Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

UN workers killed in Afghanistan

1…5681011…16

Comments

  • #212
    Mark200
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,536 ✭✭✭Mark200


    yammycat wrote: »
    lol, so if I announce that chocolate is my God and if anybody eats chocolate I will commit a massacre should everybody stop eating chocolate ? would you stop if I announced this and would you hold yourself vacariously responsible for any massacre I commited upon consumption of chocolate by a random infidel.

    If you had the power to avert a massacre by refraining from such a trivial action, you would be a complete idiot to not do so...

    Again, if it's just your life at risk then do what you want. But certainly I can't imagine the families of those UN workers being apathetic towards the actions of that mentally-lacking pastor.


  • #213
    himnextdoor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭himnextdoor


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    /facepalm

    We've turned to condemn a man who burnt a book instead of the people who beheaded innocents trying to help them.

    By your logic, Mohammed is not culpable in any way for the murder of Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf .

    So why did you bring that up?


  • #214
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    himnextdoor wrote: »
    By your logic, Mohammed is not culpable in any way for the murder of Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf .

    So why did you bring that up?
    What?

    How the hell did you manage to come to that conclusion?

    Muhammad ordered the murder of Ka'b. The pastor did not order the murder of anyone. He merely burnt a book. Nothing more.


  • #215
    himnextdoor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭himnextdoor


    yammycat wrote: »
    lol, so if I announce that chocolate is my God and if anybody eats chocolate I will commit a massacre should everybody stop eating chocolate ? would you stop if I announced this and would you hold yourself vacariously responsible for any massacre I commited upon consumption of chocolate by a random infidel.

    You mean in the same way that emperors and kings and totalitarian dictators have been doing for thousands of years?

    If someone you were frightened of told you to stop eating chocolate or else a massacre would occur, you'd stop. If you weren't afraid, you might call his bluff.

    That's what the pastor did; he called their bluff!

    What happened to those UN people may well have been a foul act of murder but the pastor's hands are not clean either.


  • #216
    himnextdoor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭himnextdoor


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    What?

    How the hell did you manage to come to that conclusion?

    Muhammad ordered the murder of Ka'b. The pastor did not order the murder of anyone. He merely burnt a book. Nothing more.

    Mohammed knew someone would die as a result of his actions and so did the pastor.


  • Advertisement
  • #217
    himnextdoor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭himnextdoor


    Jakkass wrote: »
    himnextdoor: I explained what my solution would be. Prohibit disposing of things with fire in residential areas / community areas.

    Do you think that the pastor committed a sin in his heart? Knowing what he knew and doing what he did, do you think that the pastor sinned in the sight of God?


  • #218
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    himnextdoor wrote: »
    You mean in the same way that emperors and kings and totalitarian dictators have been doing for thousands of years?

    If someone you were frightened of told you to stop eating chocolate or else a massacre would occur, you'd stop. If you weren't afraid, you might call his bluff.

    That's what the pastor did; he called their bluff!

    What happened to those UN people may well have been a foul act of murder but the pastor's hands are not clean either.

    Ok let me apply your thinking to a similar scenario.


    An atheist figure of importance (Let's say leader of Atheist Ireland) decides to publicly burn a Bible in protest. Two days following his burning of the Bible, there are protests and violent outbursts across the globe as well as death threats.

    A week following the incident, in the US, a group of Christian extremists break in to an Atheist meeting of some sort and behead ten people and thousands around the globe chant "Death to the infidels".

    Knowing the run of people here on AH, there would be posts supporting the man in his "struggle" and for his "valiant protest in promotion of rational thought" and there would be widespread condemnation of the killers. If someone even so much as attempted to support the extremists who indiscriminately murdered people they'd be ripped to shreds by the mob of AH. No one would dare apportion any blame to the person who burnt a Bible because according to them they were simply exercising their right to protest. If someone burns a Bible, it's a protest. If someone burns a Qur'an, it's an act of great provocation and the waging of war against Muslims.

    Double standards. How I hate them.


  • #219
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    himnextdoor wrote: »
    Mohammed knew someone would die as a result of his actions and so did the pastor.
    No, Muhammad ordered the death of someone knowing full well his order would be fulfilled.

    The pastor burnt a book. Why should anyone die as a result of paper being burnt? The very fact that the burning of a book would elicit such a response is abhorrent.


  • #220
    himnextdoor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭himnextdoor


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    Ok let me apply your thinking to a similar scenario.


    An atheist figure of importance (Let's say leader of Atheist Ireland) decides to publicly burn a Bible in protest. Two days following his burning of the Bible, there are protests and violent outbursts across the globe as well as death threats.

    A week following the incident, in the US, a group of Christian extremists break in to an Atheist meeting of some sort and behead ten people and thousands around the globe chant "Death to the infidels".

    Knowing the run of people here on AH, there would be posts supporting the man in his "struggle" and for his "valiant protest in promotion of rational thought" and there would be widespread condemnation of the killers. If someone even so much as attempted to support the extremists who indiscriminately murdered people they'd be ripped to shreds by the mob of AH. No one would dare apportion any blame to the person who burnt a Bible because according to them they were simply exercising their right to protest. If someone burns a Bible, it's a protest. If someone burns a Qur'an, it's an act of great provocation and the waging of war against Muslims.

    Double standards. How I hate them.

    This is utter codswallop.


  • #221
    himnextdoor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭himnextdoor


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    No, Muhammad ordered the death of someone knowing full well his order would be fulfilled.

    The pastor burnt a book. Why should anyone die as a result of paper being burnt? The very fact that the burning of a book would elicit such a response is abhorrent.

    A fact of which the pastor was fully aware.


  • Advertisement
  • #222
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    himnextdoor wrote: »
    This is utter codswallop. My double standards and the double standards of AH have been exposed and I have no real response.
    Fixed your post.

    himnextdoor wrote: »
    A fact of which the pastor was fully aware.
    So what? If someone told me "Don't dare buy an Audi RS4 or I will kill every single person I see" why should I have to appease them? Why should I limit my freedom to appease people whose sole method of communication is through blood.

    If you were told to stop criticising Christianity or Christian extremists would kill the first atheist they see would you shut up and appease them? If not, then another set of double standards have been exposed.


  • #223
    himnextdoor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭himnextdoor


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    Fixed your post.

    So what? If someone told me "Don't dare buy an Audi RS4 or I will kill every single person I see" why should I have to appease them? Why should I limit my freedom to appease people whose sole method of communication is through blood.

    If you were told to stop criticising Christianity or Christian extremists would kill the first atheist they see would you shut up and appease them? If not, then another set of double standards have been exposed.

    I think it is funny that you regard not burning Qu'rans as an act of appeasement.

    Did you buy an Audi RS4? :(:mad::(

    :cool:


  • #224
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    If that's the best you've got then let's call it a night...

    As for the RS4... not yet :D


  • #225
    himnextdoor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭himnextdoor


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    If that's the best you've got then let's call it a night...

    As for the RS4... not yet :D

    G'night. ;)


  • #226
    deco nate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,340 ✭✭✭deco nate


    bored.com:o


  • #227
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Mark200 wrote: »
    Your explanation you linked to doesn't really hold up to any logical reasoning since it misinterprets the meaning of the 'age' of the universe - by assuming that there was quite literally nothing 13.7 billion years ago. We don't know what existed (if anything) before that time. We don't even know if time existed before then. It's obviously extremely complicated - but that's no reason to say there must be a God that answers our prayers, leaves us books and sends us to hell for having sex with the wrong person.

    It holds up much better than the only hypothesis that you have to present.

    As for what you've said about hell, it couldn't be much more wrong. All sin is a violation against God, holding a grudge against someone, coveting ones property, lusting after another's wife, etc etc. Sin is essentially just falling short of God's standards which are what is best for us.

    Essentially, we have all done this, therefore we are all liable to God's rightful judgement and deserving of hell. Jesus however stood in our place so that we can be forgiven and live new lives serving God if we truly repent.

    So, I'm just as deserving as anyone else on the face of this earth of going to hell for what I have done. What's going to save me? Jesus' saving death on the cross. The same is true for everyone.
    Mark200 wrote: »
    1. I don't see why you'd have anything against me linking to someone or something that makes a point more eloquently than I can.

    Its lazy. It is also against independent and critical thought to just buy what other people say without thinking.
    Mark200 wrote: »
    2. You don't need to read every page of Harry Potter to know that it's not real. But I do know a bit about the Bible (perhaps not as much as you). Indeed, it has been said that the best argument for atheism is the Bible. Personally I believe that the best argument for atheism is a brief understanding of the history of religion(s).

    If the best argument for atheism is the Bible and if I have read it and indeed love it why amn't I an atheist?

    The Bible understood properly cannot lead to atheism. This explains why most atheists haven't read it and / or choose to strawman what they have read and are indeed ignorant of what it says. Some are not, but they are the minority from experience.
    Mark200 wrote: »
    And again, a distinction must be noted between theism and deism.

    Of course. Deism is about as useless as atheism in finding our purpose as human beings. God created us and as a result cares about us. I don't see why He wouldn't.


  • #228
    irishconvert
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,866 ✭✭✭irishconvert


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    No, Muhammad ordered the death of someone knowing full well his order would be fulfilled.

    The pastor burnt a book. Why should anyone die as a result of paper being burnt? The very fact that the burning of a book would elicit such a response is abhorrent.

    Oh come on, the Preisdent of the US told the pastor people would die as a result of his actions and asked him not to do it. He knew full well his action would result in deaths.


  • #229
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    irishconvert wrote: »
    Oh come on, the Preisdent of the US told the pastor people would die as a result of his actions and asked him not to do it. He knew full well his action would result in deaths.

    Ultimately the bigger issue is with those militants in Afghanistan.


  • #230
    whiteonion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 837 ✭✭✭whiteonion


    Jakkass wrote: »
    Ultimately the bigger issue is with those militants in Afghanistan.

    Why are Britain and America in Afghanistan? Why don't they leave?


  • #231
    irishconvert
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,866 ✭✭✭irishconvert


    Jakkass wrote: »
    Ultimately the bigger issue is with those militants in Afghanistan.

    Militants ?


  • Advertisement
  • #232
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    whiteonion wrote: »
    Why are Britain and America in Afghanistan? Why don't they leave?

    This has nothing to do with the Qur'an burning. Nor does it legitimise raw killing such as this.


  • #233
    jackiebaron
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,038 ✭✭✭jackiebaron


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    It sounds a bit far fetched tbh. The Taliban don't allow foreign news or media, so how would they know about some nutters burning a book?

    Weren't the Taliban ousted in 2001?
    Besides, this Koran burning caper wasn't on the news, it appeared as a YouTube clip and this Terry Jones clown put up a facebook page dedicated to it as well. He knew that his actions would cause murders. He did it to be a sh!tstirrer. Granted the Muslims can be a sensitive bunch but if you know that burning a Koran or vandalising a mosque is going to piss people off to the point of violence then why do it other than to get a reaction?
    I find it a bit hypocritical that this moron is "free" to burn the Koran, yet if you were to burn the Torah or Talmud or deny the holocaust, you'd be arrested.


  • #234
    whiteonion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 837 ✭✭✭whiteonion


    Jakkass wrote: »
    This has nothing to do with the Qur'an burning. Nor does it legitimise raw killing such as this.

    But no one really bothers complaining when America does it.


  • #235
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    whiteonion wrote: »
    But no one really bothers complaining when America does it.

    Really, because I specifically remember a lot of people were annoyed at the Afghanistan and Iraq situation.

    But in general, this has nothing to do with the Qur'an burning as it involved a UN force.


  • #236
    yammycat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 445 ✭✭yammycat


    jackiebaron wrote: »
    yet if you were to burn the Torah or Talmud or deny the holocaust, you'd be arrested.

    In the US you can burn any book you like or deny the holocaust, neither are crimes


  • #237
    jackiebaron
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,038 ✭✭✭jackiebaron


    partyatmygaff wrote: »

    Forgive me, but why is it that it is almost always Muslims who commit acts like these? People burn Bibles quite often and I must admit that i've never heard of Christian extremists beheading innocent people for the actions of those that offended them.

    In fact, the Taliban themselves destroyed 6th Century Buddha statues in Afghanistan. Did the Buddhists (Even the ones misrepresenting Buddhism) decide to behead a few Taliban members as well?


    Why should he not be allowed to protest? Why should he be afraid? People are not afraid to burn Israeli or American flags. People are not afraid to burn Bibles. People are not afraid to attack Churches. People are not afraid to demolish centuries old statues. Why should Islam be treated any differently? He has every right to protest (Even if it may offend others). If he is to be apportioned any blame, it is miniscule in comparison to the barbarians who killed the UN workers.

    In fairness, Christians in the US frequently attack abortion clinics and murder the staff and doctors there and how often do people get death threats because of a book they wrote or play they produced (remember that Jerry Springer broadway production?)?

    He can protest all he wants about anything but this went beyond protest or criticism. This was a ridiculous and immature act by an ignorant man who doesn't possess the intellect to intelligently articulate what problem he has with Islam besides the tired old cliches about terrorism and mysoginy. If I stood in front of a crowd and got them all riled up and then they went out and rioted and pillaged and killed people, say Hispanics or Orientals or gays, I would be arrested for inflaming hatred and charged and rightly so. Invoking freedom of speech wouldn't help my case in the slightest.
    This guy did pretty much the same thing and he proabably had a good little giggle to himself afterwards. This idiot and the sheep who follow his sorry ass are planning to descend on Dearborn in a couple of weeks and stage their little hate rallies there in the midst of one of the largest Muslim communities in the US...again just to stir up sh!t. He's no different than those Orange Order idiots with their "in your face" marches down the Garvaghy Road.
    It would be nice if this ignorant arsehole took a brick square to the face.


  • #238
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    In any case, the fact remains that the particular verse I quoted is a literal narrative of his life. It is not so much a message from God as much as it is an account of the life of a supposed messenger of God.
    .

    Without any extensive searching I find
    The presence of these different recitations is attributed to many hadith. Malik Ibn Anas has reported:[94]
    Abd al-Rahman Ibn Abd al-Qari narrated: "Umar Ibn Khattab said before me: I heard Hisham Ibn Hakim Ibn Hizam reading Surah Furqan in a different way from the one I used to read it, and the Prophet (sws) himself had read out this surah to me. Consequently, as soon as I heard him, I wanted to get hold of him. However, I gave him respite until he had finished the prayer. Then I got hold of his cloak and dragged him to the Prophet (sws). I said to him: "I have heard this person [Hisham Ibn Hakim Ibn Hizam] reading Surah Furqan in a different way from the one you had read it out to me." The Prophet (sws) said: "Leave him alone [O 'Umar]." Then he said to Hisham: "Read [it]." [Umar said:] "He read it out in the same way as he had done before me." [At this,] the Prophet (sws) said: "It was revealed thus." Then the Prophet (sws) asked me to read it out. So I read it out. [At this], he said: "It was revealed thus; this Qur’an has been revealed in Seven Ahruf. You can read it in any of them you find easy from among them.Suyuti, a famous 15th century Islamic theologian, writes after interpreting above hadith in 40 different ways:[95]
    "And to me the best opinion in this regard is that of the people who say that this hadith is from among matters of mutashabihat, the meaning of which cannot be understood."
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qur'an
    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    You have not proven me wrong. Hindu Extremists operate only within India in response to Indian incidents. Muslim Extremists do not.

    It was never about geographical location. You stated
    There are Hindus, Buddhists, Christians and people of many other Religions living in dire poverty across Africa and Asia. They are the epitome of underdeveloped yet I have never heard of either Hindu, Buddhist or Christian extremists murdering innocent people for something that someone else did.
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=71481997&postcount=72

    You shifted goalposts after being shown to be wrong.
    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    . Ask a Muslim even. The account of Muhammad's life is not up for interpretation. What he did is what he did and that is all there is to it.

    Again, the world begs to differ.
    The presence of these different recitations is attributed to many hadith. Malik Ibn Anas has reported:[94]
    Abd al-Rahman Ibn Abd al-Qari narrated: "Umar Ibn Khattab said before me: I heard Hisham Ibn Hakim Ibn Hizam reading Surah Furqan in a different way from the one I used to read it, and the Prophet (sws) himself had read out this surah to me. Consequently, as soon as I heard him, I wanted to get hold of him. However, I gave him respite until he had finished the prayer. Then I got hold of his cloak and dragged him to the Prophet (sws). I said to him: "I have heard this person [Hisham Ibn Hakim Ibn Hizam] reading Surah Furqan in a different way from the one you had read it out to me." The Prophet (sws) said: "Leave him alone [O 'Umar]." Then he said to Hisham: "Read [it]." [Umar said:] "He read it out in the same way as he had done before me." [At this,] the Prophet (sws) said: "It was revealed thus." Then the Prophet (sws) asked me to read it out. So I read it out. [At this], he said: "It was revealed thus; this Qur’an has been revealed in Seven Ahruf. You can read it in any of them you find easy from among them.Suyuti, a famous 15th century Islamic theologian, writes after interpreting above hadith in 40 different ways:[95]
    "And to me the best opinion in this regard is that of the people who say that this hadith is from among matters of mutashabihat, the meaning of which cannot be understood."
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qur'an


  • #239
    SamHarris
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,633 ✭✭✭SamHarris


    jackiebaron wrote: »
    In fairness, Christians in the US frequently attack abortion clinics and murder the staff and doctors there and how often do people get death threats because of a book they wrote or play they produced (remember that Jerry Springer broadway production?)?

    He can protest all he wants about anything but this went beyond protest or criticism. This was a ridiculous and immature act by an ignorant man who doesn't possess the intellect to intelligently articulate what problem he has with Islam besides the tired old cliches about terrorism and mysoginy. If I stood in front of a crowd and got them all riled up and then they went out and rioted and pillaged and killed people, say Hispanics or Orientals or gays, I would be arrested for inflaming hatred and charged and rightly so. Invoking freedom of speech wouldn't help my case in the slightest.
    This guy did pretty much the same thing and he proabably had a good little giggle to himself afterwards. This idiot and the sheep who follow his sorry ass are planning to descend on Dearborn in a couple of weeks and stage their little hate rallies there in the midst of one of the largest Muslim communities in the US...again just to stir up sh!t. He's no different than those Orange Order idiots with their "in your face" marches down the Garvaghy Road.
    It would be nice if this ignorant arsehole took a brick square to the face.

    Often? Really? An exageration me thinks.

    He wasnt standing in front of the crowd, he was on the other side of the world. If you stood in front of a group in the states, burnt a book and they then went on a murderous rampage, no you would not be held responsible. If you told said group to go and, say, murder someone of a different race adn they did THEN you may be, depending on the circumstances.

    Very sad to see how many people are blaming some asshole with a lighter for the deaths rather than backward ass people that actually carried out the act. A group is not "special" because they can react especially violently to certain acts.

    Why do I have a feeling that if it were a Christian rampage in the US, following a bible burning in Afghanistan there would be very different people arguing that the person went "beyond his right of protest" or that the mobs personal responsibility was somehow lessened because (oh jesus no!) they were offended?


  • #240
    himnextdoor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭himnextdoor


    Jakkass wrote: »
    This has nothing to do with the Qur'an burning. Nor does it legitimise raw killing such as this.

    It's a little disingenuous of you to suggest that anyone has 'legitimised' the killing of the UN troops.

    What people are saying is that pastor Terry Jones has a share of the responsibility for the killings.

    I once saw a program, it might have been 'Jackass', where a guy dressed up as the devil and went for a walkabout in one of the southern states' towns in America; it wasn't long before he was punched in the mouth by an offended Christian.

    Intolerance is not just a Muslim phenomena.


  • Advertisement
  • #241
    SamHarris
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,633 ✭✭✭SamHarris


    whiteonion wrote: »
    Why are Britain and America in Afghanistan? Why don't they leave?

    9/11. Really this is no secret, you should google it.


Advertisement