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

Well its official,
A defense lawyer says a British teacher has been found guilty of inciting
religious hatred and was sentenced to 15 days in prison and deportation from
Sudan.

This is not justice in any religion and IMHO on further alienates Islam from the west.

I agree that the vast majority of Muslims want peace. The main problem in my opinion is their religeous leaders.

They give a wink and nod to the extremists who scream Jihad, or threaten violence at every percieved insult to Islam or Muhammad. The religeous leaders refuse to take a hard, and by hard I mean uncompromising, stand against violence. The average Muslim, like the average Christian, knows very little about the Koran and leave it to thier religeous leaders to interpret it for them. As a result they are held mentally captive by their clerics.

The leaders are then swayed by power, prestige and political influence to put on two faces. One to the public, and another behind the closed doors of their Mosques.

Until the day comes when all Muslim Religeous leaders speak with one voice against violence there will continue to be muslims who kill in the name of their God, or condone acts of violence, brutalizing their fellow man, believing that the have divine approval.

Christianity has a bloody past, both ancient & recent. They cannot claim the high ground either in my opinion. The same holds true for them.

Originally posted by ShiftTrio
Well its official,
A defense lawyer says a British teacher has been found guilty of inciting
religious hatred and was sentenced to 15 days in prison and deportation from
Sudan.

This is not justice in any religion and IMHO on further alienates Islam from the west.

actually its surprisingly enlightened, for the seriousness of the crimes... i bet this has nothing to do with the world watching...

can you say p.r. move?

gosh, i wonder what the outcome would have been had no one been paying any attention to this?

still, 19 days is no picnic

Originally posted by planetfall

actually its surprisingly enlightened, for the seriousness of the crimes... i bet this has nothing to do with the world watching...

can you say p.r. move?

gosh, i wonder what the outcome would have been had no one been paying any attention to this?

still, 19 days is no picnic

I would agree, but what I mean by justice is not the punishment, but the charge, its obvious even to the children this was not the case, be charged is one thing, be found guilty of a charge that is obviously not Religious hatred justs wreaks of unfair judgment.

Originally posted by Sparky63
I agree that the vast majority of Muslims want peace. The main problem in my opinion is their religeous leaders.

They give a wink and nod to the extremists who scream Jihad, or threaten violence at every percieved insult to Islam or Muhammad. The religeous leaders refuse to take a hard, and by hard I mean uncompromising, stand against violence. The average Muslim, like the average Christian, knows very little about the Koran and leave it to thier religeous leaders to interpret it for them. As a result they are held mentally captive by their clerics.

The leaders are then swayed by power, prestige and political influence to put on two faces. One to the public, and another behind the closed doors of their Mosques.

Until the day comes when all Muslim Religeous leaders speak with one voice against violence there will continue to be muslims who kill in the name of their God, or condone acts of violence, brutalizing their fellow man, believing that the have divine approval.

Christianity has a bloody past, both ancient & recent. They cannot claim the high ground either in my opinion. The same holds true for them.

oh they want peace alright, but their definition is not the same as ours

if the world wants peace, they have to accept muslim rule. thats all, no problem, right?

the 'bloody' past of quasi christianity can not in any way compare to what islam has produced, and the bible does not spill over with encouraging its followers to do violence and shed blood, the koran does very clearly and not just a passage or two.


Flying Hijacked Planes into Glass Houses:

Violence in the Bible - Is it really the same


"
Islamic terrorists wage holy war on a daily basis because it is the literal command of the Qur�an. Western Muslim apologists, concerned solely with the image of Islam, window-dress these violent passages through a complex series of appeals to a patchwork of external Muslim sources.

Then, after delicately arranging the products of this Herculean charade in such a way as to convince the rest of us that these Qur�anic verses of violence are not what they appear, the apologist then steps back, wipes the sweat from his brow and says, �See how clear it is? No Muslim could possibly interpret this command to kill as a command to kill.�

Well, why are these verses in the Qur�an at all, then? If they are supposed to be history, then why do they appear as imperative? Why isn�t the context right there in the text, as it is in the Old Testament?

After all, this is supposed to be Allah�s perfect book. The Qur�an is relentlessly circulated around the word in stand-alone fashion, rarely accompanied by these external sources or words of caution against taking it literally.

Lacking a decent answer to these questions, Muslims attack the Bible instead.

"

Originally posted by ShiftTrio
This is not justice in any religion and IMHO on further alienates Islam from the west.

Sadly you are right. But how much is the alienation the result of actions by Muslim fundamentalists and how much is because of media agenda, I wonder?

This is somewhat off-topic, but pertinent to my question -- earlier in the thread somebody posted a list of headlines from the news that focuses on "Muslim Injustice". I put quotation marks there because one item on the list I know first-hand about. It was about the Malaysian Police's crackdown on a Hindu Rally. So I checked the internet to see what the foreign media is saying about it, and I was shocked and appalled -- it was completely spin.

They made it look like it was racial and religious thing. That is far from the truth. It was a political thing. It was actually about one group of Indians who were unhappy with the other Indian political party. The news articles I read even talked about 'lack of opportunities' for Indians in the country. Say what? How can there be a lack of opportunity when among the top five richest people in the country, two of them are Indians -- Tatparanandam Ananda Krishnan and Anthony Francis Fernandes. And then a video news report I watched showed riot police cracking down on protesters. The thing is, I've seen that clip before -- in 1997 -- which was unrelated to this incident, but also political in nature.

So can truly believe everything you read and watch on the news? Can you truly believe there isn't an agenda behind highlighting every single atrocity perpetrated by Muslims? We're human just like the next person, but the spotlight is on us right now for some reason...

just another countless example of people using religion as an excuse to be crap towards each other.

Personally i would take the lashes.

Originally posted by planetfall
oh they want peace alright, but their definition is not the same as ours

It's not? I didn't know you were fluent in Arabic, so please do tell us what the real definition for "peace" is then.

if the world wants peace, they have to accept muslim rule. thats all, no problem, right?

Did you make this rule up yourself or can you show us where it says this in the Quran?

the 'bloody' past of quasi christianity can not in any way compare to what islam has produced, and the bible does not spill over with encouraging its followers to do violence and shed blood

Do tell us what the Bible says will happen to the unbelievers when Jesus returns.

the koran does very clearly and not just a passage or two.

Then show us what it says. Post the passage before the one(s) you are referring to and the one after it, to show its context as well.

Flying Hijacked Planes into Glass Houses:

Violence in the Bible - Is it really the same

If you're going to quote this site as proof, then you might as well defend it. It says it's a "literal" commandment from the Quran. Can you tell us what jihad means, and what context the Quran uses it in?

Originally posted by Beachcoma
Sadly you are right. But how much is the alienation the result of actions by Muslim fundamentalists and how much is because of media agenda, I wonder?

The media always likes to place a false spin on things. Look at the riots in France that happened earlier. They claim it's a religious issue, when in fact, it happened because French police officers killed 2 teenagers. Yet the emphasis was placed on what the rioter's religion had been, and through the media, people believed it was an issue over religion, not socio-economy troubles like poverty, lack of employment, abuses of police powers, and lack of goverment funding for inner city neighborhoods.

[edit on 29-11-2007 by DJMessiah]

Originally posted by DJMessiah

Do tell us what the Bible says will happen to the unbelievers when Jesus returns.

I'd like to see that for myself, as well. Curious to see if the Bible actually tells its followers to go out and murder people (as the koran does) when Jesus returns (if he returns).

Originally posted by centurion1211
I'd like to see that for myself, as well. Curious to see if the Bible actually tells its followers to go out and murder people (as the koran does) when Jesus returns (if he returns).

Show us where the Quran commands all Muslims to murder people.

Like I asked from the previous poster, I want the passage before and after the one you are referring to as well.

One extra note, I want you to post the surrah and passage from the Quran, not what you find off a website that changes its word to fit their own meaning.

[edit on 29-11-2007 by DJMessiah]

Originally posted by DJMessiah

Originally posted by planetfall
oh they want peace alright, but their definition is not the same as ours

It's not. I didn't know you were fluent in Arabic, so please do tell us what the real definition for "peace" is then.

if the world wants peace, they have to accept muslim rule. thats all, no problem, right?

Did you make this rule up yourself or can you show us where it says this in the Quran?

if you cant be bothered to pay attention to the discussion and keep up, try not to come storming in here like everyone owes you a synopsis. not everyone is as patient as i am, so to get you up to speed:

As Indonesian cleric, Abu Bakar Bashir recently put it, "If the West wants to have peace, then they have to accept Islamic rule."

In Muhammad's words: "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them..." (Bukhari 8:387)

would you prefer to read those in their original arabic, as if that made a difference?

the 'bloody' past of quasi christianity can not in any way compare to what islam has produced, and the bible does not spill over with encouraging its followers to do violence and shed blood

Do tell us what the Bible says will happen to the unbelievers when Jesus returns.

this is not a discussion about the bible, why not mention the star wars novels and say' so what? what does the empire do to alliance rebels, hmmm?"

just as relevant, i'll thank you to stay on point.

the koran does very clearly and not just a passage or two.

Then show us what it says. Post the passage before the ones you are refering to and the one after it, to show it's context as well.

many are in the links below, you know how to use a link, right? hover your cursor over the link, click and release the left mouse button...

but since the passages are so plentiful, i'll post even more right here:

"Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection." (9:29)

The verse that follows curses Christians and Jews by name and says "May Allah destroy them" (as with other sections of the Qur'an, it is unclear whether it is Allah or Muhammad speaking).

context enough for you? but wait, spanky, theres more:

www.thereligionofpeace.com...

Flying Hijacked Planes into Glass Houses:

Violence in the Bible - Is it really the same

If you're going to quote this site as proof, then you might as well defend it. It says it's a "literal" commandment from the Quran. Can you tell us what jihad means, and what context the Quran uses it in?

The Myth:

Islam’s Western apologists sometimes claim that since the Arabic word, Jihad, literally means “fight” or “struggle,” it refers to an “inner struggle” rather than holy war.

The Truth:

This is extremely difficult to reconcile with the Qur’an, which, for example, exempted the disabled and elderly from Jihad. This would make no sense if the word is being used merely within the context of spiritual struggle. It is also unclear why Muhammad would use graphic language, such as smiting fingers and heads from the hands and necks of unbelievers if he were speaking merely of personal development.

With this in mind, Muslims themselves usually admit that there are two meanings to the word, but insist that “inner struggle” is the “greater Jihad,” whereas “holy war” is the “lesser.” In fact, this misconception is based only on a tiny handful of extremely weak and unreliable Hadith.

By contrast, the most reliable of all Hadith is that of Bukhari. The word, Jihad, is mentioned over 200 times in reference to the words of Muhammad and each one is a clear connotation to holy war. By contrast, Bukhari does not contain a single reference to Jihad within the context of “personal struggle.”


anything more i can do for you? now perhaps you'll contribute something more useful than this defensive whining.

Originally posted by DJMessiah

Originally posted by centurion1211
I'd like to see that for myself, as well. Curious to see if the Bible actually tells its followers to go out and murder people (as the koran does) when Jesus returns (if he returns).

Show us where the Quran commands all Muslims to murder people.

Like I asked from the previous poster, I want the passage before and after the one you are referring to as well.

One extra note, I want you to post the surrah and passage from the Quran, not what you find off a website that changes its word to fit their own meaning.

[edit on 29-11-2007 by DJMessiah]

compare them yourself, there are plenty of online koran resources out there, you have some nerve, lumbering in here and demanding research that if you're so interested in, you would do it.

and while you're at it, contribute something to the discussion by posting your results, unless of course, they are unfavorable to your mewling complaints.

some people, sheesh.

reply to post by LDragonFire


If anyone relizes that a "Teddy Bear" is the Democrat "Icon" of "Teddy Rosevelt" it will realy get bad.

That is an icon from his hunting tripe.......

I have to say, Im impressed.

This was an amazingly fair sentencing.

In Britain, heretics get a metaphorical lashing

www.spiked-online.com.../site/article/4124/

it is monumentally illiberal to imprison someone for what she said, and lashes are a backward punishment for any crime, never mind the ‘crime’ of naming a toy.

First there was the Danish cartoons scandal. Then Muslim groups kicked up a stink over Salman Rushdie being knighted into a cartoon empire (the British). Now we have the ‘teddy bear affair’. A British schoolteacher in Sudan, Gillian Gibbons, has been arrested for letting her pupils name their class mascot Muhammad. She faces a stint in jail or a possible 40 lashes. Whatever next? Isn’t there a Beano strip that might be interpreted as Islamophobic? Or a scene in Bambi that might get Bin Laden’s goat and make him wag his finger in fury at the West? Have I been somehow Islamophobic by mentioning the word ‘goat’?

Thankfully no one in Britain is given 40 lashes. Instead they’re given a metaphorical lashing. Those who offend public morality or ridicule conventional wisdom are not tied up and beaten, but they are beaten up in the press and political circles and are frequently hounded from their jobs. The difference in Britain is that the metaphorical lashers pose as the guardians of PC, liberal morality, keen to protect the public from outdated and offensive ideas, while in Sudan the literal lashers are closed-minded clerics who lose the plot over any inappropriate mention of Muhammad. Yet both have in common a deep intolerance of ‘unacceptable’ ideas and a desire to monitor and clamp down on blasphemy: whether it’s secular blasphemy against liberal conventions here, or literal blasphemy against archaic conventions over there.

Wake up people, what if she was your family member?

Let's call a spade, a spade, this is immoral and incomprehensible

She is INNOCENT of any crime.

It is inhumane and is accepted because they live in a state of fear.

Basically it reminds me of witch hunts.

Originally posted by mrsdudara
I have to say, Im impressed.

This was an amazingly fair sentencing.

Seriously?

Originally posted by Stormdancer777

Originally posted by mrsdudara
I have to say, Im impressed.

This was an amazingly fair sentencing.

Seriously?

You would prefer that she be physically beaten? Or imprisoned for 6 months?

The islamic extremists are the ones who need to look at themselves and I don't condone death but if anyone should die over a teddy bear it should be them and not the obviously innocent teacher, the extremists want the public to see how offensive it is to fellow osama bin laden-ists?, that's like asking the public to feel sorry for neo nazis, muslimism is not better than any other religion, making jokes about jesus in every way imaginable is tolerable but when little kids in a class choose to name a teddy bear mohammed, named after one of the classmates whose name is mohammed and over-reacting the way they did is proof that the extremists don't belong in this world no matter how far the government is controlled by that religion, it's a red flag that there should at least be outsider immunity from such prehistoric barbaric practices.

You know better then that Intrepid, she should be set free,

Why the head games?

She shouldn't be punished at all, surely you don't think this is JUST?

I am livid at this injustice and appaled people cut these extremist slack of any kind.

I am so shocked and disappointed, who on earth would take their side over this issue?

[edit on 033030p://bThursday2007 by Stormdancer777]

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
You know better then that Intrepid, she should be set free,

Why the head games?

What "head games"? They screwed up and they are saving face by giving her a token sentence. Better than the alternative imo.