NationStates Jolt Archive

Wonder if Moslem children can ride that beast?

And there's that new low I had been expecting for a while. What, in principle, makes you different from the Neo-Nazi morons that pushed around the 6 year old now, Myrmi?

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,22813376-5012777,00.html

apologies if posted earlier...

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/Wary_of_Mohammed_teddy_row_UK_author_changes_characters/articleshow/2589772.cms


Fear of offending muslims.

So the Sudanese muslims who say that it is an offense are correct. :confused:

If they are wrong, then why should this author be afraid of offending muslims? ;)

"The overwhelming British Muslim plea for Gibbons to have been spared by the Sudanese judges came as 10,000 teddies, named Adam the Muslim Prayer Bear, were reportedly bought by Muslim families in Britain to raise money for Sudanese refugees. Adam bear's name is that of another prophet of Islam and at £ 15 a piece, he recites Assalam-o-alaikum when his paws are pressed."

Interesting. Some of the Muslims at work sided with Sudan saying the usual garbage.

I will pass this article by them and see what they say.

Thanks

Back to ignoring points made with a quick troll I see... its either that or your usual tactic of cutting and running I suppose

There have been a very few real points made in this thread. Understandably, so, as it's a very stupid action on the part of the Moslem Sudanese government.

It is entertaining to see the Moslem apologists, such as yourself and Heikou, get worked up over such trivial things as the Pink Pig, though...

apologies if posted earlier...They are most necessary. We have a thread on this already.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/Wary_of_Mohammed_teddy_row_UK_author_changes_characters/articleshow/2589772.cms


Fear of offending muslims.

So the Sudanese muslims who say that it is an offense are correct. :confused:

If they are wrong, then why should this author be afraid of offending muslims? ;)Well, if you call a mole "Mohammed" specifically to make the book more likeable towards muslims, why would you keep the name if you found out that they might not like that? Wouldn't keeping it be detrimental to the original intention?

It is entertaining to see the Moslem apologists, such as yourself and Heikou, get worked up over such trivial things as the Pink Pig, though...

You mean the part in which you decided to include kids as a prop in your masturbation to the notion of offending Muslims or the part in which you failed to explain what makes you different from the Neonazis that pushed around the 6-year old immigrant child over their bigotry that's not at all unlike yours?

Well, if you call a mole "Mohammed" specifically to make the book more likeable towards muslims, why would you keep the name if you found out that they might not like that? Wouldn't keeping it be detrimental to the original intention?

So is it really offensive to call a teddy bear as Muhammed and it is not just certain crazy ignorant Sudanese muslims who think so ?

In that case, what about the thousands of criminals who carry the name Muhammed ? Is that not offensive ? Since it is impossible to be sinless (at least in the islamic context....since only prophets are sinless/masoom) should kids be named Muhammed ?

If all this is just nonsense, then why should the author feel compelled to change the name ? Is it not a feeling of "why unnecessarily get into trouble (read fatwas, riots, sermons, negative publicity etc)" ?

In that case, is it not more insulting to muslims to say that "Oh I changed it because muslims would riot" ?

There have been a very few real points made in this thread. Understandably, so, as it's a very stupid action on the part of the Moslem Sudanese government.
.

all this thread has shown to me is the trendy islamaphobes on here demand that muslims that move to the 'west' must integrate into our society and obey our laws, no matter how stupid, but when a westerner goes to a muslim society, they can behave exactly as they like and not have to obey stupid laws.

cos muslims are eeeevill or something like that.

there are still areas of the US that naming a teddy Jesus in school would have negative career and possible legal implications.

I think she deserves the fifteen lashes. Their country, their laws.

An update on the teacher's situation:

KHARTOUM, Sudan (AP) - A British teacher jailed for insulting Islam after allowing her students to name a teddy bear Muhammad was released Monday when Sudan's president pardoned her, a British Embassy spokesman said.

The teacher, Gillian Gibbons, said she did not intend to offend anyone and had great respect for Islam.

"She is in British Embassy custody and is with the deputy British ambassador," embassy spokesman Omar Daair said. He would not give her exact location or say when she would leave Sudan.

...

Earlier Monday, President Omar al-Bashir pardoned Gibbons after two British Muslim politicians from the House of Lords met with him to plead for her release.

Lord Nazir Ahmed, who met with al-Bashir along with Baroness Sayeeda Warsi, said the case was an "unfortunate misunderstanding" and stressed that Britain respected Islam.

Link (http://apnews.myway.com//article/20071203/D8TA06280.html)

Good to see that the teacher has been pardoned and released, as well as seeing that it was Muslims that persuaded the President of Sudan to release her.

So is it really offensive to call a teddy bear as Muhammed and it is not just certain crazy ignorant Sudanese muslims who think so ?

In that case, what about the thousands of criminals who carry the name Muhammed ? Is that not offensive ? Since it is impossible to be sinless (at least in the islamic context....since only prophets are sinless/masoom) should kids be named Muhammed ?

If all this is just nonsense, then why should the author feel compelled to change the name ? Is it not a feeling of "why unnecessarily get into trouble (read fatwas, riots, sermons, negative publicity etc)" ?

In that case, is it not more insulting to muslims to say that "Oh I changed it because muslims would riot" ?Please, for once just try and understand what I wrote.

An update on the teacher's situation:



Link (http://apnews.myway.com//article/20071203/D8TA06280.html)

Good to see that the teacher has been pardoned and released, as well as seeing that it was Muslims that persuaded the President of Sudan to release her.Yeah, I was glad to hear about that yesterday.

An update on the teacher's situation:



Link (http://apnews.myway.com//article/20071203/D8TA06280.html)

Good to see that the teacher has been pardoned and released, as well as seeing that it was Muslims that persuaded the President of Sudan to release her.

Good. She should leave as soon as she can. In fact, Western governments should make it clear to their citizens that this is a barbaric country and their continued presence in the Sudan is at their own risk...

On the other side of the coin, CAIR (http://www.cair.com/ArticleDetails.aspx?mid1=777&&ArticleID=23869&&name=n&&currPage=1) has published a statement that is one of the few rational things I've read from them. Usually, they are even bigger apologists than y'all, but not in this case.


Given the ongoing controversy over the jailing of British teacher Gillian Gibbons in the Sudan for “insulting Islam,” perhaps it is time to remind us all how the Prophet himself reacted to insults, both real and perceived.

Even if Ms. Gibbons had the intent to cause insult, which does not seem to be the case, Islamic traditions include a number of instances in which the Prophet had the opportunity to retaliate against those who abused him, but refrained from doing so.

“You do not do evil to those who do evil to you, but you deal with them with forgiveness and kindness.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari)

It is entertaining to see the Moslem apologists, such as yourself and Heikou, get worked up over such trivial things as the Pink Pig, though...

O I haven't gotten worked up, me oul flower. I just think that people who target children for reasons of sectarian bigotry are scum. Thats a consistent principle of those of us who know the consequences of that kind of thing. I also think that its interesting that the same people who yap and whine about "blacks", positive discrimination and the like are often the ones frothing at the mouth over the muslim bogeyman. I suspect redirected energies there...

Considering the way that the US got worked over a nipple, btw, I'd step outside the house before throwing stones.....

Good. She should leave as soon as she can. In fact, Western governments should make it clear to their citizens that this is a barbaric country and their continued presence in the Sudan is at their own risk...

On the other side of the coin, CAIR (http://www.cair.com/ArticleDetails.aspx?mid1=777&&ArticleID=23869&&name=n&&currPage=1) has published a statement that is one of the few rational things I've read from them. Usually, they are even bigger apologists than y'all, but not in this case.


Given the ongoing controversy over the jailing of British teacher Gillian Gibbons in the Sudan for “insulting Islam,” perhaps it is time to remind us all how the Prophet himself reacted to insults, both real and perceived.

Even if Ms. Gibbons had the intent to cause insult, which does not seem to be the case, Islamic traditions include a number of instances in which the Prophet had the opportunity to retaliate against those who abused him, but refrained from doing so.

“You do not do evil to those who do evil to you, but you deal with them with forgiveness and kindness.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari)


Even though this is all to do with a few assholes and factions within Sudan, rather than any great genuine anger amongst the Sudanese....

Good. She should leave as soon as she can. In fact, Western governments should make it clear to their citizens that this is a barbaric country and their continued presence in the Sudan is at their own risk...

On the other side of the coin, CAIR (http://www.cair.com/ArticleDetails.aspx?mid1=777&&ArticleID=23869&&name=n&&currPage=1) has published a statement that is one of the few rational things I've read from them. Usually, they are even bigger apologists than y'all, but not in this case.


Given the ongoing controversy over the jailing of British teacher Gillian Gibbons in the Sudan for “insulting Islam,” perhaps it is time to remind us all how the Prophet himself reacted to insults, both real and perceived.

Even if Ms. Gibbons had the intent to cause insult, which does not seem to be the case, Islamic traditions include a number of instances in which the Prophet had the opportunity to retaliate against those who abused him, but refrained from doing so.

“You do not do evil to those who do evil to you, but you deal with them with forgiveness and kindness.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari)


You see, that's because they aren't "apologists". Neither is the rest of us. They know, as well as we do, that Islam isn't about violence. That Muhammad didn't commit violence against those that insulted him. And so on. That's not "apology", that's fact.

Good. She should leave as soon as she can. In fact, Western governments should make it clear to their citizens that this is a barbaric country and their continued presence in the Sudan is at their own risk...

On the other side of the coin, CAIR (http://www.cair.com/ArticleDetails.aspx?mid1=777&&ArticleID=23869&&name=n&&currPage=1) has published a statement that is one of the few rational things I've read from them. Usually, they are even bigger apologists than y'all, but not in this case.


Given the ongoing controversy over the jailing of British teacher Gillian Gibbons in the Sudan for “insulting Islam,” perhaps it is time to remind us all how the Prophet himself reacted to insults, both real and perceived.

Even if Ms. Gibbons had the intent to cause insult, which does not seem to be the case, Islamic traditions include a number of instances in which the Prophet had the opportunity to retaliate against those who abused him, but refrained from doing so.

“You do not do evil to those who do evil to you, but you deal with them with forgiveness and kindness.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari)


Well, to be fair, Sudan is on the State Department's Travel Warning list.

Good. She should leave as soon as she can. In fact, Western governments should make it clear to their citizens that this is a barbaric country and their continued presence in the Sudan is at their own risk...


Barbaric? Risk?

She got 15 days, commuted, for breaking the law. The triviality of the crime isnt really the issue.

Its not as if she got kidnapped, put on a plane and tortured now is it....

Barbaric? Risk?

She got 15 days, commuted, for breaking the law. The triviality of the crime isnt really the issue.

Its not as if she got kidnapped, put on a plane and tortured now is it....

I qualify people calling for my death as torture.

Then again, I might actually ENJOY it, as I take pleasure in offending people I dislike and knowing they reciprocate, and seeing them angry enough to want me DEAD would be the final signal of them hating my guts.

I qualify people calling for my death as torture.


that sort of nonsense deameans actual torture.

you are assuming she knew that there was a protest against her

that sort of nonsense deameans actual torture.

you are assuming she knew that there was a protest against her

Look. We're talking here about a really, REALLY bad law. Then again, I also think that, back when Kansas had "intelligent design" as part of its curriculum, people should also have been warned against going there.

Please, for once just try and understand what I wrote.

Let me try.

You wrote "why would you keep the name if you found out that they might not like that?"

Why would they (assuming muslims in general or at least muslims in UK) not like it? Is it because it is an offense?

So you agree that it is indeed an offense to call a teddy bear as Muhammed ?

In that case, then is not the punishment (as determined by an islamic sharia court) proper for the offense ? :D

What is it? Is it an offense or not ?

If it is an offense, then is not the punishment proper?

If it is not, then why would the author feel compelled to change the name ?

Yes, I understand what you are saying. I am not agreeing to it. Do you see the difference ?

Look. We're talking here about a really, REALLY bad law. Then again, I also think that, back when Kansas had "intelligent design" as part of its curriculum, people should also have been warned against going there.

I dont disagree, but blasphemy is a staple law in the west. Lets look closer to home before condemning Sudan as 'barbaric'.

The anti Islamic core to this argument is irrelevent here. We cant expect muslims in the west to behave in a certain fashion and defend a westerners right to flout their laws.

I dont disagree, but blasphemy is a staple law in the west. Lets look closer to home before condemning Sudan as 'barbaric'.

The anti Islamic core to this argument is irrelevent here. We cant expect muslims in the west to behave in a certain fashion and defend a westerners right to flout their laws.

You do realize I pointed out that Islam is NOTHING about doing what the Sudanese government, religion be damned, did to this woman, right?

Although I think it's ridiculous, in Muslim faith, it's illegal to call an inanimate object a holy name (like Mohammed). Although the bear was actually named after one of the boys in the class.

And that is why she is facing punishment. Not because Muslims are 'crazy' or whatever else is running through peoples minds.

Let me try.

You wrote "why would you keep the name if you found out that they might not like that?"Your missing the "if you intended to make the mole an friendly gesture to begin with?"

Why would they (assuming muslims in general or at least muslims in UK) not like it? Is it because it is an offense? Because some muslims in Sudan were apparently pissed off enough to call for the execution of someone that made a harmless. The logical assumption would be that what some idiots go crazy about, more cultivated muslims might be displeased with.

So you agree that it is indeed an offense to call a teddy bear as Muhammed ?Semantics. Apparently people are offended, so it must be offensive to them. I think they need to grow a thicker skin, but that doesn't mean they aren't offended.

In that case, then is not the punishment (as determined by an islamic sharia court) proper for the offense ? :DWhy should it? I don't call for executions when people sully the flag of a country I care about nor when they show me the finger.

What is it? Is it an offense or not ?Yes.

If it is an offense, then is not the punishment proper?Is the author being punished? :confused:

If it is not, then why would the author feel compelled to change the name ? While I see nothing wrong with naming teddy bears Mohammed and support any one's right to do so (even Myrmi's childish behavior, as obnoxious as it is), I'll also support the right to avoid insulting people. Apparently, the whole idea behind naming the mole "Mohammed" was to reach out to muslims. Upon hearing that someone was being sentenced to 15 days in jail for naming a teddy bear Mohammed, the author apparently decided to rename the mole, on grounds that his earlier action would probably run counter to the original intention.

What I don't get is why people are so offended by the renaming.

Yes, I understand what you are saying. I am not agreeing to it. Do you see the difference ?Actually, I don't think you did. I'll say it again, just to be clear:

Author names mole Mohammed to appeal to muslims.
Teacher lets class name Teddy Mohammed.
Teacher gets sentenced for doing so.
Author takes note; infers that naming objects such as Teddies and moles may be offensive/distasteful to muslims.
Offense/distaste implies lack of appeal.
Author decides to change name of mole.

Nothing wrong with that. It's like inviting over some Hindu friends for a steak, and then switching to pork when you find out that they have reasons for not eating cow.

And that is why she is facing punishment. Not because Muslims are 'crazy' or whatever else is running through peoples minds.She's been given a full pardon by now.

Although I think it's ridiculous, in Muslim faith, it's illegal to call an inanimate object a holy name (like Mohammed). Although the bear was actually named after one of the boys in the class.

And that is why she is facing punishment. Not because Muslims are 'crazy' or whatever else is running through peoples minds.

not muslims. religious people more generally. its sort of a diagnostic feature of religion to be filled with all sorts of nonsense like that. and if calling for the whipping and/or death of someone not even of your religion for violating one of your nonsensical rules ain't a sure sign of crazy, what would be?

She's been given a full pardon by now.

A public apology, offer of compensation and whatever else would humiliate the Sudan is all that would suffice.

They have no power to "pardon" her, as they she has done nothing wrong. It is a bloody sad day when a western power must cravenly accept the judgement of a Johnny Nobody like the Sudan; whatever happened to the days when we could simply do as we pleased with the likes of them?

<snip embarassing wannabe-imperialist diatribe>
That was so sad... :(

That was so sad... :(

It's true. Why on earth should we submit to the judgement of Sudan? What can they actually do to us, other than send Oxfam a few more videos for their adverts, or moan to the UN?

It's true. Why on earth should we submit to the judgement of Sudan? What can they actually do to us, other than send Oxfam a few more videos for their adverts, or moan to the UN?Why should "we" submit to the judgement of Sudan? Simple: Same reason that Sudanese should submit to our laws while in our countries.

Why should "we" submit to the judgement of Sudan? Simple: Same reason that Sudanese should submit to our laws while in our countries.

I think you miss the point. Firstly, by any reasonable legal code, the teacher did nothing wrong. Secondly, we've got bigger guns than them, and more of them.

A public apology, offer of compensation and whatever else would humiliate the Sudan is all that would suffice.

They have no power to "pardon" her, as they she has done nothing wrong. It is a bloody sad day when a western power must cravenly accept the judgement of a Johnny Nobody like the Sudan; whatever happened to the days when we could simply do as we pleased with the likes of them?

She has broken the law. A similar law to one that exists where you live.

I think you miss the point. Firstly, by any reasonable legal code, the teacher did nothing wrong.Indeed. And irrelevant.
Secondly, we've got bigger guns than them, and more of them.Indeed. Also irrelevant.

Indeed. And irrelevant.
Indeed. Also irrelevant.

Not to somebody with a spine, and any appreciation of real politik. You and your like would hapily accredit the likes of the Sudan a diplomatic prestige they neither merit through their state nor justify through their conduct, all due to a weak idealogy that will lead the west wilfully down the path to oblivion.

She has broken the law. A similar law to one that exists where you live.

Bollocks. I can call my Teddy Bear whatever I want to. Gosh how lucky I am, really, to have the right to call by teddy Mohammed.:rolleyes:

Not to somebody with a spine, and any appreciation of real politik. You and your like would hapily accredit the likes of the Sudan a diplomatic prestige they neither merit through their state nor justify through their conduct, all due to a weak idealogy that will lead the west wilfully down the path to oblivion.Meh. Luckily most British have dropped your pathetic attitude. Now if we can get the US, Russia, and China to do the same, the world might become a better place.

EDIT:

I just realized, Russia has far more guns than Britain, and that would make them right in the issue of Litvinyenko's death. Britain should be humiliated and offer public apologies, because it has less weapons, since that, and not what is right is what's important.

What was she doing in Sudan anyway?

I have very little sympathy for these Westerners that leave needy people at home to go help others because of their self-loathing Western guilt. Far as I'm concerned, they give up the protection of the state when they stop serving its interests.

Not to somebody with a spine, and any appreciation of real politik. You and your like would hapily accredit the likes of the Sudan a diplomatic prestige they neither merit through their state nor justify through their conduct, all due to a weak idealogy that will lead the west wilfully down the path to oblivion.

And by "your like" you mean, "people who don't break the law."

It's funny, you know - you're all for immigrants Respecting The Laws Of Your Country, and being castrated/gassed/deported/imprisoned/whatever for not doing so. But that knife doesn't cut both ways - you happily shit over foreign laws and incourage others to do the same in foreign countries. So for you it's obviously not really about law or legality, it's about the triumph of your own egotism over rationality.

Luckily, your own egotism dies when you do. :( Won't the world be a sad place then.

What was she doing in Sudan anyway?

I have very little sympathy for these Westerners that leave needy people at home to go help others because of their self-loathing Western guilt. Far as I'm concerned, they give up the protection of the state when they stop serving its interests.I'm not sure if she was teaching at an international school (in which case your whole rationale would be rendered useless, seeing as she'd be helping British children, among others) but exposing foreigners to other cultures and acting as an ambassador is beneficial to the state. Unless you're a racist jackass.

Joy, another idiot who doesn't even bother to look at the basics of a story. She was teaching at a Christian school for locals. Instead of helping to educate people in her own nation, she thought it was best to go abroad to help others. No sympathy from me at all.

And by "your like" you mean, "people who don't break the law."

It's funny, you know - you're all for immigrants Respecting The Laws Of Your Country, and being castrated/gassed/deported/imprisoned/whatever for not doing so. But that knife doesn't cut both ways - you happily shit over foreign laws and incourage others to do the same in foreign countries. So for you it's obviously not really about law or legality, it's about the triumph of your own egotism over rationality.

Luckily, your own egotism dies when you do. :( Won't the world be a sad place then.

I console myself that I'll die after you, and do so having had a better life.:)

In any case, why is equality necessary in diplomatic relations. I don't pretend to care for the rest of the world outside of perhaps Europe, North America and certain commonwealth states because, well, I don't. I don't care for their sensibilities, their values and their rights; I'd do as I pleased with the Sudan to protect British interests and British citizens.

Bollocks. I can call my Teddy Bear whatever I want to. Gosh how lucky I am, really, to have the right to call by teddy Mohammed.:rolleyes:

No, but name it Jesus the Paedophile in a Texan school and see how long you last.

The Celtic goalkeeper got convicted for blessing himslef against Rangers last year in Scotland.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/5288184.stm

Lets start in the bits of the world you care about before we get on our high horses here

1. It's a bad thing to be quoting without comment.
I disagree. An OP without comment is a bad thing, but a post may stand on its own even without comment. I believe this commentary falls into that category.


It's a very pertinent quote, and I know roughly what your position would be, but still. If you, a respected contributor to the forum do this,
:eek:

Moi?

:D:fluffle:

won't newcomers think it's an OK way to make their point too?
I think it can be, sometimes. As long as they stay away from cut'n'paste spam in the OPs, it's gonna be fine :)


2. They went after the teacher instead of blaming the kids. That's a fair cop -- she can go live in Britain, not all of them can.
They went after the teacher for political reasons. She was tried and convicted for other reasons than "insulting Islam".

But at least she gets to go home now, unharmed.

If the British government really wants to protect its citizens, they should rescue this woman. Either diplomatically, or militarily, they should act as they would if she were a climber stranded on a mountain.
*Yawn*

For 15 days in prison? Hardly.

Then again, nobody invaded Thailand to rescue Jody Aggett (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=479807&in_page_id=1811), so I'm guessing cooler heads prevail, luckily.


The Sudan is no place to leave a Christian to the mercy of the courts or mobs.
Especially with their history of jihad against Christians.
Heh. :p

I think (IMHO of course) that he is feeling "why invite trouble unnecessarily"...but I think it is necessary not to modify behaviour / thoughts because of "let's not offend muslims because they riot / are violent".
You could modify your behavior if your behavior calls undue attention to you - like wearing the wrong baseball cap or soccer uniform at a game - but modifying your behavior because a minority uses that behavior as an excuse to score cheap political points is just silly. And when muslims in your home country - indeed, even Sudanese officials - say that this isn't something that should offend any of the islamic faith, listen to them and don't cater to the fringe lunatics. Especially after selling 40,000 copies of the book without anybody voicing a complaint in the past.


Its not like islamists are going to scale down their "angry because we are offended" argument...there will be no end to this other than converting wholesale to islam...and then it will be "oh you are not islamic enough" (that's what we see in fully/majority islamic countries).
Well, yes. If you give an inch...

There have been a very few real points made in this thread. Understandably, so, as it's a very stupid action on the part of the Moslem Sudanese government.
Must be because you refuse to read a great many posts.


It is entertaining to see the Moslem apologists, such as yourself and Heikou, get worked up over such trivial things as the Pink Pig, though...
They did?

Not to somebody with a spine, and any appreciation of real politik. You and your like ... justify through their conduct, ... weak idealogy ... lead the west ... down the path to oblivion.
*Yawns*

*Snores*
I don't care for their sensibilities, their values and their rights; I'd do as I pleased with the Sudan to protect British interests and British citizens.
So you agree in principle with the actions of the Sudanese government. Well done.

I don't care for their sensibilities, their values and their rights.

The terrorists don't care for yours. What's the difference between you and them?

The terrorists don't care for yours. What's the difference between you and them?

Basically boils down to "I'm a White Anglican Brit and they're not."

Basically boils down to "I'm a White Anglican Brit and they're not."

I did get a whiff of white mans burden from him alright.

Basically boils down to "I'm a White Anglican Brit and they're not."

THIS is the guy that calls himself a genius?

The one that's getting his sorry behind handed to him in an internet forum?

Far as I'm concerned, they give up the protection of the state when they stop serving its interests.

Everyone has the right to be protected. And the state is not, nor will it ever be, more important than the individual.

Why should "we" submit to the judgement of Sudan? Simple: Same reason that Sudanese should submit to our laws while in our countries.

except that they should only submit in so far as our laws are just, just as we should do likewise both here and there. in sheer practicality, this is admittedly tough. but its the only viable principle we've got, on pain of being obligated to participate in genocide or any other crazy thing some country's laws may require.

When you move to a nation you accept the rules of that nation. I bet moving from Liverpool to Sudan she would have been chuffed at how well behaved the pupils were... well there's a reason for it...they live in an oppresive nation with extremely strict law and order. So if she accepts the benefits she must also accept the downside.

Not to somebody with a spine, and any appreciation of real politik. You and your like would hapily accredit the likes of the Sudan a diplomatic prestige they neither merit through their state nor justify through their conduct, all due to a weak idealogy that will lead the west wilfully down the path to oblivion.
Such moronic hubris is exactly what lost us our empire, Chris. You should know that. Using our power to be extremely petty when our subjects break the law?

Yeah, nice one.

The only way to be fair here is to give all of the children whom voted for that name 40 lashes too. Then 40 lashes for all of the parents for raising children without the proper reverence for Islam. Another 40 lashes for the local government officials whom allowed such parents to exist and then 40 lashes for the leaders of Sudan because their underlings were so lax in their support of Islam. Really, just lash everyone so that the Prophet cannot be disrespected in such a foul and egregious manner ever again.

In light of this incident, I am naming my left sock Muhammad and my right sock Jesus Christ.

Such moronic hubris is exactly what lost us our empire, Chris. You should know that. Using our power to be extremely petty when our subjects break the law?

Yeah, nice one.

How was the Empire acquired?

The terrorists don't care for yours. What's the difference between you and them?

One of them "has a spine" and an "appreciation for realpolitik," and the other doesn't.

As to which is which I think it's best I do not say.

One of them "has a spine" and an "appreciation for realpolitik," and the other doesn't.

As to which is which I think it's best I do not say.

Will you be my new best friend at NSG? :D

How was the Empire acquired?
By sending our best and brightest out around the world to snatch the best bits of land, and then getting directions on how to send more troops there, and information on habitability, amount, technical advancement and general temprament of the locals.

What we ended with is sending off public schoolboys off in the Imperial Police to go around repressing the natives pointlessly. By the 1930s, the empire was already pretty much over. Our colonies, such as India, were overtaking us because we'd stopped relying on our own ingenuity and hard work to get jobs done and instead relied on arrogance and tradition.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The blessed Chris View Post
Bollocks. I can call my Teddy Bear whatever I want to. Gosh how lucky I am, really, to have the right to call by teddy Mohammed.


The Celtic goalkeeper got convicted for blessing himslef against Rangers last year in Scotland.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/5288184.stm

Lets start in the bits of the world you care about before we get on our high horses here



Yes, he was convicted in a country which also saw a woman disciplined by her employer for wearing a crucifix but is happy to let other employees wear turbans (a religious symbol). (As indeed the British state waived the requirement for Sikhs to wear crash helmets on motorcycles.)

The problem being the lopsided implementation of the various dicta. It seems to be an issue to offend someone who professes a non-Western religion in the (yes, I know Christianity began in Asia) West but at the same time Westerners are also expected to avoid offence abroad.

While contributors can smell a whiff of the whiteman's burden their olfactory senses appear unaware of the obvious racism being expressed in Sudan.

Why would it be blasphemy to name a teddy Mohammed, but not a child? Meh. Some people are just so insecure about their identities.

Oh, and there's the teeny tiny fact that she will only face punishment if convicted. Plus there's probably a fairly high chance that Sudan will deport her rather than risk a diplomatic incident by punishing her in Sudan.

Thats not the point. The point is that religion is stupid and everyone would be happier if we were all atheists.

Thats not the point. The point is that religion is stupid and everyone would be happier if we were all atheists.
I couldn't disagree more. I'm an atheist myself, but I don't think that antagonising people due to them having a faith is a good idea, that's the kind of stupidity we're meant to have given up, let's be honest.

Thats not the point. The point is that religion is stupid and everyone would be happier if we were all atheists.

Not really. There'd be an entire issue of how NOT to believe, and so on. Such is human nature.

Thats not the point. The point is that religion is stupid and everyone would be happier if we were all atheists.

Nope, already tried it...turned out quite badly.

When you move to a nation you accept the rules of that nation.

only if fascism is correct.

only if fascism is correct.
I was unaware that the rule of law was Fascism.

only if fascism is correct.

How so? :confused:

I was unaware that the rule of law was Fascism.

rule of law only counts for anything when the law is just. when the law is unjust we all have an obligation to break the law. you most certainly do not have an obligation to 'accept the rules of a nation when you move there', and any theory that says otherwise exalts the state over justice and shares at least a common base with fascism or some forms of absolutist monarch/god-emperor system.

rule of law only counts for anything when the law is just. when the law is unjust we all have an obligation to break the law. you most certainly do not have an obligation to 'accept the rules of a nation when you move there', and any theory that says otherwise exalts the state over justice and shares at least a common base with fascism or some forms of absolutist monarch/god-emperor system.
Yes, all lovely utter bullshit, but won't stand up in court, squire.

If you live somewhere, you accept their laws and rules. That's just how things are, and that's how things will remain. It's Super Tragic if a state has unjust policies, but nowadays in the world, you can settle pretty much anywhere in the Western world you like, so long as you're white.

If you don't like it, then move away. That's all there is to it. And if you don't like the way that any state works, then go and pointlessly die in a French commune or something.

you can settle pretty much anywhere in the Western world you like, so long as you're white.

.

That must be a big "pretty much". Unless non-EU Europeans are not white and the dusky non-European folk of Oslo, Malmo, Dublin, London, Bradford, Paris etc etc are actually white.

That must be a big "pretty much". Unless non-EU Europeans are not white and the dusky non-European folk of Oslo, Malmo, Dublin, London, Bradford, Paris etc etc are actually white.
*shrugs* It's still mostly true.

The main areas with large amounts of white people are Europe, the US, Canada, Australia and a bit of North Africa and India.

Pretty easy to live anywhere else in the Western World if you're from those areas.

That must be a big "pretty much". Unless non-EU Europeans are not white and the dusky non-European folk of Oslo, Malmo, Dublin, London, Bradford, Paris etc etc are actually white.

why is Oslo on that list.... :D

why is Oslo on that list.... :D
Maybe he's really Ny Nordland or something. Who knows?

Yes, all lovely utter bullshit, but won't stand up in court, squire.

doesn't have to stand up in court. that's sort of the point.

here, imagine this. a country has a law which requires you to take part in the gang rape of someone. do you honestly think that you should obey the law? do you think it's being the law gets you off the hook for the wrong you have committed?

If you live somewhere, you accept their laws and rules. That's just how things are, and that's how things will remain.

no, that doesn't describe the situation at all. what you mean to say is that the laws are inflicted on you because they have the power, whether or not they act with justice. this is a far cry from acceptance. shit, it doesn't even imply tolerance of them.

If you don't like it, then move away. That's all there is to it. And if you don't like the way that any state works, then go and pointlessly die in a French commune or something.

or you could, you know, change things. nah, who am i kidding, the state is always right and true and must not be opposed or questioned.

Apparently she's been pardoned.

http://news.aol.com/story/_a/teacher-in-teddy-bear-case-leaves-sudan/20071203065309990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001

And do read the delightful comments on the bottom (of the article). How civilized.

Apparently she's been pardoned.

http://news.aol.com/story/_a/teacher-in-teddy-bear-case-leaves-sudan/20071203065309990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001

And do read the delightful comments on the bottom (of the article). How civilized.

America Online is chock full of kiddies and outright dumbfucks that make even the more narrow-minded posters on NSG look like journalists in comparison.

America Online is chock full of kiddies and outright dumbfucks that make even the more narrow-minded posters on NSG look like journalists in comparison.

Well, sometimes it's quite funny, I enjoy analyzing the stupidity of their average poster,.

[Piss on muhamad and all those bloody rag heads, they are nothing but dung on the heap of history!

KIll all Muslims

DON'T TELL THE MUSLIMS,BUT MY PITBULL'S NAME IS MUHAMMAD SSSSHHHH

I just took a dump in the toilet. Let's name it "Mohammed". *waits for my 40 lashes*
.......
I'm probably gonna see a suicide bomber out my door any day now.

IT WOULD HAVE BEEN COOLER IF THEY HAD KILLED HER OR WHIPPED HER 40 LASHES !!!!!!!! AS LONG AS THEY SHOWED IT ON TV OR PUT IT ONLINE !!! ITS JUST ONE BRITISH WOMAN !!!!!!!! WHO CARES !!!!! THOSE COWS ARE A DIME A DOZEN !!! IM VERY DISAPOINTED IN SUDAN !!!!!!]

Then there are the posts of semi-wisdom.

[I see the crazies have learned to post. When did mental hospitals start allowing patients use of the internet?]

Whenever I have too much faith in humanity, I know there's always AOL.

:)

Interesting time article.

Seems it was a fired employee of the school that got this started.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1690280,00.html

Interesting time article.

Seems it was a fired employee of the school that got this started.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1690280,00.html
Interesting indeed. And it all seems politically motivated at every step of the way, while only being cursorily related to religion. Something I'm quite chuffed to have called correctly.

Anyway, I'm glad she's been released, but I'm still sorry for all those children who won't be able to go to school for the rest of the year due to that former school secretary's actions.

Interesting indeed. And it all seems politically motivated at every step of the way, while only being cursorily related to religion. Something I'm quite chuffed to have called correctly.

Anyway, I'm glad she's been released, but I'm still sorry for all those children who won't be able to go to school for the rest of the year due to that former school secretary's actions.

Same here, I was expecting something political.

But I don't think you need to worry too much about the children, I'm sure they'll get someone, they're some of the wealthier people around, so it'll get done.

Same here, I was expecting something political.

But I don't think you need to worry too much about the children, I'm sure they'll get someone, they're some of the wealthier people around, so it'll get done.Perhaps, but the I believe the school will be closed for over a month due to this incident. A month is a long time to be off school.

Perhaps, but the I believe the school will be closed for over a month due to this incident. A month is a long time to be off school.

Really, those kids have some luck.

Really, those kids have some luck.You don't know what you've got till it's gone. So many people do not realise how lucky they are to have had access to a good education system.