well i think that because the suggestion came from a muslim kid, she probably thought it was ok... besides, it isnt exactly defamitory is it? naming a loved toy bear after a prophet?

 

their country/culture or not, there was a faction there that completely overreacted. in a civilised normal world a simple apology would have sufficed.

 

as for the comments regarding 'doing your homework' and 'obseving the countrys culture' etc... that hardly goes on here does it! many immigrants want to bring their own laws here disregarding ours. turbans instead of crash helmets on bikes, the right to wear religious clothing/iconography where others cant... it cuts both ways and i see precious little from 'the other side'.

 

 

anyway the silly bint has been released now and will soon be home.... probably the target of one of mohameds deciples to exact justice <_<

as for the comments regarding 'doing your homework' and 'obseving the countrys culture' etc... that hardly goes on here does it! many immigrants want to bring their own laws here disregarding ours. turbans instead of crash helmets on bikes, the right to wear religious clothing/iconography where others cant... it cuts both ways and i see precious little from 'the other side'.

 

 

exactly!

 

how often to non-nationals moan about about rules on subjects on the grounds of religion or no doubt because its what they do back home. the mindless , spinless government should just remind them where dover/heathrow is.

Oh Scott, take your big head out of your ass for once, eh? And realise that YOU are the person on these boards who makes the most derogatory, inflammatory remarks simply because, in your eyes, you CAN. Well, Mr - moderator or no moderator, we've all of us stood by AGHAST at some of the bile you've spewed to not one but MANY posters on Buzzjack and said, shamefully, nothing. It's time you realised that you are not above criticism, not above rules and not above anyone else here. Don't you think?

 

You will absolutely NOT put me on any kind of 'official notice' - OK? There have been NO racist comments here - I suggest you take your little blinkers off and READ this thread - if you can see that far down from that high horse.

 

As for you being 'thoroughly sick' of this forum becomeing a sounding borad for bigots and racists (how DARE you by the way) - don't you mean you are 'thoroughly sick' with this board being inhabited by people with equal, or higher, intelligence as yourself, who simply argue BACK at you? Something I've noticed over the years,m you simply are NOT able to tolerate or accept?

 

You will ONLY delete posts that are openly racist - NONE of the posts here have been.

 

You will ONLY close topics if they descend to mindless racism - NONE have.

 

You will ONLY issue, I have to conceal my mirth here, 'warnings' (YOU giving out warnings for offensive behaviour?!?!?!? You couldn't make it up, really you couldn't) if the poster displays anything that contravenes the Buzzjack codes of conduct which, quite promptly, I suggest you read - thoroughly. NOBODY here has - except you, on quite a few occasions, too.

 

I suggest once again, you actually READ through this thread - at NO POINT was it suggested, as you ridiculously claim, that all Muslims were paedophiles - quote me the part where it does, please do - it WAS suggested, however, that it was strange that such a draconiam moral religion as Islam was led by a prophet who liked orgies with nine year old girls. Surely some hypocrisy there, even in your clouded judgement of the whole affair? As for likening stating this what the Nazis did - grow up Scott - you're being highly offensive - and making yourself out to be a bit silly, too.

 

I also suggest it's YOU, Scott whoi has a, I quote, "very fractious grasp of what they are wittering on about" - as it always appears you have little or no understanding of the other side of any argument but your own. You display this with increasingly fervent vigour on virtually every thread you choose to shout at or belittle people on.

 

And it's YOU who should be, ahem, "damned well ashamed of yourself" for your treatment of the younger, (in your eyes) less knowledgeable, people on these boards. Strange, isn't it, that when someone your age stands up to you you natter on about us being Nazi-like, defamatory, offensive and abusive. I sense some seriouis Freudian projection going on here, myself.......

 

Sorry, but you very deliberately attempted to equate ALL muslims with paedophiles, if I were to say what you said about Jews or gay people I'd expect to be jumped on, and I'd deserve it as well...

 

And, do you honestly believe that the majority of people in this country would actually be even capable of making the distinction that you are now back peddling on....? All too many people in this country are knuckle-dragging neanderthals who get all their "information" from the Murdoch press and are totally incapable of being able to distinguish a Paedophile from a Paediatrician, so YOU come along with your thinly disguised bigoted rhetoric and you can just see these morons rubbing the two braincells they DO have together and saying "UG... Muslim is p****! UG! Me no like p****! UG! Me go kill all Muslim! UG!"

 

If you can present an argument that doesn't involve quite vile indirect racism (which is every bit as bad and insidious as the direct kind, and I know how to recognise it too....) then I'll listen to what you have to say, until then, I dont wanna know....

 

I'm gathering up the evidence here mate, you ARE presenting yourself as a small-minded bigot whether you want to admit it or not, you expect tolerance for your gay rights arguments, but give none to anyone else in return, that's hypocrisy in my book.... I actually have more respect for people who openly admit they are racist in some ways, at least they dont make excuses for themselves....

 

 

All religions seeks to impose a 'received text or wisdom' on to us, telling us how we should think and behave. Not that there is much wrong with the ten commandments (although I imagine the one about adultery would cause problems to more than a few British MPs!)

 

Most of the rules were made centuries ago and fundamentalists (in all religions) seem reluctant to change them in the face of progress or science. We may all look back and laugh at the problems that Copernicus had in the 16th century trying to get the Church to accept that the earth revolved around the sun but similar problems still exist today. (Darwin, women priests, etc).

 

First of all let me say that I have no objection to any adult person practicing his or her religion of choice in private. It is when it is aired in public, it involves children or is given some special kind of reverence or place in society that I feel I must object.

 

Each religion is just like a club or society that like minded people can join. Each professes to worship the one true God and yet God seems to have given them all a different set of rules. Catholics don't allow birth control, strict Baptists don't allow televisions, Methodists don't allow drinking alcohol (no wonder I'm a lapsed Methodist!) and Protestants won't allow divorcees to remarry in church, etc, etc. In the Middle East, anyone committing adultery or homosexual acts gets stoned.

 

If you don't like the rules of the club you are in then just start a new club and try to dissolve the old one as Henry VIII did when the Pope refused him a divorce. Strange how this one act of selfishness resulted in so many deaths, as Protestants and Catholics fought each other in the next 450 yrs. God seems to take some pretty long lunch breaks.

 

In reality of course, all the rules of the club are man made and mostly are made to control other men. In Islam, you are apparently guaranteed a place in heaven if you become a suicide bomber. Just in case anyone should disagree with this rule or raise common sense objections to whether or not there is a God, then they seem to have another rule to eliminate any opposition entirely:

 

'Qur'an 9:5 “Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.”

 

Religion has been responsible for most of the wars in history and sadly it shows all the signs of doing so again in the future. To those that indulge in it, religion is very much like a dangerous drug - the more you take then the more you get hooked on it. So the last thing you would want to do would be to get your child hooked on it - would you??? Sadly of course, religious people do just that. Imprint it on an impressionable mind that has no choice in the matter.

 

Hence religion should not be mentioned to children and it has no place in school (except in the general knowledge context and the historical context of who killed who). Therefore there would be no religious dress code problems in school and no PC Dress Police to make a fuss about it. When the children become adults at 18 they can make their own (non-prejudiced) minds up as to the value of it.

 

So while I rarely agree with the French (I'm joking in case anyone thinks I'm having a dig at our neighbours over the Channel), their laws keeping religion out of school and well apart from government seem to make a lot of sense. If religion stays private then the country can discuss and make laws based on current circumstances and common sense rather than some arguing for 'Christian values' and some arguing for 'Sharia Law'.

 

If you think my viewpoint is "Racist" then I'm utterly offended by YOU and your left wing Political correct attitude that stifles debate and common sense, Scott..

 

My best friend is of Afro-Caribbean origin and two of my best mates at work are Muslims. But I have a huge problem with ANY type of Religious Fundamentalism in ANY religion which is lacking in decency, tolerance & common sense.

 

http://www.comedyonline.co.uk/comedy-images/dave-allen.jpg

"Good night & may your God go with you" Dave Allen (1937-2005)

 

Take note Russ, and others on this thread, this is how you actually present a decent, balanced, well thought out arguement....

 

I agree with much of what you say, AND you managed to say it without engaging in petty insults against ethnic or other minorities, or try to rehabilitate crypto-racist ideologies such as Enoch Powell's.... Full marks....

 

I've never had a problem with practical criticism, but much of what is going on in this thread (and others) is definitely of the "crossing the line" variety. You've managed to avoid falling into that trap....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7124447.stm

 

The teacher has been freed from jail thanks to British Muslims who went to Sudan to meet the President!!

 

To be honest this thing got out of hand. At the school she worked at a member of staff was the one who reported the teacher. Think this was very sly of member of staff and she should of had a talk to Gillian Gibbons instead of putting her through hell!!!

 

Yay pleased shes been freed

Take note Russ, and others on this thread, this is how you actually present a decent, balanced, well thought out arguement....

 

:rolleyes: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Hilarious. As if YOU of ALL people would even KNOW a decent, balanced or well thought out argument if it battered you over your blinkered head with a housebrick, Scott.

 

As for taking notes from thisispop's post -oh I did - he's by far the most eloquent and informed member on these threads - reading his posts is always a pleasure. I suggest it's you, Scott, who could take some education from his posts, his style and his flair in presenting a balanced argument. Something I've never, ever seen you do. Not once.

 

As for your other offensive post - I'll take my time dissecting that one. Pretty slanderous in parts, from what I can see.

Edited December 4, 200717 yr by russt68

sorry scott, but i think russ is right here.

 

Thanks, Rob.

 

Careful, though - Scott and his hilariously toe-curling 'right-on' crew will be labelling you as a bigot, racist and an ignoramus, too, if you're not careful. Be mindful of having an opinion that differs from the Chairman's - or he'll be slandering you, too.

The prophet Mohammed is worshipped - and his words are followed (to the letter) by followers of Islam the world over - are we to take it that you think these followers should pick and choose which bits of the Koran they choose to believe? Like the fanatics do? The Koran is quite, quite clear that the love of this prophets life was a 9 year old girl - it's hardly a comment or an emotion that can be misinterpreted, is it?

 

I find it very bizarre that any religion that preaches so much moralistic bile against women, gays and anyone that doesn't conform to its neanderthal beliefs can be so accepting and in awe of a paedophile. Don't you?

 

As for being 'anti-Muslim' - no, not at all - I'm anti ALL religion - vehemently, too. Religion is a despicable tool, usually a filler for people with very little social life or social skills. Empty words for empty people.... that's what I call 'gut-wrenchingly awful', that here we are now, in the 21st century, and the cancer of religion is rearing its troublesome, ugly head up all over again.

 

Me? I prefer friends I can see, thank you very much.

 

I can only presume Chairman Scott objected to this post - and nowhere in this post can I see an inference that ALL Muslims are paedophiles. It's quite clear that I state that the 'prophet' this cult follows was a proud, self-confessed paedophile, who not only fell in love with a nine year old girl, but also married her - and subsequently included her in the many orgies he is said to have favoured.

 

As I said, not open to interpretation or misunderstanding - the Koran makes these facts crystal clear - and my point, which was clearly made for those with an iota of intelligence and insight, was that Islam, possibly more than any other religion, is steeped in sickening hypocrisy and injustice. It can preach and condemn women and gays - yet their figurehead was a guy who had very, very dubious and rather sickeniong morals himself.

 

My post is as clear and not open to misinterpretation as the Koran is on these facts above - unless you're Chairman Scott, that is and, like a lowly backbench politician, will try to twist and turn your words into something they rather than you want them to say. :lol:

 

Thanks, Rob.

 

Careful, though - Scott and his hilariously toe-curling 'right-on' crew will be labelling you as a bigot, racist and an ignoramus, too, if you're not careful. Be mindful of having an opinion that differs from the Chairman's - or he'll be slandering you, too.

 

me n scott have been locking horns for 3 years now russ...lol.. though admittedly we arnt agreeing as much as we used to do... i think we know eachother well enough not to be offended by eachothers differences. tbh ive always enjoyed scott wading in all guns blazing, but maybe its not so appropriate here.

 

agreed about t.i.p. he writes the posts most of us would like to have done! lol.

 

lets try and keep it civil lads :)

Talking about the teacher...... She got back into the Uk this morning, and gave a little speech about her time over in Sudan (stangely about how she loved her time over there and what a nice place it was. -_- )

It is ridiculous that all that erupted over naming a teddy bear whichever way you look at it. By the sounds of it there may be more to all this than this than meets the eye. I think there have been good points made that this teacher and this issue has just been used as a political pawn. Of course it could just be as silly as it looks.

I can only presume Chairman Scott objected to this post - and nowhere in this post can I see an inference that ALL Muslims are paedophiles. It's quite clear that I state that the 'prophet' this cult follows was a proud, self-confessed paedophile, who not only fell in love with a nine year old girl, but also married her - and subsequently included her in the many orgies he is said to have favoured.

 

As I said, not open to interpretation or misunderstanding - the Koran makes these facts crystal clear - and my point, which was clearly made for those with an iota of intelligence and insight, was that Islam, possibly more than any other religion, is steeped in sickening hypocrisy and injustice. It can preach and condemn women and gays - yet their figurehead was a guy who had very, very dubious and rather sickeniong morals himself.

 

My post is as clear and not open to misinterpretation as the Koran is on these facts above - unless you're Chairman Scott, that is and, like a lowly backbench politician, will try to twist and turn your words into something they rather than you want them to say. :lol:

 

It's pretty easy to take a few quotes out of context though and formulate a theory around it, just look what happened with Morrissey and the NME the other week, they took two or three quotes, totally isolated them from the context of the full text and ran with a "Morrissey Is a Right Wing Bigot" article even though he wasn't arguing anything of the sort....

 

Facts are, neither you nor I know what the hell happened over a thousand years ago, but I do know for a fact that if you were to print out your posts as a Tabloid "news story" or opinion piece, the knuckle-draggers in this country would interpret that as being Muslim Male = Paedophile... Look what happened when the News of the Screws printed those photographs of so-called "paedophiles" some time back, people were attacked on the streets.... Maybe you'd like that would you...? Totally innocent Muslims to be assaulted for no reason....?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7124447.stm

member of staff was the one who reported the teacher. Think this was very sly of member of staff and she should of had a talk to Gillian Gibbons instead of putting her through hell!!!

 

That's the bit I don't understand. Did the English schoolteacher make that snitcher soooo angry at some point that she/he didn't mind sending Gibbons to her death/prison/lashes? She's came to your country to help and that's how you repay her? Madness. Take her to one side and say "Change the bear's name..."

It always amazes me why any westerner would even consider going to live and work in a country where sharia law is in force. All the money in the world wouldn't entice me to set foot in such a backward place. As far as I'm concerned if they want to be ruled by crackpots who think it's still the year 1230 then let them get on with it.

 

The reason is because she didn´t go there for money.... She went there to f***ing help and do something good. There are thousand of easier ways to make more money then being a teacher in a f***ed up islamic country. And by the way they are not in 21st century because they use a different calendar.

 

The reason is because she didn´t go there for money.... She went there to f***ing help and do something good. There are thousand of easier ways to make more money then being a teacher in a f***ed up islamic country. And by the way they are not in 21st century because they use a different calendar.

not often we agree...lol.. but on this we do. :)

Im not racist in anyway either, BUT the religions down over in the east are beyond pathetic. No offence to their religion, but there religious views and beliefs are by far the most far-fetched of all religions, yet it manages to controll the people, the law/government (?Do they have a government) and the way the country works.

 

Isn't there anything OUR government could do? :unsure:

 

You don´t need to be so defensive and say that you don´t want to offend a religion that you just called pathetic. I think everyone agrees that a religion or doctrine which teaches include stoning and lashing people are beyond vile. Western governments will do nothing because USA walks hand in hand with Saudi Arabia and desperately needs their oil. Under these circumstances, the saudis could even offer human sacrifices to their god in public and the western governments would say it´s an "internal matter". USA doesn´t give a f*** about democracy or the quality of the life of people living in 3rd world countries, they just use such things as excuses to attack countries they have strategic reasons for. Why are them so f***ing worried with democracy in Venezuela when at the same time they are partners with vile nations like Saudi Arabia who are living in dark ages, which make the european middle ages look like land of freedom???