Dutch Politician Suggests to Ban the Quran (2 Viewers)

[ogmzergrush]

if mein kampf is banned, why can't the koran be?

im not for any kind of censorship, i think its a fucking disgrace any books are banned, but wat makes the koran any better than mein kampf? both books are equally violent, racist and derogatory (like i said, i dont think either should be banned), but if one is, why not the other?

Mein Kampf is certainly not "banned"; I have a copy, as does my old high scool, and my current university, and I'd imagine pretty much any library you care to check as well. Its sale and distribution is restricted or prohibited in countries which have strict regulations regarding nazi-related materials, and from memory these include at least France and Germany, and probably a few others.

French people are soft, and I guess the Germans are still nervous about the whole affair. How is this a parallel at all? While their factual content may be similar, I'd think that's pretty much where the similarities end.

 

[jimmayyy]

if mein kampf is banned, why can't the koran be?

im not for any kind of censorship, i think its a fucking disgrace any books are banned, but wat makes the koran any better than mein kampf? both books are equally violent, racist and derogatory (like i said, i dont think either should be banned), but if one is, why not the other?

i meant banned in the country this article is talking about. its banned in heaps of european countries. hell, denying the holocaust is an imprisonable offence in most of the EU

the point im trying to make is how can you pick and choose wats banned and wats not? if you are going to ban mein kampf for it promoting violence, being prejudiced against groups of people and brainwashing people - one could argue (and quite successfully, i'd think) that the holy koran has many of the same traits. as does the bible. but no one bans them because they pertain to a world wide faith. it seems that to throw the label of "religious" on something makes it untouchable, which is hypocritical.

(like i said im talking in a dutch context here)

 

[jimmayyy]

Mein Kampf is certainly not "banned"; I have a copy, as does my old high scool, and my current university, and I'd imagine pretty much any library you care to check as well. Its sale and distribution is restricted or prohibited in countries which have strict regulations regarding nazi-related materials, and from memory these include at least France and Germany, and probably a few others.

French people are soft, and I guess the Germans are still nervous about the whole affair. How is this a parallel at all? While their factual content may be similar, I'd think that's pretty much where the similarities end.

you mean countries where they had problems with nazis.

atm the entire western world is having problems with extremist muslims - why not take the same line and ban the book that started and encourages it?

atm either i'm "soft" or "still nervous" about some muslim "slaughtering me where they find me" for his 72 vrigins.

 

[ogmzergrush]

you mean countries where they had problems with nazis.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the problems with nazis extended beyond those countries where this restriction is currently in place. Something of a problem for quite a lot of people if I recall correctly. Despite this, the places where such restrictive measures are in place are quite limited, indeed, even within the EU calls for the banning of the display of swastikas (nazi trapping in-tact) have been rejected.

atm the entire western world is having problems with extremist muslims - why not take the same line and ban the book that started and encourages it?

See above, it's not the same line at all, because it's not the sort of universal ban you're discussing. On top of that, you're pretending that they're books in the same vein, which is highly arguable - one is juvenile fiction, and the other was written by Hitler. Contrasting a ban several decades after the fact due to ongoing sensitivities and some sort of pre-emptive attack on a storybook in case it makes people blow themselves up just doesn't seem to make much sense.

atm either i'm "soft" or "still nervous" about some muslim "slaughtering me where they find me" for his 72 vrigins.

I'm sure there are plenty of well-founded concerns around, but I think there are probably bigger issues at play here than a cute little book.

 

[wasupdog]

personally if something like this was to b banned that ountry should hang its head in shame.

as a muslim, i didnt even no what a terrorist was UNITL 9/11
i didnt no wat extremist//fundametalists/ etc were UNTIL 9/11
i did not no anything about this so called "war on the west" until 9/11



U NO HOW TO FIX THIS FUCKING MUSLIM PROBLEM ?

1. NUKE THE FUCK OUT OF NORTH WESTERN PAKISTAN AND AFGHANISTAN, COZ THESE DICKHEADS HAVE MADE IT WORSE FOR EVERY MUSLIM IN THE FUCKING WORLD.

2. educate the rest of the muslim world, bing them back to the 21st century.....coz 95% of them still think as if its the 15th century.


THESE HOOLIGANs who think that the world is after them or "western civilization" wants to abolish them are so fuckd up in their fucking head......

.
tell me ....... did the "western world " give a 2c about islam prior to 9/11 ? NO


these <1% fucking mother fuckers should be nuked/ anailated, killed , kicked off the fucking earth.


and if inocent lives have to be lost, then so be it

u no y im saying this? because ive experienced this bullshit first hand

i went to pakistan......after the earthquake......and the red cross were their giving POLIO vacinations to all woman and children for free............BUT MY GOD, guess what the leader of the local mosque said? JUST GUESS ? HE TOLD THE RED CROSS THAT NO WOMAN OR CHILD WILL BE VACINATED WITH THIS BECAUSE........wait for it ......BECAUSE IT IS AN AMERICAN CONSPIRACY TO ABOLISH ALL MUSLIMS


all in all......muslims brought this on themselves.

 

[PrinceHarry]

Australia have the right to ban muslim immigration. Safety first.

 

[ogmzergrush]

holy fuck I wish I could sig that entire post, lol.

 

[wasupdog]

Australia have the right to ban muslim immigration. Safety first.

on the basis that if he /she is a threat to national security.

 

[Snaykew]

holy fuck I wish I could sig that entire post, lol.

Amen to that.

 

[MaNiElla]

personally if something like this was to b banned that ountry should hang its head in shame.

as a muslim, i didnt even no what a terrorist was UNITL 9/11
i didnt no wat extremist//fundametalists/ etc were UNTIL 9/11
i did not no anything about this so called "war on the west" until 9/11



U NO HOW TO FIX THIS FUCKING MUSLIM PROBLEM ?

1. NUKE THE FUCK OUT OF NORTH WESTERN PAKISTAN AND AFGHANISTAN, COZ THESE DICKHEADS HAVE MADE IT WORSE FOR EVERY MUSLIM IN THE FUCKING WORLD.

2. educate the rest of the muslim world, bing them back to the 21st century.....coz 95% of them still think as if its the 15th century.


THESE HOOLIGANs who think that the world is after them or "western civilization" wants to abolish them are so fuckd up in their fucking head......

.
tell me ....... did the "western world " give a 2c about islam prior to 9/11 ? NO


these <1% fucking mother fuckers should be nuked/ anailated, killed , kicked off the fucking earth.


and if inocent lives have to be lost, then so be it

u no y im saying this? because ive experienced this bullshit first hand

i went to pakistan......after the earthquake......and the red cross were their giving POLIO vacinations to all woman and children for free............BUT MY GOD, guess what the leader of the local mosque said? JUST GUESS ? HE TOLD THE RED CROSS THAT NO WOMAN OR CHILD WILL BE VACINATED WITH THIS BECAUSE........wait for it ......BECAUSE IT IS AN AMERICAN CONSPIRACY TO ABOLISH ALL MUSLIMS


all in all......muslims brought this on themselves.

what a little fuckwit :\

 

[PrinceHarry]

When some muslim speak the truth, they are quickly labelled as infidel by their fellow muslim, followed by Fatwa.

 

[jimmayyy]

I have a sneaking suspicion that the problems with nazis extended beyond those countries where this restriction is currently in place. Something of a problem for quite a lot of people if I recall correctly. Despite this, the places where such restrictive measures are in place are quite limited, indeed, even within the EU calls for the banning of the display of swastikas (nazi trapping in-tact) have been rejected.

wait, you've lost me. lets simplify things - a book (mein kampf), which, we have all agreed promotes violence, sexism and racism and was used by a certain group of extremists to justify the slaughter of millions of innocent people has been banned in a certain country, and no one has a problem with that.

70 years later, same country, very similar book, similar global climate of wars, fear, oppression etc etc some bloke questions why current book isn't banned and its a big deal?

See above, it's not the same line at all, because it's not the sort of universal ban you're discussing. On top of that, you're pretending that they're books in the same vein, which is highly arguable - one is juvenile fiction, and the other was written by Hitler. Contrasting a ban several decades after the fact due to ongoing sensitivities and some sort of pre-emptive attack on a storybook in case it makes people blow themselves up just doesn't seem to make much sense.

you under estimate the power of both books. extremist muslims use direct quotes from the koran to justify terrorist actions. extremist nazis used direct quotes from mein kampf to justify terrorist actions. how aren't they similar?

the point im trying to make is people allow double standards because it has to do with the holocaust, which is still such a touchy subject or because it has to do with religion like the koran, which is apparently unfuckwithable.

I'm sure there are plenty of well-founded concerns around, but I think there are probably bigger issues at play here than a cute little book.

if extremist muslim terrorist isn't one of the top concerns of the world right now (keeping in mind the number of people it has already killed and will continue to kill), i don't know what planet you are living on, pal.

 

[Gosford]

wait, you've lost me. lets simplify things - a book (mein kampf), which, we have all agreed promotes violence, sexism and racism and was used by a certain group of extremists to justify the slaughter of millions of innocent people has been banned in a certain country, and no one has a problem with that.

70 years later, same country, very similar book, similar global climate of wars, fear, oppression etc etc some bloke questions why current book isn't banned and its a big deal?




you under estimate the power of both books. extremist muslims use direct quotes from the koran to justify terrorist actions. extremist nazis used direct quotes from mein kampf to justify terrorist actions. how aren't they similar?

the point im trying to make is people allow double standards because it has to do with the holocaust, which is still such a touchy subject or because it has to do with religion like the koran, which is apparently unfuckwithable.



if extremist muslim terrorist isn't one of the top concerns of the world right now (keeping in mind the number of people it has already killed and will continue to kill), i don't know what planet you are living on, pal.

Mate
we have denounced those who do terrorist acts
where as that Nazi books purpose was clearly defined (I dont want to go in more detail as I may say something wrong), the Qura's purpose is not coz hatred, violence etc.
Mainly it is rules to abide by givin to us by God (to those who dont believea taht, at least humour us in that we follishly think it is given to us by God)
It is a peaceful text!
it has possibly been misinterpreted
but like i said earlier on
it is believed by muslims (of those true at least)
"to kill a person(innocent), is like killing all the people in the world"
a contridcition NO!
it is an extremly wrong SIN to commit murder
punishable by death! (Capital punishment, similar to that in secular states like those in US etc.)
It does not say nor IMPLY anywhere in the quran to attack people in trade centres, nor people on holiday in middle east etc.

And mate have a think to urself

you under estimate the power of both books. extremist muslims use direct quotes from the koran to justify terrorist actions. extremist nazis used direct quotes from mein kampf to justify terrorist actions. how aren't they similar?

want to know whats wrong with that statement, direct quotes that are wrong
Ill give u an example first
In a book i may be reading
it might say "Hit people with the name John"
I then hit someone with the name "Jake"
Somebody asks me why i did that, I say "Book said to hit people with name Jake"
Now a clever person (...thats ur problem here), would check the book
they would then see that the person was mistaken

Now, in relation to the Quran I'm saying those people using direct quotes from the Quran (i dont know wat they claimed), well im saying they r untrue
do some research!

its funny that the people you complain about
extremist muslim terrorists, that u think are dangerous (which they are), and cant be trusted
YET
u trust them when they say something like that
Ironic much?
I sincerely urge you to provide me with any quotes from the quran justifying killing innocent people!

 

[ogmzergrush]

lets simplify things - a book (mein kampf), which, we have all agreed promotes violence, sexism and racism and was used by a certain group of extremists to justify the slaughter of millions of innocent people has been banned in a certain country, and no one has a problem with that.

70 years later, same country, very similar book, similar global climate of wars, fear, oppression etc etc some bloke questions why current book isn't banned and its a big deal?

* The book was banned after the slaughter of said millions, not pre-emptively, and not for purposes of preventing said slaughter (as it had already happened; to the best of my knowledge Germans don't have time machines yet). Seeing as you acknowledged that you're having trouble keeping up, I'll spell it out for you.

"Hey, this book might kind of offend people a bit, seeing as 70 odd years ago it had a bit to do with a lot of people dying. Maybe life will be better if we restrict its distribution here"

vs

"Hey, this book seems like it's stirring up some nasties, we better ban it before people die as a direct result of its availability!"

Of course, even this comparison pretends that they're in the same league, and I really fail to see how they are. I would imagine that very few people who live by Mein Kampf (so we're talking maybe eight people total in the first place) manage to take away from it a positive message which allows them to be a functional, pleasant and stable member of society. This is in contrast with muslims, because I figure there must be at least oh I don't know, thirty of them who don't want to spend all their time killing infidels and shit, and who seem to fit reasonably well in our society.

you under estimate the power of both books. extremist muslims use direct quotes from the koran to justify terrorist actions. extremist nazis used direct quotes from mein kampf to justify terrorist actions. how aren't they similar?

* I'd imagine it's actually direct quotes from Allah (lol) and Hitler himself, respectively. The book doesn't seem to me to be as central to the process as you imply.

* Each are available widely on the Internet. This makes such bans kind of pointless and plain stupid, just in case the idea of banning a book for being evil itself wasn't stupid enough in the first place.

the point im trying to make is people allow double standards because it has to do with the holocaust, which is still such a touchy subject or because it has to do with religion like the koran, which is apparently unfuckwithable.

Holocaust... and... Religion... I see the difference, do you?

I'm all for writing off religions, but I think there are probably better ways to go about it than to pretend that the holocaust and muslims are analogous. Even if we roll with the assumption that what you meant to say was "I think muslims and nazis are analogous", so that we're at least comparing two groups of people as opposed to comparing a religion to an event, we're left with the conclusion that there are probably far more muslims around who have yet to kill anyone (or condone this killing), than there ever were "innocent" nazis (ignoring coercion and what-not, we're already on enough of a tangent).

I'd never actually agree that a book should be banned due to the way that stupid people respond when they read it, but I'll tell you what, I'll agree that I could at least see reason in the suggestion that it be banned after all people who follow its word have conspicuously and systematically killed off several million people within the space of half a decade or so. Until then, I don't think we're really comparing the same thing at all.

if extremist muslim terrorist isn't one of the top concerns of the world right now (keeping in mind the number of people it has already killed and will continue to kill), i don't know what planet you are living on, pal.

That's not actually what I said. What I'm talking about is the fact that regarding fucking angry muslims, there are probably bigger problems than the koran. Like the bit where real life, actual people, seem to think violence like that is ok, even if they did read it in their story books.

Seems we'd be better off dealing with those who have a disposition towards being problematic after story time, rather than banning the book and ruining the fun for everyone.

 

[Snaykew]

Apparently poverty isn't a top issue anymore. Ignoring the fact that it basically pushes people to violence(eg. terrorism), what's the harm? Let's feed terrorists with recruits by ignoring the source.

 

[PrinceHarry]

......

We see that Muhammad had many people murdered. By request, by command, by implication, Muhammad had many people murdered, many killed while they slept. There were no trials, no judgments, no dialog, if you insulted Muhammad, if you doubted his credibility and if you spoke out, you were murdered. Men and women, young and old, all were killed because of Muhammad's hatred. Here is a summary of the seven terroristic murders committed at Muhammad's requests or efforts:

1) Ibn Sunayna, a Jewish man who was murdered because he was simply a Jew
2) Abu Afak, a 120 year old man, murdered while he slept
3) Asma Marwan, mother of 5 children, murdered while she slept
4) A slave women, mother of two children, murdered while she slept
5) A one-eyed shepherd, murdered while he slept
6) A very old women, literally ripped in half by Muslims who captured her on a raid.
7) A slave girl, who was murdered because she poked fun at Muhammad.



​

I will add that there were many more people who suffered a similar fate. I choose not to list them here because of space limitations. Make no mistake about it: Muhammad was a terrorist. Today's Muslim terrorists follow his actions. Like prophet, like followers; today's Mohammadan terrorists commit their acts based upon what Muhammad did.

Source: http://www.muhammadanism.org/Muhammad/muhammad_terrorism.htm#Early

Many of the above points are still true and valid to this day. Especially when it comes to criticism of Mohamed himself.

By the way terrorists are not pushed by desperation to violence but by their clear conscience and their beleives in the writings of Quran, the word of the devil, Satan.

 

[wasupdog]

Source: http://www.muhammadanism.org/Muhammad/muhammad_terrorism.htm#Early

Many of the above points are still true and valid to this day. Especially when it comes to criticism of Mohamed himself.

By the way terrorists are not pushed by desperation to violence but by their clear conscience and their beleives in the writings of Quran, the word of the devil, Satan.

u are easily influenced person. seems to me u sit on the side of the fence where the majority are.

if u were so into defaming a religion.... u would go and read the holy quran.....and quote it from their.

also that website u quoted from......contradicted itself 4 times on the same webpage u gave.......its not even a decent source.

 

[Snaykew]

If you think wealth is not a strong influence of crime, you're just plain ignorant. Why do you think terrorists are usually from poor countries? Of course, wealth in some cases may not be a factor, but I'll bet in a large number of cases, it is.

 

[jb_nc]

If you think we

alth is not a strong influence of crime, you're just plain ignorant. Why do you think terrorists are usually from poor countries? Of course, wealth in some cases may not be a factor, but I'll bet in a large number of cases, it is.​

​

lmao, British born UK bombers, Usama bin-Laden wasn't exactly short a penny either, Saudia Arabia (where the majority of the 9-11 hi-jackers came from) is not a "poor" country either.

Wealth has nothing to do with it, both the poor and the élite can be brainwashed into believing propaganda.

 

[ogmzergrush]

It's a good thing you've enriched this conversation by not RANTING!!!! lolz