The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Abusing freedom of expression > Comments

Abusing freedom of expression : Comments

By Syed Atiq ul Hassan, published 10/2/2006

The media has a responsibility to the on going civic development of society but not to insult and promote disharmony.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 24
  7. 25
  8. 26
  9. Page 27
  10. 28
  11. 29
  12. All
Malik, Bill Clinton, a really believable person. Didn't inhale (dope), oral sex is not sex so doesn't count, a truly devoted christian using freedom of deceitful expression.

My oh my Philo, desperation turns to panic, capitals eh. WHO ON THIS THREAD IS CALLING FOR WAR THAT COULD WIPE OUT BILLIONS? A MAN OF PEACE EH? A HYPOCRITE OF THE HIGHEST ORDER! “ Could it be a god fearing person, give me a hint, or is this a confession, sorry I defrocked years ago.

You did support the christian invasion of Iraq and the continuing worldwide barbarity of religion in the form of conversion. However I understand the religious deep seated desire to attribute blame anywhere but to themselves, for fear that they will one day have to accept the reality of their delusions.

As to fear and loathing, I'll just leave it to those experienced in that, the religious. I'm not atheist, they are just as bad as the religious. Nor are the vast majority of non believers atheists, we just want to be rid of this disease (religion) that is trying to destroy everything. So that we can get on with a rational life and investigate the real future in peace and harmony.

I have no fear of the future Philo, quite the opposite. I look forward to it, just a deep sadness for all life that has, and is being destroyed in the name of god.

Religious freedom of expression, is always in the form of a gun against those that disagree. Thats why 98% of dictators and those incarcerated for violent crimes, identify with a monotheistic belief, true religious freedom of expression. That does make them evil and dangerous, but it appears that you disagree, which is to be expected considering your allegiance to god.

Froggie, an excellent link showing their true hypocrisy, but thats religion for you.

Well said Arjay.
Posted by The alchemist, Sunday, 19 February 2006 6:54:47 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I am shocked to see your double standard mental approach. Anyway you don’t believe Bill Clinton what about George Bernard Shaw, Lamar Tine and many other great scholars, writers and intellectuals of the West.
(Sir George Bernard Shaw in 'The Genuine Islam,' Vol. 1, No. 8, 1936.

 "If any religion had the chance of ruling over England, nay Europe within the next hundred years, it could be Islam."
I have always held the religion of Muhammad in high estimation because of its wonderful vitality. It is the only religion, which appears to me to possess that assimilating capacity to the changing phase of existence,
which can make itself appeal to every age.
 I have studied him - the wonderful man and in my opinion for from being an anti-Christ, he must be called the Savior of Humanity." "I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it the much needed peace and happiness:
 I have prophesied about the faith of Muhammad that it would be acceptable to the Europe of tomorrow as it is beginning to be acceptable to the Europe of today.”
He was by far the most remarkable man that ever set foot on this earth.
 He preached a religion, founded a state, built a nation, laid down a moral code, initiated numerous social and political reforms
 He established a powerful and dynamic society to practice and represent his teachings and completely revolutionized the worlds of human thought and behavior for all times to come.
Posted by Malik, Sunday, 19 February 2006 11:39:13 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
You are right Malik. I have been trying to convince these fellows here but I just gave up after realising that these are few bunches of untaught people who don’t have knowledge on history and other religion and just inspired by inflammatory commercial media commercial stories. More comments from the Western great historians:

EDWARD GIBBON and SIMON OCKLEY (HISTORY OF THE SARACEN EMPIRES, London, 1870, p. 54)

"'I BELIEVE IN ONE GOD, AND MAHOMET, AN APOSTLE OF GOD' is the simple and invariable profession of Islam. The intellectual image of the Deity has never been degraded by any visible idol; the honor of the Prophet has never transgressed the measure of human virtues; and his living precepts have restrained the gratitude of his disciples within the bounds of reason and religion."

“Muhammad was nothing more or less than a human being. But he was a man with a noble mission, which was to unite humanity on the submission to ONE and ONLY GOD and to teach them the way to ideal and upright living based on the commands of God. He always described himself as, 'A Servant and Messenger of God,' and so indeed every action of his proclaimed to be”
Posted by Alan_Bold, Sunday, 19 February 2006 11:54:07 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In the words of PROF. HURGRONJE:
"The league of nations founded by the prophet of Islam put the principle of international unity and human brotherhood on such universal foundations as to show candle to other nations.“

He continues: "The fact is that no nation of the world can show a parallel to what Islam has done towards the realization of the idea of the League of Nations."

“The world has not hesitated to raise to divinity, individuals whose lives and missions have been lost in legend. Historically speaking, none of these legends achieved even a fraction of what Muhammad accomplished. And all his striving was for the sole purpose of uniting mankind for the worship of One God on the codes of moral excellence.”
“Muhammad or his followers never at any time claimed that he was a Son of God or the God-incarnate or a man with divinity - but he always was and is even today considered as only a Messenger chosen by God”.
THOMAS CARLYLE in his HEROES AND HEROWORSHIP, was simply amazed as to:
"How one man single-handedly, could weld warring tribes and wandering Bedouins into a most powerful and civilized nation in less than two decades." "The lies (Western slander) which well-meaning zeal has heaped round this man (Muhammad) are disgraceful to ourselves only." "A silent great soul, one of that who cannot but be earnest. He was to kindle the world; the world’s Maker had ordered so."
Posted by Alan_Bold, Sunday, 19 February 2006 11:56:37 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
To Alan and Malik

There is only ONE thing which is important in assessing Islam.

"Was Mohammed truly from God" ?

...nothing else matters.

You have quoted 'convenient' historians.
Those who's words seem to lend credence to Islam and Mohammed, yet they are speaking of him purely in historical sense, not in terms of the truth or falsehood of his claim to be 'from God'.

As you quoted the fundamenatls of Islam are:

1/ One God

2/ Mohammed is his (final) messenger.

As to point 1, we have no argument. (in spite of your misunderstanding of the concept of 'Trinity' which I won't go into here)

Regarding point 2, clearly without this, there are no Muslims. Or..
if point 2 is dispensable, as in, "People are born Muslim" then he is intirely superluous. But clearly the message of Islam is not 'just' the unity and one-ness of the Almighty, it is ALSO absolutely about 'Mohammed is His prophet'.. which we utterly, finally and completely and eternally reject.

To accept Mohammed as a messenger from God, is the greatest insult to God who came in Christ to say "I am the way, the truth and the life.. No man (including all Muslims) comes to the Father, but by me" JOHN 14.6

"There is Salvation in no other,there is no other name under heaven by which we must be saved" (Acts14:12)

Now this brings us to the question 'Is mohammed from God'?

You will most likely recall all the 'fond heartwarming stories' which support this view such as his concern for the Jewish woman who threw garbage on his place or on him each day, and when she stopped,he enquired about her health.

And I counter this with 'His murder of a poet who mocked him'.. etc etc... His torture of the camel theives, his genocide of the Banu Qurayza, his expulsion and 50% tax on Jews and so it goes on.

Islamic expansion? simple..

-through blood and marraige relationships to key military and soveriegns.

-Through conquest and murder. (e.g. Ukaydir, Prince of Duma Tabuk )

It's as simple as that.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Sunday, 19 February 2006 12:39:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Malik and Alan Bold
George Bernard Shaw- 1856-1950 Irish dramatist.
GBS said and wrote a lot of things, and he was also a very confused man sometimes.

This from the internet:
“Despite the fact that he was a democratic socialist in the 1930’s, Shaw approved of the dictatorship of Stalin and even made some ambiguous statements that could be interpreted as being pro-Hitler. In 1945 in his preface to his play “Geneva” Shaw claimed that the majority of the victims of the Nazi extermination camps had in fact died of "overcrowding". However, he also stated that Hitler had become a "mad messiah" over time. According to Shaw, "Stalin... made good by doing things better and much more promptly than parliaments". Shaw also made numerous anti-semitic comments at this time, although the extent to which he was merely being ironic or provocative is unclear. His pro-Stalin bias is undeniable...Perhaps the kindest way of looking at Shaw's political position is that he remained in many ways an Edwardian who never fully understood the politics of a totalitarian age.”

He obviously never understood Islam very well either.

For the views of another Islamic website regarding GBS, refer to the following link:
http://www.submission.org/hadith/sunnahdogma.html

I think for myself, unlike some believers of religious dogma on this forum.

I look at what Islam is doing today, with its terrorism and threats of death, and it is enough to convince me that Islam is a dangerous and evil religion. I might add that I am an agnostic, not a subscriber to any religion.

Why do Muslims not apologise for the bombing of innocent people by Islamists in various parts of the world in recent years? No word of apology from you for the Australians killed in Bali!

Yet, you want a cartoonist killed for a few stupid cartoons! You have proven that Muslims have no concept of what “freedom of speech” means, judging by the over-reaction to a few silly drawings.
If you can’t live with a free society, get out, go and live in an Islamic one. It’s that simple!
Posted by Froggie, Sunday, 19 February 2006 4:48:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 24
  7. 25
  8. 26
  9. Page 27
  10. 28
  11. 29
  12. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy