Am I the only one who just SORTA wanted to see Pastor Jones burn the Koran, not necessarily because I oppose Islam but just because I'm a guy and I feel the need to watch something BURN?
610 views after 4 days! Is that it? Indeed, nobody gives a flying fuck about some paper burning. Yet everyone wanting to leverage the existing media attention is in on the game. What a sick, sick world. Great job on the video.
@dinther The video was censored as "inappropriate content." I fail to see anything inappropriate about it. That's censorship, without a good cause, and censoring of media which I don't approve. So to show my support, I mirror the video.
Despite the asshole'ish behaviour TJ normally puts on, if you watch through his videos, his arguments and rationale are always refreshing and very good. Especially in that I find his opinions don't exactly align with my own, which always gets me thinking.
I hate terrorists, but burning the Quran offends all Muslims. Don't pretend it doesn't. There are more specific symbolic ways to lash out at Bin Laden. You only guarantee that peaceful Muslims like me won't help you
@IbnFergus It's not about Bin Laden... And tough luck with moderate muslims, but their religion is still one that encourages people to rape unveiled women, because men can't control their sexual appetites. I don't care if they don't believe that themselves, but if that's the case, they should disagree with the Kor'an, as it is, just as strongly as we do.
@IbnFergus Qu'ran 24:31 makes the case. Though perhaps it is not entirely accurate to state the Kor'an itself states in plain black and white that men can not hold back their sexual appetite, even within the verse it mentions that a woman can only expose herself in front of "male servants not having need..." (of women). So even if it is only the apologetic answer to the question produced by clerics, it is still insinuated in the Kor'an.
@ThinkAbout1t I have read it and you're proving to me that you didn't.
Quran 24:31: "And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest..." Nothing at all about rape, is that the only proof you can find for your wild theory? Show me a SINGLE Muslim scholar who came to the same conclusion as you; for there are none that would say that.
@IbnFergus I said "their religion is still one that encourages people to rape unveiled women."
Simply put, I never said the Qu'ran simply says "rapity rape rape!" I said the religion is one that encourages it. 24:31 is simply the verse that, in your eyes, is misinterpreted to have no meaning towards this conversation. I say it does, and that would mean we are at an impass of opinion. However, I can absolutely attest to the instances of rape of unveiled women in Britain, see "Did Draw M Day Work"
@ThinkAbout1t you've jumped to a conclusion so big that you could fit the Grand Canyon in between the jump. How does "lower your gaze" in your mind encourage rape? I think, and Muslim scholars say, that it actually means the opposite; don't go near temptation.
Of all the anti-Muslim stuff I've heard over my lifetime, this is the most original, and one of the craziest.
@IbnFergus It's not me that misinterprets it, I'm reporting the existence of a phenomenon, and citing the source of the (in your opinion*) misinterpretation, and the reasoning behind the misinterpretation.
amnation.com/vfr/archives/004811.html
I don't agree with the overall theme of that article("Clearly the liberal West and Islam are incompatible."), but I'm just providing an example of what I'm talking about. The article is definitely too influenced by bias.
@ThinkAbout1t lol thats your source? A youtube video you can't substantiate? Please show me a newspaper article or report about muslim men raping women because they don't cover their hair. It never happened, not even in a place like Afghanistan (show me a report of a single incident of it). Again, not happening and clearly not in the Quran. You're delusional.
@IbnFergus No... that's my own video. It's got a clip at 2:45 starting from an NBC news story on Islamic extremism in the UK.
If you want to accuse me of not researching what I'm saying, and making unsubstantiated claims, then you ought to pay attention to what I'm saying just the same.
@IbnFergus It's not me that misinterprets it, I'm reporting the existence of a phenomenon, and citing the source of the (in your opinion*) misinterpretation, and the reasoning behind the misinterpretation.
Burning books is a symbol in itself. It is a symbol of censorship. It is a symbol of destroying knowledge, getting rid of unwanted information. That's what it historically means, and I don't want to send that message. Back in the day I disagreed with Brett's "burn the bible day" and now I disagree with "burn the Koran day".
And it's not ashes to ashes, actually. It's trees to ashes.
And you generate profit for people who print this stuff.
The trouble with burning the Qu'ran is that it is doubly offensive. 1) It is obviously offensive to muslims. 2) It is offensive in the west, since burning books is a symbol of denying free-speech, literally burning any book you disagree with so that you don't have to refute it.
@Golkarian No it's not, burning symbols in general is in and of ITSELF a symbol of free speech. It's what has been practiced time and time again in the US.
@ThinkAbout1t no, it is practicing free speech, just like those who rant about democracy and the fact you can read or write anti-democratic books. That does not make these symbols of free speech. The act of burning a symbol such as the American flag symobolizes opposition to free-speech, but those who do it are still nevertheless practicing it. People should be permitted to burn books, but I don't think it symolizes free speech in any way.
@ThinkAbout1t alright, some might be burning the US flag since they disbelieve in capatalism or just think the US is restricting ideas. But that was a metaphor to explain the example, not an argument. The real example is book burning, which remains a symbol of opposition to free speech. Of course a symbol is subjective (a rose only relates to love in people's minds, not reality) so this is more an argument about what people think, not what is and is not.
@Golkarian I'll point out here that the original cause of this debate (Terry Jones) had a terrible reason for burning the Qu'ran. But the example given in this video is what I'm defending as justified, and the context in which you perform the action defines the symbolism of the action.
Comparing this with the Nazi's book burning is a fallacy. The Nazi's stole the books they burnt and those books were only available in paper form so their burning were genuinely fascist.
I'm not sure about Dawkin's book but the Bible and Quran are available online and TAA will have to buy another copy of the 'God Delusion' so Dawkins will be quid's in. btw idolatry is a crime in Islam so a devout Muslim would only object to the people who object to this.
It's the act of book burning, that is so vile and disgusting... No matter, how much one might disagree, or how much "out of date" one thinks, these books are...
It's the burning of ideas, an act, which portrays, that a person, who resorts to this kind of infantile and ignorant behaviour (even if he's just doing it, to get a point across or others rolling a joint out of the pages) is very fast with a lighter at hand...
And it's this famous quote and the promise it keeps, that worries me:
@ProjectPaladin I disagree with the quote entirely. The act of book burning is in no way infantile, the way in which you perform the act determines whether or not you're being purile. But the same could be said of any protest. Terry Jones is absolutely being purile about the whole thing, but TheAmazingAtheist here made the point through book burning, that ideas aren't protected from criticism or disagreement. And the act itself signifies the world would be better off without these ideas.
I can acknowledge the point, TJ was making, yet still the destruction of ideas, especially when done symbolically, remains purile and infantile... It's saying, the content is not worth adressing, the thoughts, which are in it and which surround the people, who see value in it are only worth putting them in the bin...
Ideas are NEVER protected from criticism or disagreement, but destroying them sends undeniably the message, that you're not even willing, to hear the other side...
Furthermore, who gets to decide, which ideas the world would be better off without? It's especially this kind of reasoning, that I personally fear... Talking about "superiority"...
I agree. The way to fight a book's content is not through fire and destruction - it's through logic and reason. If you disagree with a book, open a dialogue and say why you disagree with it.
Burning a book, like other forms of censorship, is an admission that one is not up to the task of refuting it in an adult and civilized manner.
@bushputz Unless that individual has already proposed many unrefuted arguments regarding the barbarity, the middle aged thinking, the horrendous problems with human rights, to which a childish reply was given. At that point, symbols speak louder than words. It's not simply that I disagree with your ideas, nor that your ideas are logically inconsistent, and your customs are barbaric. No, it's the fact that I feel the world would be better off without raping women for not wearing veils, is the msg
@bushputz We have been doing the whole "reason and logic" thing for the past 2 thousand years, it does not seem to work on these people, just saying.
And no I don't support those tards that burn the Quran, but I'm not going to give Islam a special treatment, and be against this just because their feeling are hurt.
@ProjectPaladin This is a just symbolic protest at the vile and disgusting ideas the book contains, not the destruction of the ideas themselves. The primary collection of ideas nowadays is online, not on paper; times have changed in this respect. I would be far more shocked at the destruction of irreplaceable documents. The real problem is that there are people who believe that a physical book can posses, in effect, magical properties more important than the life, liberty or property of others.
fucking awesome. thx for uploading
bercziiiib 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Am I the only one who just SORTA wanted to see Pastor Jones burn the Koran, not necessarily because I oppose Islam but just because I'm a guy and I feel the need to watch something BURN?
VoiceHunter 1 year ago
Comment removed
VoiceHunter 1 year ago
610 views after 4 days! Is that it? Indeed, nobody gives a flying fuck about some paper burning. Yet everyone wanting to leverage the existing media attention is in on the game. What a sick, sick world. Great job on the video.
dinther 1 year ago
@dinther This is "TheAmazingAtheist's" video, and has over 120k views on his channel.
ThinkAbout1t 1 year ago
@ThinkAbout1t Thanks for putting me straight on that. Why the hell would you re-post his videos?
dinther 1 year ago
@dinther The video was censored as "inappropriate content." I fail to see anything inappropriate about it. That's censorship, without a good cause, and censoring of media which I don't approve. So to show my support, I mirror the video.
Despite the asshole'ish behaviour TJ normally puts on, if you watch through his videos, his arguments and rationale are always refreshing and very good. Especially in that I find his opinions don't exactly align with my own, which always gets me thinking.
ThinkAbout1t 1 year ago
Somehow, TheAmazingAtheist reminds me of Theo van Gogh...
xtremegoogler 1 year ago
I hate terrorists, but burning the Quran offends all Muslims. Don't pretend it doesn't. There are more specific symbolic ways to lash out at Bin Laden. You only guarantee that peaceful Muslims like me won't help you
IbnFergus 1 year ago
@IbnFergus It's not about Bin Laden... And tough luck with moderate muslims, but their religion is still one that encourages people to rape unveiled women, because men can't control their sexual appetites. I don't care if they don't believe that themselves, but if that's the case, they should disagree with the Kor'an, as it is, just as strongly as we do.
ThinkAbout1t 1 year ago
@ThinkAbout1t I would disagree with the Quran...if what you just said was actually IN it. Have you actually bothered to read what you burn?
IbnFergus 1 year ago
@IbnFergus Qu'ran 24:31 makes the case. Though perhaps it is not entirely accurate to state the Kor'an itself states in plain black and white that men can not hold back their sexual appetite, even within the verse it mentions that a woman can only expose herself in front of "male servants not having need..." (of women). So even if it is only the apologetic answer to the question produced by clerics, it is still insinuated in the Kor'an.
Have you read it?
ThinkAbout1t 1 year ago
@ThinkAbout1t I have read it and you're proving to me that you didn't.
Quran 24:31: "And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest..." Nothing at all about rape, is that the only proof you can find for your wild theory? Show me a SINGLE Muslim scholar who came to the same conclusion as you; for there are none that would say that.
IbnFergus 1 year ago
@IbnFergus I said "their religion is still one that encourages people to rape unveiled women."
Simply put, I never said the Qu'ran simply says "rapity rape rape!" I said the religion is one that encourages it. 24:31 is simply the verse that, in your eyes, is misinterpreted to have no meaning towards this conversation. I say it does, and that would mean we are at an impass of opinion. However, I can absolutely attest to the instances of rape of unveiled women in Britain, see "Did Draw M Day Work"
ThinkAbout1t 1 year ago
@ThinkAbout1t you've jumped to a conclusion so big that you could fit the Grand Canyon in between the jump. How does "lower your gaze" in your mind encourage rape? I think, and Muslim scholars say, that it actually means the opposite; don't go near temptation.
Of all the anti-Muslim stuff I've heard over my lifetime, this is the most original, and one of the craziest.
IbnFergus 1 year ago
@IbnFergus It's not me that misinterprets it, I'm reporting the existence of a phenomenon, and citing the source of the (in your opinion*) misinterpretation, and the reasoning behind the misinterpretation.
amnation.com/vfr/archives/004811.html
I don't agree with the overall theme of that article("Clearly the liberal West and Islam are incompatible."), but I'm just providing an example of what I'm talking about. The article is definitely too influenced by bias.
ThinkAbout1t 1 year ago
@ThinkAbout1t lol thats your source? A youtube video you can't substantiate? Please show me a newspaper article or report about muslim men raping women because they don't cover their hair. It never happened, not even in a place like Afghanistan (show me a report of a single incident of it). Again, not happening and clearly not in the Quran. You're delusional.
IbnFergus 1 year ago
@IbnFergus No... that's my own video. It's got a clip at 2:45 starting from an NBC news story on Islamic extremism in the UK.
If you want to accuse me of not researching what I'm saying, and making unsubstantiated claims, then you ought to pay attention to what I'm saying just the same.
ThinkAbout1t 1 year ago
@IbnFergus It's not me that misinterprets it, I'm reporting the existence of a phenomenon, and citing the source of the (in your opinion*) misinterpretation, and the reasoning behind the misinterpretation.
youtube com/watch?v=Wnb6fNraO9A - starts 2:45 in.
Whether or not you agree with that interpretation of the passage, others do, and others proposed it, and others follow it. That's the problem.
ThinkAbout1t 1 year ago
Burning books is a symbol in itself. It is a symbol of censorship. It is a symbol of destroying knowledge, getting rid of unwanted information. That's what it historically means, and I don't want to send that message. Back in the day I disagreed with Brett's "burn the bible day" and now I disagree with "burn the Koran day".
And it's not ashes to ashes, actually. It's trees to ashes.
And you generate profit for people who print this stuff.
Kuba022 1 year ago 2
if you are my neibourgh i will cut you empty head - bastard ignorant
veracite13 1 year ago
@veracite13 lol, you funny guy.
I kill you last.
ResidentNinja 1 year ago
@veracite13
veracite, you're an idiot. Did you not listen properly to the video?
magicmartin18 1 year ago
you will be burned in the Volcano larvae that have provoked you are a scatterbrained
and holocaustist - bastard
veracite13 1 year ago
omg
u r so stupid
masquerader1000 1 year ago
FUCK YOU!
SmellyJonasHaters 1 year ago
The trouble with burning the Qu'ran is that it is doubly offensive. 1) It is obviously offensive to muslims. 2) It is offensive in the west, since burning books is a symbol of denying free-speech, literally burning any book you disagree with so that you don't have to refute it.
Golkarian 1 year ago
@Golkarian No it's not, burning symbols in general is in and of ITSELF a symbol of free speech. It's what has been practiced time and time again in the US.
ThinkAbout1t 1 year ago
@ThinkAbout1t no, it is practicing free speech, just like those who rant about democracy and the fact you can read or write anti-democratic books. That does not make these symbols of free speech. The act of burning a symbol such as the American flag symobolizes opposition to free-speech, but those who do it are still nevertheless practicing it. People should be permitted to burn books, but I don't think it symolizes free speech in any way.
Golkarian 1 year ago
@Golkarian ...
You're telling me everyone who burned American flags in the past was about the *restrictions* of the rights of the people.
Please, think about the implications that scenario, and get back to me.
ThinkAbout1t 1 year ago
@ThinkAbout1t alright, some might be burning the US flag since they disbelieve in capatalism or just think the US is restricting ideas. But that was a metaphor to explain the example, not an argument. The real example is book burning, which remains a symbol of opposition to free speech. Of course a symbol is subjective (a rose only relates to love in people's minds, not reality) so this is more an argument about what people think, not what is and is not.
Golkarian 1 year ago
@Golkarian I'll point out here that the original cause of this debate (Terry Jones) had a terrible reason for burning the Qu'ran. But the example given in this video is what I'm defending as justified, and the context in which you perform the action defines the symbolism of the action.
ThinkAbout1t 1 year ago
@ThinkAbout1t Kinda like when Zoidberg eats the Earth's Flag?
machphantom 1 year ago
Comparing this with the Nazi's book burning is a fallacy. The Nazi's stole the books they burnt and those books were only available in paper form so their burning were genuinely fascist.
I'm not sure about Dawkin's book but the Bible and Quran are available online and TAA will have to buy another copy of the 'God Delusion' so Dawkins will be quid's in. btw idolatry is a crime in Islam so a devout Muslim would only object to the people who object to this.
DontBendOverForAllah 1 year ago
Burn Mother Fucker, BURN
argo984 1 year ago
It's the act of book burning, that is so vile and disgusting... No matter, how much one might disagree, or how much "out of date" one thinks, these books are...
It's the burning of ideas, an act, which portrays, that a person, who resorts to this kind of infantile and ignorant behaviour (even if he's just doing it, to get a point across or others rolling a joint out of the pages) is very fast with a lighter at hand...
And it's this famous quote and the promise it keeps, that worries me:
ProjectPaladin 1 year ago
“Wherever they burn books they will also, in the end, burn human beings.”
Heinrich Heine
ProjectPaladin 1 year ago
@ProjectPaladin That... is such a terrible... terrible quote.
"Wherever they budge in line, in the end, they will also shove people to the ground and beat them."
~Random unimportant individual claiming superior insight.
ThinkAbout1t 1 year ago 3
@ProjectPaladin I disagree with the quote entirely. The act of book burning is in no way infantile, the way in which you perform the act determines whether or not you're being purile. But the same could be said of any protest. Terry Jones is absolutely being purile about the whole thing, but TheAmazingAtheist here made the point through book burning, that ideas aren't protected from criticism or disagreement. And the act itself signifies the world would be better off without these ideas.
ThinkAbout1t 1 year ago
@ThinkAbout1t
I can acknowledge the point, TJ was making, yet still the destruction of ideas, especially when done symbolically, remains purile and infantile... It's saying, the content is not worth adressing, the thoughts, which are in it and which surround the people, who see value in it are only worth putting them in the bin...
Ideas are NEVER protected from criticism or disagreement, but destroying them sends undeniably the message, that you're not even willing, to hear the other side...
ProjectPaladin 1 year ago
@ThinkAbout1t
Furthermore, who gets to decide, which ideas the world would be better off without? It's especially this kind of reasoning, that I personally fear... Talking about "superiority"...
ProjectPaladin 1 year ago
@ProjectPaladin
I agree. The way to fight a book's content is not through fire and destruction - it's through logic and reason. If you disagree with a book, open a dialogue and say why you disagree with it.
Burning a book, like other forms of censorship, is an admission that one is not up to the task of refuting it in an adult and civilized manner.
bushputz 1 year ago
@bushputz Unless that individual has already proposed many unrefuted arguments regarding the barbarity, the middle aged thinking, the horrendous problems with human rights, to which a childish reply was given. At that point, symbols speak louder than words. It's not simply that I disagree with your ideas, nor that your ideas are logically inconsistent, and your customs are barbaric. No, it's the fact that I feel the world would be better off without raping women for not wearing veils, is the msg
ThinkAbout1t 1 year ago
@bushputz We have been doing the whole "reason and logic" thing for the past 2 thousand years, it does not seem to work on these people, just saying.
And no I don't support those tards that burn the Quran, but I'm not going to give Islam a special treatment, and be against this just because their feeling are hurt.
Naminator236 1 year ago
@bushputz
loverboy200818 1 year ago
@ProjectPaladin This is a just symbolic protest at the vile and disgusting ideas the book contains, not the destruction of the ideas themselves. The primary collection of ideas nowadays is online, not on paper; times have changed in this respect. I would be far more shocked at the destruction of irreplaceable documents. The real problem is that there are people who believe that a physical book can posses, in effect, magical properties more important than the life, liberty or property of others.
Marchawc 1 year ago
Qu'Ran... surely?
lolocaustism 1 year ago 3
great vid!
ndyt 1 year ago