse for their own agenda

That's as reported on the BBC this morning, must be their agenda then.

 

[daveinprague]

Not really...its whats been reported from the beginning...

 

[bhaexpress]

Heaven forbid by that logic anyone decides to put a Catholic place of worship next to the Brighton Grand!

Didn't realise the Catholics were fighting a holy war.

 

[GOM]

That is just ridiculous. Who is saying that there is a rule entitling the Muslim world to riot and kill westerners as a reaction? Of course no one is for a second suggesting that is acceptable. One rule for them, one for us? There is no rule for that and that's where your argument breaks down.

Also, research your history, Hitler and his nazi party started burning books, notably the Bible and Koran amoung other 'un-german' books as early as 1933 shortly after being elected. Had the rest of the world reacted immediately to those acts and what they represented, then maybe he would never had a chance to build an army in the first place!

I'm at a loss to know why you would think a universal condemnation of book burning is appeasement. It's nothing of the sort, it is solely an act to inspire hatred and generate fear. It doesn't matter what the text is whether Bible, Koran, whatever, it's wrong.

Please re-read as there was no mention of rules only a comment on the potential outcomes from the scenario in question and the one you proposed and therefore there was no argument to break down.

In fact I think you ought to re-read all of my posts on this thread without pre-conceived ideas about what you think I was writing. I believe you are reading into them what you wanted to read, my comments have all been very generalised ( apart of course from the scenarios).
At no point have I condoned the tinpot preacher.
I agree, in fact never disagreed, that a universal condemnation of book burning is appeasement, however the reason for condemnation of book burning may be appeasement.
My argument is that some of the citizens of western 'so called civilised' nations are all too eager to show a willingness to bow down in the face of pressure in order to avoid the issue, i.e an easier life, and in doing so the issue will become greater. Give an inch and they will take a mile is an old adage.
We should not be pressurised into actions, or non-action, just because it might upset someone.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Didn't realise the Catholics were fighting a holy war.

Right. Okay, the troubles in Northern Ireland were solely on secular grounds obviously. I missed that. The Orange marches stir up so much trouble on the Catholic estates, well, because frankly they must hate the colour orange!

 

[daveinprague]

Thats why there is supposed to be diplomacy

 

[keaton]

Didn't realise the Catholics were fighting a holy war.

And Muslims are?