Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

US Ambassador to Libya killed by mob

Options
12467…10

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,965 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Manic Moran wrote: »
    Definitely starting to look like it was a well-executed operation, pre-planned. That the film had sparked protests was just a piece of incredible good fortune, either to be on the day originally planned given the 9/11 significance, or they did very well and accelerated their plan to take advantage of it.

    That said, there is still the problem that there are groups of people who get angry enough to storm compounds because they feel insulted.

    NTM
    What says the film maker wasn't complicit?


  • Options
    #93
    christmas2012
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,827 ✭✭✭christmas2012


    You state there are violent passages in the Koran. There are. However, the Hold Books of Christianity and Judaism are far more violent.


    There are violent passages,but they are not feverishly adhered to like in islam.

    Does this make the American Christians who converted to Islam and embraced terrorism objective commentators on Christianity or America?

    It could do,they could show a different side to the coin.
    there are honour killings in other cultures and societies, particularly in Hindu communities in India. Does this mean that all Hindus are barbarous and medieval?

    It means there is a problem in the hindu culture and attitudes towards women,that needs addressing..
    Yet quite a number of Islamic nations have more MPs than Ireland, and several have more than the likes of the UK and France.


    Perecentage wise i would say the amount of mps ratio to men is much lower,you are counting billions of muslims all over the muslim world...Of course there is bound to be a few female mps ,but i wouldnt say they would fill the house..


  • Options
    #94
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    christmas2012 wrote: »
    There are (......) ,but i wouldnt say they would fill the house..

    If you'd get back to me on the point raised here....
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80768518&postcount=90


  • Options
    #95
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    I mean why is it only Muslims in countries with already strained relationships with the US who are full on rioting over this?
    This definitely isn't just about religion. It strikes me as being very similar to how The Troubles became a Protestant / Catholic conflict 'officially', but in reality religion had f*ck all to do with it.

    These guys would have eventually found a different reason to riot if this hadn't happened.


  • Options
    #96
    Einhard
    Registered Users Posts: 6,920 ✭✭✭Einhard


    Thanks for answering my points.
    christmas2012 wrote: »
    There are violent passages,but they are not feverishly adhered to like in islam.

    I've travelled through Muslim countries and I was never attacked for not being a Muslim. I know Muslim people and they have never attacked me. Indeed, I have been treated by Muslim doctors in hospital. Actually, when you look at it, there are 1 billion Musims in the world, and the overwhelming majority have never attacked people for being of a different faith, so how exactly do they feverishly adhere to these passages?

    Seriously, you're not only wrong, but your assertions are totally illogical. They make no sense.
    It could do,they could show a different side to the coin.

    But would you say that they must be tellign the truth simply because they were once American Christians? That's what you're saying about Ali Hirsi.
    It means there is a problem in the hindu culture and attitudes towards
    women,that needs addressing..

    So...when it happens with Muslims, it's indicative of a backward, medieval culture in which believers are all violent and barbarous. When it happens with Hindus, it's merely a problem which needs addressing. Why the double standards?
    Perecentage wise i would say the amount of mps ratio to men is much lower,you
    are counting billions of muslims all over the muslim world...Of course there is
    bound to be a few female mps ,but i wouldnt say they would fill the
    house..

    I was speaking about percentages. In a good many Muslim majority countries, including those I mentioned, the % of women parliamentarians is higher than in Ireland, and France, and the UK. How does that fit with a people that are allegedly psychotically anti-women?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    a5y
    Registered Users Posts: 944 ✭✭✭a5y


    wes wrote: »
    Pro American rallies in Benghazi:
    'This Does Not Represent Us': Moving Photos of Pro-American Rallies in Libya

    Shows that not all Libyan's supported the violence against the US consulate, as some have essentially suggested on here.

    ... These people have really, really neat hand-writing. The legibility is just fantastic.

    I wish the news would talk to people who had neat hand-writing as much as it talked to people who make death threats like they're some nasal teen playing Xbox or shouting at the football.

    I mean, its not exactly motivating when the raging a55holes of any region, however few their minority are, can dominate the national identity by headline grabbing criminality and violence.


  • Options
    #98
    Fromthetrees
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,846 ✭✭✭Fromthetrees


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    I mean why is it only Muslims in countries with already strained relationships with the US who are full on rioting over this?
    This definitely isn't just about religion. It strikes me as being very similar to how The Troubles became a Protestant / Catholic conflict 'officially', but in reality religion had f*ck all to do with it.

    These guys would have eventually found a different reason to riot if this hadn't happened.
    Religion had loads to do with 'The Troubles'.
    Partition came about because northern Protestants were afraid to be a minority in a Catholic country.
    The Civil rights movement was born out of Catholic suppression by Protestants. Religion playing a part in Protestants thinking they were superior to Catholics.
    Ian Paisley often said 'No To Roman Rule' implying Ireland was a theocracy.
    If it wasn't for 100% Catholic or 100% Protestant schools I genuinely believe only a fraction of the amount of people who joined the IRA, UVF ect would have. It's so much harder to join an organisation who wants to murder your best friend from school.
    Religion divided the two communities up north more than anything else. Mixed secular schools is where we should be heading.
    Please don't get me wrong, there's a whole host of other reasons outside of religion but to say it played no part in the conflict is wrong imo.


  • Options
    #99
    christmas2012
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,827 ✭✭✭christmas2012


    I was speaking about percentages. In a good many Muslim majority countries, including those I mentioned, the % of women parliamentarians is higher than in Ireland, and France, and the UK. How does that fit with a people that are allegedly psychotically anti-women?

    In afghanistan there were beheadings for mixed sex parties,and how come in mosques there are seperate mens and womens rooms,some of the womens rooms are less handsomely facilitated as the mens.

    In the quaran,it states a womans testimony is worth less than a mans..


  • Options
    #100
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    christmas2012 wrote: »
    In afghanistan there were beheadings for mixed sex parties,.........less than a mans..

    For the second time, would you care to get back to me on the point raised here....
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80768518&postcount=90


  • Options
    #101
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    christmas2012 wrote: »
    In afghanistan there were beheadings for mixed sex parties.........

    Hardly as clear cut as that. Nor do I know why you use the plural.

    "There are two Taliban commanders, Mullah Wali Mohammad and Mullah Sayed Gul, that control the area near Kajaki, but they argued about the two women," Ahmadi said. "We don't know exactly what the differences are, but the killing was because of the difference between the two commanders over these women. Their throats were slit but their heads were not completely cut off."
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/aug/27/taliban-execute-civilians-at-party?INTCMP=SRCH


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    christmas2012
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,827 ✭✭✭christmas2012


    Their throats were slit but their heads were not completely cut off."

    Oh well that clarification makes it all okay.. :P


  • Options
    #103
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    christmas2012 wrote: »
    Oh well that clarification makes it all okay.. :P

    Being obtuse now, are we?

    For the third time, could you get back to me on the point raised here....
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80768518&postcount=90


  • Options
    #104
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    christmas2012 wrote: »
    In the quaran,it states a womans testimony is worth less than a mans..

    As it does in the Bible (along with a lot worse when it comes to women), yet you won't find all Jews or Christians professing to believe that particular view. Likewise, not all Muslims hold such beliefs, despite it being written in their holy book.


  • Options
    #105
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,965 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    I mean why is it only Muslims in countries with already strained relationships with the US who are full on rioting over this?
    http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jvnn_NQDYccDCNlVlcx7zZR3dIjw?docId=CNG.7f23ea5f543b6342902a442e1feea6f4.801

    And that is the sound of a foot meeting a mouth...


  • Options
    #106
    christmas2012
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,827 ✭✭✭christmas2012


    As it does in the Bible (along with a lot worse when it comes to women), yet you won't find all Jews or Christians professing to believe that particular view. Likewise, not all Muslims hold such beliefs, despite it being written in their holy book.

    No you wont,and you wont see them feverishly defending a book to the nth degree or killing us ambassadors over a film that had nothing to do with a us ambassador..


  • Options
    #107
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    christmas2012 wrote: »
    No you wont,and you wont see them feverishly defending a book to the nth degree or killing us ambassadors over a film that had nothing to do with a us ambassador..

    You use "them" in a collective sense, as if the actions of some are representative of the views of all. You've completely missed the point I was trying to make.

    I'm in no way condoning the actions of the violent protestors and rioters, but their actions are in no way representative of the views of all Muslims. You're tarring 1.6 billion people with the one brush, and using your outrage towards a minority as a means to hate a majority.


  • Options
    #108
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    gvn wrote: »
    As it does in the Bible (along with a lot worse when it comes to women), yet you won't find all Jews or Christians professing to believe that particular view. Likewise, not all Muslims hold such beliefs, despite it being written in their holy book.

    Do you want to list your specific objections or substantiate that claim?


  • Options
    #109
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    christmas2012 wrote: »
    No you wont,and you wont see them feverishly defending a book to the nth degree or killing us ambassadors over a film that had nothing to do with a us ambassador..


    For the fourth time, could you answer the question raised here?
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80768518&postcount=90


  • Options
    #110
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    philologos wrote: »
    Do you want to list your specific objections or substantiate that claim?

    I won't, because that would be completely off-topic for this thread. But you know the particular books and relevant verses of the Old Testament I'm speaking of. Christians don't abide by the particular passages (for various reasons), while the same passages are seemingly ignored by most Jews. My point is that despite particularly distasteful passages being present in the Bible, its adherents don't necessarily hold that these passages are true or binding, for whatever reason. Likewise, not all Muslims will hold passages and verses of the Quran as true or binding, directly refuting christmass2012's claim.


  • Options
    #111
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    gvn wrote: »
    philologos wrote: »
    Do you want to list your specific objections or substantiate that claim?

    I won't, because that would be completely off-topic for this thread. But you know the particular books and relevant verses of the Old Testament I'm speaking of. Christians don't abide by the particular passages (for various reasons), while the same passages are seemingly ignored by most Jews. My point is that despite particularly distasteful passages being present in the Bible, its adherents don't necessarily hold that these passages are true or binding, for whatever reason. Likewise, not all Muslims will hold passages and verses of the Quran as true or binding, directly refuting christmass2012's claim.

    Why did you bring it up if it's off-topic though?

    If you post something surely the onus is on you to back your claim up both in reference to the Qur'an and the Bible?

    Your claim is highly questionable.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    philologos wrote: »
    Why did you bring it up if it's off-topic though?

    If you post something surely the onus is on you to back your claim up both in reference to the Qur'an and the Bible?

    Your claim is highly questionable.

    My point wasn't off-topic, it was illustrative; answering your question (listing and substantiating my specific objections to the Bible) would have been off-topic. Please go back and read my two posts again, as I genuinely cannot see what is causing you concern.

    I won't discuss Biblical references and interpretations in this thread, because I won't drag it further off-topic than I already appeared to have done. Any problems, PM me.


  • Options
    #113
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    gvn wrote: »
    My point wasn't off-topic, it was illustrative; answering your question (listing and substantiating my specific objections to the Bible) would have been off-topic. Please go back and read my two posts again, as I genuinely cannot see what is causing you concern.

    I won't discuss Biblical references and interpretations in this thread, because I won't drag it further off-topic than I already appeared to have done. Any problems, PM me.

    Your point wasn't off topic, but yet being asked to explain your position is? I think that all posts should be open to questioning or criticism.

    All I'm asking you to do is elaborate on your position.


  • Options
    #114
    christmas2012
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,827 ✭✭✭christmas2012


    You're tarring 1.6 billion people with the one brush, and using your outrage towards a minority as a means to hate a majority.

    You have to admit though individualism is not something that is promoted or encouraged within the religion of islam..


  • Options
    #115
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    philologos wrote: »
    Your point wasn't off topic, but yet being asked to explain your position is? I think that all posts should be open to questioning or criticism.

    All I'm asking you to do is elaborate on your position.

    Rightio ...

    My original point was in reference to christmas2012's post, where she stated that, in the Qur'an, the testimony of women is considered to be lower than that of men. My reply attempted to illustrate that the adherents of a particular religion don't always hold what's written in their holy book to be their own opinion or view. That is, to say, not all Muslims would believe the testimony of women is anything less than the testimony of men, as christmas2012's original point implied. To give an example of this, that christmas2012 could relate to, I said there are passages in the Bible that speak of women in a similar or worse fashion, but despite this not all Christians or Jews would hold such views, despite it being written in their holy book. There are a multitude of reasons why a Christian or Jew would not hold such views, but I didn't get into that.

    My original point was pretty clear, and I don't believe I could make it much clearer. I really don't see why you need to force me to spell it out word by word. It wasn't an attact on Christianity, as you likely see it.

    I won't be dragging this thread further off-topic. I apologise for dragging it off-topic now, as it likely is. If you need a further explanation of the above (and I don't see how that would be possible), PM me.


  • Options
    #116
    Frank Grimes
    Registered Users Posts: 5,238 ✭✭✭Frank Grimes


    christmas2012 wrote: »
    You have to admit though individualism is not something that is promoted or encouraged within the religion of islam..
    So they're all the same? I really suggest you inform yourself better on the religion, the level of generalisation you are making is pretty unbelievable. To even speak of Islam as being such a homogeneous entity, as you appear to think, is entirely incorrect, let alone to speak of Muslims as if they're some sort of borg-like collectivity who all think the same and act the same displays a total lack of understanding of the reality of the religion and its adherents.


  • Options
    #117
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    gvn wrote: »
    Rightio ...

    My original point was in reference to christmas2012's post, where she stated that, in the Qur'an, the testimony of women is considered to be lower than that of men. My reply attempted to illustrate that the adherents of a particular religion don't always hold what's written in their holy book to be their own opinion or view. That is, to say, not all Muslims would believe the testimony of women is anything less than the testimony of men, as christmas2012's original point implied. To give an example of this, that christmas2012 could relate to, I said there are passages in the Bible that speak of women in a similar or worse fashion, but despite this not all Christians or Jews would hold such views, despite it being written in their holy book. There are a multitude of reasons why a Christian or Jew would not hold such views, but I didn't get into that.

    My original point was pretty clear, and I don't believe I could make it much clearer. I really don't see why you need to force me to spell it out word by word. It wasn't an attact on Christianity, as you likely see it.

    I won't be dragging this thread further off-topic. I apologise for dragging it off-topic now, as it likely is. If you need a further explanation of the above (and I don't see how that would be possible), PM me.

    Your point isn't clear because you've not provided it much basis. I'm disappointed that a poster of your calibre won't provide good reason for their argument on a thread.

    If you don't want to discuss it, that's fine, but realistically you shouldn't bring up points that you won't be able to discuss when questioned on.

    The reason I decided to post here rather than PM is because I think that other posters on the thread should be able to see your response. If you make a claim you should be able to stand by it on thread.

    On that note, I won't bring it up again, but to post something and refuse to elaborate on it when questioned isn't a real "discussion".


  • Options
    #118
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    philologos wrote: »
    Your point isn't clear because you've not provided it much basis. I'm disappointed that a poster of your calibre won't provide good reason for their argument on a thread.

    If you don't want to discuss it, that's fine, but realistically you shouldn't bring up points that you won't be able to discuss when questioned on.

    The reason I decided to post here rather than PM is because I think that other posters on the thread should be able to see your response. If you make a claim you should be able to stand by it on thread.

    On that note, I won't bring it up again, but to post something and refuse to elaborate on it when questioned isn't a real "discussion".

    What, exactly, is my claim, the one you're having issue with? That there are passages in the Bible which reference women in a distasteful way?


  • Options
    #119
    christmas2012
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,827 ✭✭✭christmas2012


    What i find worrying about the whole fiasco,is that the muslims there,seem to be more outraged about the actual film,than the actions of those who lynched and killed the US ambassador,who was an innocent party in all of this,and had nothing...nothing to do with the film that the egyptian director filmed about mohammed.

    They need to chill out a little bit,take off the rage tinted glasses,and not take every insult to their ''god'' so personally,its not like they got a personal attack on themselves..Even if someone personally attacked me etc,i would turn the other cheek so to speak,because it will wind them up even more,if they think youre not affected by them..

    That egyptian director got what he wanted,notioriety and fame,of epic proportions,people the world over,know about this guy,and will want to see his film,and he caused a huge outcry in the arab world,what more publicity could one want?Sounds like a dream..


  • Options
    #120
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    gvn wrote: »
    What, exactly, is my claim, the one you're having issue with? That there are passages in the Bible which reference women in a distasteful way?

    I think if you claim something about the Bible, you should walk through your objections and let others see if they are valid or not.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    Frank Grimes
    Registered Users Posts: 5,238 ✭✭✭Frank Grimes


    christmas2012 wrote: »
    They need to chill out a little bit,take off the rage tinted glasses,and not take every insult to their ''god'' so personally,its not like they got a personal attack on themselves
    Muslims do not think that Muhammad was god. And many devout Muslims will take these types of things 'personally', whether you agree with it or not. I'm not advocating/condoning violent reactions either before anyone accuses me of that, or membership of the PC brigade.


Advertisement