You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
A pastor in Gainesville, Florida, has announced a 'Burn a Koran' day to coincide with the anniversary of 9-11.
What are your thoughts?
A small church with between 30 and 50 adherents have got the international press into a lather. Extreme Muslimist movements have picked up on this and will use it for propaganda purposes in Pakistan, Afghanistan and the world in general.
Will this put Britons, by association, at more risk?
Is it evidence of a new 'sectarianism' in the US?
Does it uphold the spirit of the first amendment in the US or does it give voice to those that don't?
Quote:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
[sub]It is interesting to note that the event is illegal as they don't have a bonfire permit. The Land of the Free? Fuck off[/sub]
Should the press be more circumspect? This is a minor story that has got world, and perhaps fatal, consequences..... but it sells papers. Is that OK?
A pastor in Gainesville, Florida, has announced a 'Burn a Koran' day to coincide with the anniversary of 9-11.
What are your thoughts?
A small church with between 30 and 50 adherents have got the international press into a lather. Extreme Muslimist movements have picked up on this and will use it for propaganda purposes in Pakistan, Afghanistan and the world in general.
Will this put Britons, by association, at more risk?
Is it evidence of a new 'sectarianism' in the US?
Does it uphold the spirit of the first amendment in the US or does it give voice to those that don't?
[sub]It is interesting to note that the event is illegal as they don't have a bonfire permit. The Land of the Free? Fuck off[/sub]
Should the press be more circumspect? This is a minor story that has got world, and perhaps fatal, consequences..... but it sells papers. Is that OK?
It certainly isn't evidence of any "new sectarianism in the U.S". Watch Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and others of their ilk on Fox News spew their neo-con bullshit on prime time tv. It is the evidence of sensationalism, which has been commonplace in the mainstream American media since Clinton was impeached for getting a blow job, a story which "made" Fox News. Sadly CNN, C-Span and NBC have followed the lead of Fox and given air time to this sort of shite. At best, this merits inclusion as the final segment in a news broadcast. Something which the anchors would giggle at before signing off.
It arises out of the whole "Mosque at the trade centre" story. I'm sure you know the history of that one. Bloomberg embarrassed the mainstream media by calling them out on the daily show with john stewart. He firstly set the record straight concerning the whereabouts of the mosque and the history of the muslims involved in the project, where the Imams politics are etc.
This guys congregation numbers less than 100 people. Ask yourself why this gets so much coverage?
It isn't a first amendment issue. It's a human rights issue. Should American muslims be subjected to the ridicule of having their holy text burned in the glare of the media spotlight, by a puppet of neo cons like bill kristol and his pal Richard Perle, men who told George Bush that the aftermath of the iraq invasion would be like a fairy tale, with Iraqi's joining hands and singing ring a ring o' roses?? Shia / Tsunni anyone?
The whole thing makes me want to vomit. I'm moving to a desert Island. Or a dessert Island. That would be sweeter
and i'm off to bed. i'm an hour ahead of you muppets!!! I'll read your opinions tomorrow with interest.
Typical Yanks stirring shite again ,I dont care if they burn the bloody books ,they should stir it a bit more by inviting Salmond Ruskie to ignite the bloody fire ,now that would cause a media frenzie ,
The entire current situation in the US at the moment is pathetic. The protesting about the mosque is redundant as Stewart pointed out along with a large number of other people on American TV and this is likewise as pathetic. Why now?
And as Begs pointed out, why have the media saddled this story and road it through the mainstream like some out of control bull? It only serves to give negative spot-light on the US despite the outright condemnation of the proposed event.
America is a nation built on freedom, not Christianity. The right to choose a religion or not is part of what made them who they are; point and case being that Muslims died on 9/11 and Muslims are fighting for and with the American army either through Afghan/Iraq coalition or directly from within their own forces. It is a united nation. But right wing nutpoles like this sect of bigots choose to show their solidarity of "American rights" through misguidance and ignorance.
It would be a fair comparison to make that all people burn the Bible due to revelations about Catholicism covering up paedophillia. Just because one section of a religion is at fault, doesn't mean the rest are.
A lot of US issues are coming to light now, especially the fairness of the extradiction treaty. This has been the case for years before 9-11. The present system was only brought in after 9-11 but it gives, and in recent times has, the Americans the right to demand an extradition from Britain but doesn't allow Britain the same rights.
I agree with Ruudboy. Burning a Qu'ran doesn't contradict the US first amendment, I was sloppy, but cannot help but feel that the burning of a book equates to 'Fahrenheit 451'.
I wonder what the 'Dove World Outreach Center' would think if Muslims were burning a pile of Bibles?
A lot of US issues are coming to light now, especially the fairness of the extradiction treaty. This has been the case for years before 9-11. The present system was only brought in after 9-11 but it gives, and in recent times has, the Americans the right to demand an extradition from Britain but doesn't allow Britain the same rights.
I agree with Ruudboy. Burning a Qu'ran doesn't contradict the US first amendment, I was sloppy, but cannot help but feel that the burning of a book equates to 'Fahrenheit 451'.
I wonder what the 'Dove World Outreach Center' would think if Muslims were burning a pile of Bibles?
But Muslims aren't. For the same reasons that they shouldn't burn the Qu'ran; it wasn't Muslims who conducted 9/11. And it was not Christian's who went to war with Iraq and Afghanistan. 9/11 had nothing to do with religion. The West was attacked, not Christianity. People of all or no faith have felt the affects.
If that particular church wants to insight holy war with people who will go to extreme lengths to prove a point then they either need to be silenced to protect themselves or left to face the consequences; only problem is that, as you said, the media have carpet bombed this story and it reads like America Burns The Qu'ran.
But Muslims aren't. For the same reasons that they shouldn't burn the Qu'ran; it wasn't Muslims who conducted 9/11. And it was not Christian's who went to war with Iraq and Afghanistan. 9/11 had nothing to do with religion. The West was attacked, not Christianity. People of all or no faith have felt the affects.
If that particular church wants to insight holy war with people who will go to extreme lengths to prove a point then they either need to be silenced to protect themselves or left to face the consequences; only problem is that, as you said, the media have carpet bombed this story and it reads like America Burns The Qu'ran.
Sorry Rev. It was Muslims (wronged in their opinion) who conducted 9-11. It was Neo-Con Christians (wronged in their opinion) who attacked Iraq. Extremists, but hey!
Sadaam tried to blow up George Bush senior so GWB 'got him'.
I can see the reason for the Afghani campaign but have never seen the reason for the Iraqi campaign. Saddam Hussein would never have put up with Al-Qaeda's shit.
The Americans will blame the Muslims for everything that goes wrong in the world ,they thought Obama was the great savior ,its quickly gone tits up for him ,how do they distract the peoples attention away from the fact there economy has plummited simples , O here,s a small church who are going to burn the koran, woopee lets get the world press over there now
lets blame the muslims ,lets flame the fire of hatred ,God bless america lol
Utter Stupid Arseholes
Sorry Rev. It was Muslims (wronged in their opinion) who conducted 9-11. It was Neo-Con Christians (wronged in their opinion) who attacked Iraq. Extremists, but hey!
Sorry Rev. It was Muslims (wronged in their opinion) who conducted 9-11. It was Neo-Con Christians (wronged in their opinion) who attacked Iraq. Extremists, but hey!
Sadaam tried to blow up George Bush senior so GWB 'got him'.
I can see the reason for the Afghani campaign but have never seen the reason for the Iraqi campaign. Saddam Hussein would never have put up with Al-Qaeda's shit.
There are so many holes in the 9/11 commission report that one has to ask himself/herself do we really know what happened that day? For those of you who reject any critiscism or scrutiny of the offical version of what happened that day, here are some interesting facts you may/may not be aware of.
1. There is no mention whatsoever in the 9/11 commission report of WTC building #7 which collapsed into it's own footprint at 5.21pm on 9/11 despite not having been hit by a plane. It was hit with debris from the collapse of the north and south towers. However it's amazing that there is not a solitary mention of it in the 9/11 commission report.
2. William Rodriguez, a janitor, working at the north tower, testified to the commission of explosions in the basement where he was working, before the north tower was hit by a plane. His testimony lasted 30 mins and was conducted behind closed doors. He was the last person to leave the north tower before the collapse, although subsequent people were pulled out of the rubble later. There is no mention of Rodriguez in the commission report. Rodriguez' contention has always been that the government were aware of the impending attacks and purposely ignored them. He attempted to sue bush, cheney and most of the administration for complicity in the attacks, but this was dismissed in 2006 without ever reaching court.
3. Of the 19 hijackers alleged to have carried out the attacks 15 came from saudi arabia, 2 hailed from the United Arab Emirates, and an egyptian and a lebanese made up the 19. This spins off begbies point about Irag and afghanistan. Why wasn't there a serious diplomatic effort to question The Saudia Arabian government? We know the answer to that one don't we? You only have to watch Michael Moores Fahrenheit 9/11 to learn How important Saudi Arabia is to the US economy.
5. This is a chapter of a wikipedia article entitled "9/11 conspiracy theories" Read it. Read it twice.
Suspected Insider Trading
Just before 9/11 there was an "extraordinary" amount of put options placed on United Airlines and American Airlines stocks. Authorities regarded as suspicious, and some conspiracy theorists continue to maintain, that trading insiders may have known in advance of the coming events of 9/11 and placed their bets accordingly. An analysis by Allen M. Poteshman into the possibility of insider trading on 9/11 concludes that: "A measure of abnormal long put volume was also examined and seen to be at abnormally high levels in the days leading up to the attacks. Consequently, the paper concludes that there is evidence of unusual option market activity in the days leading up to September 11 that is consistent with investors trading on advance knowledge of the attacks."[57]
On the days leading up to 9/11, two airlines saw a rise in their put to call ratio. These two airlines were United Airlines and American Airlines, the two airlines whose planes were hijacked on 9/11. Between 6 and 7 September, the Chicago Board Options Exchange saw purchases of 4,744 "put" option contracts in UAL versus 396 call options. On 10 September, more trading in Chicago saw the purchase of 4,516 put options in American Airlines, the other airline involved in the hijackings. This compares with a mere 748 call options in American purchased that day. No others airline companies saw anomalies in their put to call ratio in the days leading up to the attacks.[58] American Airlines however, had just released a major warning about possible losses.[59]
Insurance companies saw anomalous trading activities as well. Citigroup Inc., which has estimated that its Travelers insurance unit may pay $500 million in claims from the World Trade Center attack, had about 45 times the normal volume during three trading days before the attack for options that profit if the stock falls below $40. Citigroup shares fell $1.25 in late trading to $38.09. Morgan Stanley, which occupied 22 floors at the World Trade Center, experienced bigger-than-normal pre-attack trading of options that profit when stock prices fall. Other companies that were directly affected by the tragedy had similar jumps. [60]
Raytheon, a defense contractor, had an anomalously high number of call options trading on September 10. A Raytheon option that makes money if shares are more than $25 each had 232 options contracts traded on the day before the attacks, almost six times the total number of trades that had occurred before that day.[61]
The initial options were bought through at least two brokerage firms including NFS, a subsidiary of Fidelity Brokerage, and TD Waterhouse. It was estimated that the trader or traders would have realized a 5 million dollar profit. The Securities and Exchange Commission launched an insider trading investigation in which Osama Bin Laden was a suspect after receiving information from at least one Wall Street Firm.[62]
I'll tell you where I stand. As a talk radio producer at local and national stations, I've learned to question everything you hear, or are told. I've not gone into the controlled demolition theories, or NORAD standing down etc, cos you've heard it all before.
But I do not accept the 9/11 commission report. I cannot believe that 19 men armed with stanley knives (box cutters) could penetrate the aviation security of the worlds most powerful country. And take control of four planes without any interference from the US airforce. Did they have inside help? I don't know. Were they patsys, and did the Americans orchestrate and carry out the attacks on themselves? It's a horrifying thought. It's a question very few people are comfortable asking. My answer is, I don't know.
Will we ever know? I ask people to read both accounts. Listen to those who say it happened like the 9/11 commission report, but also listen to those who question it. Not everyone who questions the report is a lunatic or an anti semite. Many famous and well respected academics have serious reservations about the offical account.
I'll tell you where I stand. As a talk radio producer at local and national stations, I've learned to question everything you hear, or are told. I've not gone into the controlled demolition theories, or NORAD standing down etc, cos you've heard it all before.
But I do not accept the 9/11 commission report. I cannot believe that 19 men armed with stanley knives (box cutters) could penetrate the aviation security of the worlds most powerful country. And take control of four planes without any interference from the US airforce. Did they have inside help? I don't know. Were they patsys, and did the Americans orchestrate and carry out the attacks on themselves? It's a horrifying thought. It's a question very few people are comfortable asking. My answer is, I don't know.
Will we ever know? I ask people to read both accounts. Listen to those who say it happened like the 9/11 commission report, but also listen to those who question it. Not everyone who questions the report is a lunatic or an anti semite. Many famous and well respected academics have serious reservations about the offical account.
THat's it, I've rambled on too long.
Blimey, someone on this site has taken the red pill! I thought everyone was a 'blue piller!' 9/11 was an inside job - even most American's believe that now! It's all about control and the NWO taking away your freedoms
little by little to create world government. The elite want to create a final battle between Islam and the West and clean up afterwards.
the preacher is obviously 2 sandwiches short of a picnic!! He's been telling porkies today about an agreement for the mosque not to be built, in exchange for the cancellation of the koran burning. What a dickhead. The most disgusting thing about this is the way the media have ran with a story which amounts to no more than a nutter in hicksville USA.
MUFC 1977 - death... 
Linear Mode
