It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

British Teacher Faces 40 Lashes for Naming Class Teddy Bear 'Muhammad'

page: 21
14
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by OptionToChoose
No. Why do you ask that? Is that the only way to perceive what I wrote?


I honestly didn't know how to percieve it, you said....

"Even yet, tho, the faint cry of "agenda" whispers in the wind as we in the civilized West are told to contemplate even further how extreme and unreasonable those Islamic radicals are . . ."

Sorry, to me that didn't make much sense. Nobody "told" us to contemplate anything, we do that on our own when we read about injustices like this. I'm sure there are those who enjoy seeing their beliefs that muslims are raised to be savages vindicated in this way, and that certainly isn't me, but the event speaks for itself. There was no western agenda behind it and that's what it seemed like you were getting at. Sorry if I misunderstood.



What I am suggesting is that in the grand ol' tradition of cause stalking on a national level, any and every single incident that can be will be used to dissuade a positive image of the Islamic belief system.


Well, they sure provide LOTS of ammo for the "grand ol' tradition" don't they? Hopefully they'll get out of the dark ages sooner or later.



This is not about a religion's right to be outvalued over a human being . . if you'd calm down long enough to digest what you read you could likely see that my question would be directed at those making the decision to punish Gibbons: is there no mercy?


I'm pretty calm now (thanks xanax, lol), and I understood your question and agreed with you fully, it was just at the end of your post it seemed you made a connection to the possibility of a western agenda, and that's what threw me...




posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by planetfall
the common thread? its obvious.


What's not obvious to you is that we are talking about Muslim nations not Muslim individuals. You aren't seeing the good in Muslims, just the negative. You know what that's called?


a nation of people is not limited to specific countries, the muslim nation is also what i have been discussing, not individual countries

do you know what thats called? ambiguity.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 01:21 PM
link   
If she'd suggested to the children not to vote for the name then I wonder what would have happened to her then. If the same good for nothign parent made a complaint about that she'd probably be in a similar situation.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 01:30 PM
link   
27, yes I did end the post with that statement of opinion, as independent from the questions I have regarding the entire issue.

It seems that there are several considerations to ponder when examining something as volatile as the reporting of world events; there's more than one factor involved, from the story itself to said story's credibility (did it actually happen, as in this case it very well seems to be actual), to understanding the factors involved (did she know the laws of the land, did she opt to ignore them if so, and if so, why?), down to the reporting of the story and finally to personally determine if the information has been presented with any degree of spin -- rare, I know, but it happens


There may be those who seek to prove that every single event in the news is a set-up designed to bring down the image of this group or that individual, but I'm not one. Does that mean I will go blind and pretend that there are no other motive(s) for mainstream media spins, especially in this day and age?

No.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by OptionToChoose
Does that mean I will go blind and pretend that there are no other motive(s) for mainstream media spins, especially in this day and age?

No.


That's good. I'm the same way, I regard most that hear from the mainstream as a biased slant one way or the other, so I kinda look for the middle ground. However, in this case it's cut and dry. There's no spin going on here, the Sudanese government would have let us know, the children are speaking out to defend their teacher. I see no agenda being pushed here, and I am very open minded to identify when agendas are being pushed. Regardless of the law of the land, we're talking about children naming a teddy bear, and a foreign teacher who meant NO harm in any way, shape, or form. It makes me very angry, I'll admit that.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 01:40 PM
link   
And true enough, no one verbally "told" us to believe anything. But as a visual communicator myself, I understand already that the art I create does not come with a larynx, yet it speaks volumes.

Media is the same way. What you are reading, you are being communicated to, or to use another word, a message is being "told". A story is "told". When one watches a movie, does not one seek to be "told" by a good script/production/acting an interesting adventure or romance, or info if the film is a doc?

I try to avoid wordfights, as ususally there is a simple misunderstanding of what one person was trying to say, and more drama enters from the hair-splitting than the actual word in question could ever have hoped to produce



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Well for all the apologists who said Sudan didn't really mean it and nothing would happen to the teacher, there is this just out on CCC.com:

CNN Article


A British teacher arrested in Sudan after allowing her class to name a teddy bear "Mohammed" has been charged by authorities with offending religion, British officials say.

Gillian Gibbons, 54, is being held by police in the capital Khartoum after she asked her class of seven-year-olds to come up with a name for the toy as part of a school project, Robert Boulos, the head of Unity High School told CNN.

It is expected that she will appear in court Thursday, Sudan state media reported.

A British Foreign Office spokeswoman said Gibbons had been charged under Article 125 of Sudan's constitution, the law relating to insulting religion and inciting hatred.


I guess these (not all) muslims and their apologists fail to understand that this is exactly the type of thing that "incites hatred" - of muslims.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by OptionToChoose
Media is the same way. What you are reading, you are being communicated to, or to use another word, a message is being "told". A story is "told". When one watches a movie, does not one seek to be "told" by a good script/production/acting an interesting adventure or romance, or info if the film is a doc?


Well, yeah...but everybody is "told" something different based on their own artistic interpretations. Just like when one is told by the media of a story, if they just tell the story without slant or their own emotional input, then it's up to the viewer/reader to interpret their feelings about the story. In this case, if it were told by a robot, just the facts, it would make me mad. There is no propaganda at work here, in this case. I agree otherwise.



I try to avoid wordfights, as ususally there is a simple misunderstanding of what one person was trying to say, and more drama enters from the hair-splitting than the actual word in question could ever have hoped to produce


True. But I think we ironed it out, and sometimes it's a good thing because other readers may have misunderstood too, just didn't address it, and to them your point actual may have been missed or misinterpreted....



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 02:03 PM
link   
Let me clarify "spin" in this case. I don't think there is an attempt to twist what has happened and been somewhat of a shock to many. The spin would be an implied "see, look how unreasonable and violent the Islamic people are!" factor. And in this particular case, plausible deniability protects the spinners.

My first reaction is to feel that this arrest of a contributing member of that society (Gibbons) is extreme, and that's based on my North American upbringing, which does not provide for the arrest/beating of an individual for contrary religious views. Yet, this story just gives the anti-Islamic spin doctors something else to toss on their ever-rising pile of trespasses. Similar to this: suppose you had a teacher back in grade school who hated you, and would just wait like a cat for you to mess up, whether talking during a test, or something else basically petty. Technically, the offense may be real, but the way that teacher might have compiled a personal list of your offenses, then later present this compilation of your incessant flaws to the principal, other teachers, or your parents may have been slanted in motive. If he/she tried to paint you as the most troublesome and undesirable kid in the history of the school (when in fact kids are just kids and you did not exceed in wrongdoing beyond anyone else) then I would consider this a spin, whether the individual details were authentic or not.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211I guess these (not all) muslims and their apologists fail to understand that this is exactly the type of thing that "incites hatred" - of muslims.


too right, i bet all the good, moderate muslims are going to mass protest this miscarriage any second now... wait for it... wait for it...

ahem

i said... i'm sure the much ballyhoo'd good muslims will be taking to the streets any moment now, speaking out about this travesty... openly challenging the courts decision...

you know, in much the same way they did when someone drew an accurate cartoon of ol' mo... you remember, how they ironically justified everything that cartoon depicted?

yep... wont be long now.... i'm sure of it.

i'll just be over here holding my breath



*gasp*



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 02:20 PM
link   
I don't know why I bother, it's so blissful in here:


One Muslim teacher at Unity, who also has a child in Gibbons' class, said she had not found the project offensive.

"I had no problem with it at all," the teacher said. "I know Gillian and she would never have meant it as an insult. I was just impressed that she got them to vote."


www.alertnet.org...



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 02:23 PM
link   
And another:


“We are surprised and disappointed by the developments,” said Omar Daair, spokesman for the British embassy in Khartoum, Sudan’s capital. “This isn’t the way we were hoping it would go.”


www.nytimes.com...



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by OptionToChoose
Let me clarify "spin" in this case. I don't think there is an attempt to twist what has happened and been somewhat of a shock to many. The spin would be an implied "see, look how unreasonable and violent the Islamic people are!" factor. And in this particular case, plausible deniability protects the spinners.


Well my friend, the bottom line is this happened and there WILL be those who jump on the opportunity to spin it for their personal hate. I can't be bothered with them, and won't let them waste my time. I don't hate muslim people, just their religious and government leaders that use them so easily at will, and to be fair I hate ours too. They are in large numbers indoctrinated by people that use the extreme side of the faith to manipulate and discount human life. Some take it much further than others, but the overall support is pretty solid. That's what I see personally, and this incident does solidify that belief. These aren't fringe extremists, this is the government charging this woman over a teddy bear's name that children chose, that's all that needs to be said.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sparky63
The Sudanese should ask themselves, "What would Muhhammed do?"
......Or maybe they did already and thats why they decided 40 lashes is justified.


If they stoped & asked what would Muhhammed do....

She would have been Raped, tortured, dismembered alive & left in the street for the dogs to eat...

Thats what Muhhammed did to Christian & Jewish Women when he went on his holy Islamic Crusade...



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
And another:


“We are surprised and disappointed by the developments,” said Omar Daair, spokesman for the British embassy in Khartoum, Sudan’s capital. “This isn’t the way we were hoping it would go.”


www.nytimes.com...


Yes, but it still did go the way of the sudanese theocracy bringing charges against the teacher didn't it. In spite of the wishes of this one moderate muslim.

[edit on 11/28/2007 by centurion1211]



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd
These aren't fringe extremists, this is the government charging this woman over a teddy bear's name that children chose, that's all that needs to be said.


I believe this is the main point we should all take into account. We are not Muslim bashing. We are bashing a government that bases it's laws (and punishment) on a text written thousands of years ago.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 02:35 PM
link   
the ap is way more on the ball than the bbc on this story:

news.yahoo.com...


interesting snippets:



Sudan charged a British teacher Wednesday with inciting religious hatred after she allowed her students to name a teddy bear Muhammad, an offense that could subject her to 40 lashes, the Justice Ministry said.

If convicted, she faces up to 40 lashes, six months and prison and a fine, said Abdul Daem Zumrawi, the Justice Ministry's undersecretary.

Each child was allowed to take the bear home on weekends and write a diary about what they did with it. The diary entries were collected in a book with the bear's picture on the cover, labeled, "My Name is Muhammad," he said. The bear itself was never labeled with the name, he added.

Although Khartoum officials played down the case and said it was an isolated incident, Sudan's top clerics said in a statement Wednesday that the full measure of the law should be applied against Gibbons, calling the incident part of a broader Western "plot" against Islam.

"What has happened was not haphazard or carried out of ignorance, but rather a calculated action and another ring in the circles of plotting against Islam," the Sudanese Assembly of the Ulemas said the statement.

"It is part of the campaign of the so-called war against terrorism and the intense media campaign against Islam," they said.

Although an earlier report had suggested that only one parent had complained, the clergy statement Wednesday said that several had complained.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
Yes, but it still did go the way of bringing charges against the teacher didn't it. In spite of the wishes of this one moderate muslim.


Actually I pointed out 2 and could come up with more(including the parents of the child) but I'd wager that it wouldn't cut through the hate and bigotry here.

Let the reader decide for themselves.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 02:37 PM
link   
Hi There,

Well, it just gets better, doesn't it? In charging Ms Gibbons the Sudanese have actually made a crime out of the act of naming a teddy bear! I am staggered by their incomprehensibilty, by their arrogant stupidity, by their careless attitude to how they have brought the Islamic faith into disrepute, and are continuing to do so on the international stage. It is jaw-droppingly incredible that in our contemporary times, there are still nations stuck in the dark ages of ignorance.

It seems they so fervently believe in the alleged offence caused by this teacher, that any outcry or criticism against potential punishment upon her, is a plot to hate Islam. The ramifications for said religion should the punishment proceed would be exceedingly unpleasant for the faith, they really do need to address this immediately, else minds will set themselves against it with due conviction drawn from this Islamic debacle.

Under absolutely no circumstance should this event be allowed to be used by the Sudanese against the UK government to establish any kind of gamesmanship; for this is nothing more than a use of 'terror', a crime against humanity. It matters not if its one or many persons, the 'terror' is the same in its use. Islam needs to comprehend the revulsion felt by the western-mind for the 'sharia law'. If it cannot do this, it will gain for itself a pain of immense isolation and detriment for its followers, which will bring upon them ever more suffering.

Fundamentalism, in whatever way it is expressed, must never be tolerated, bartered with, or accepted on any account. It has a lot to answer for, and it is time that it was looked at with a serious view for uncompromised opposing. To give it no opposition is to allow it free-range to poison the lives of many, and to allow it to cause fractures and cracks between nations, for upon such fault lines wars are fought. We are not at 'war' with 'terror', we are at war with fundamentalism...



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by planetfall
the ap is way more on the ball than the bbc on this story:


Why? I was always under the impression that the BBC was a leading news source in the world. Could it be that it doesn't support your preconceived notions?



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join