galeninjapan
Banned
Im a liberal guy, and love to put down the Bush administration every chance I get, but I cannot for the life of me figure out why defacing the koran is such a big deal. Its better than physical torture right?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Whats the big deal with Flushing a Koran down the Toilet?
- Thread starter galeninjapan
- Start date
- Status
SatelliteOfLove
Member
Better is subjective in this case; not to mention...
A: It rightfully pisses Muslims off
B: Doesn't piss off a few as much as it gives them another excuse to 'splode people.
and
C: Anyone who'd do this shoulda knew the first 2 would duh-huh happen.
A: It rightfully pisses Muslims off
B: Doesn't piss off a few as much as it gives them another excuse to 'splode people.
and
C: Anyone who'd do this shoulda knew the first 2 would duh-huh happen.
Guileless
Temp Banned for Remedial Purposes
There was a blurb in Newsweek (ironically enough) that explained the great reverence for the Koran itself among Muslims, which was something I wasn't aware of. According to this article, they believe that the Koran wasn't "written," but rather has existed forever along with God.
The author quoted some religious expert as saying the rough equivalent to throwing the Koran on the ground for Christians would be something like Mapplethorpe's "Piss Christ" photo where a crucifix is submerged in urine.
There are now elaborate rules about prison guards handling the Koran. The article states that a non-Muslim even touching it is offensive to the more hardcore, so Muslim chaplains come in to inspect everybody's Korans instead of a regular guards.
The author quoted some religious expert as saying the rough equivalent to throwing the Koran on the ground for Christians would be something like Mapplethorpe's "Piss Christ" photo where a crucifix is submerged in urine.
There are now elaborate rules about prison guards handling the Koran. The article states that a non-Muslim even touching it is offensive to the more hardcore, so Muslim chaplains come in to inspect everybody's Korans instead of a regular guards.
galeninjapan
Banned
Guileless said:
I would rather that happen to me than getting my nuts choped off. Damn even the Army is getting all PC.
monkeymagic
Banned
galeninjapan said:
Is there an option where neither happen?
Kabuki Waq
Member
would be same as flushing the bible or the Jewish holybook(forgot name) down the toilet.
I mean fuck remember how much shit went down when that bald lady ripped up the picture of the pope on snl?
I mean fuck remember how much shit went down when that bald lady ripped up the picture of the pope on snl?
themadcowtipper
Smells faintly of rancid stilton.
Tazznum1 said:
Fixed and I agree with you
ManDudeChild
Member
Tazznum1 said:
Agreed, in an ideal world people wouldn't kill each other over a few silly works of fiction, but unfortunately we don't live in an ideal world. So in thsi case, it isn't smart to screw around with these so called "holy" books.
Much worse. The Koran is very sacred to most Muslims...as Guileless said, some of the more fundamentalist believers would even be offended to have it touch the floor, let alone be touched by someone who represents the people who they perceive have invaded their Holy Land, let alone be flushed down the toilet by this person.Kabuki Waq said:
It's a very big deal. Many people just don't see it because culturally we in the West don't have anything that really compares.
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
D-X said:
Except it's a hundred fold more offensive to muslims.
galeninjapan
Banned
human5892 said:
I dont give a shit about the muslims.
enjoy bell woods
Banned
Gale's a compassionate guy.
Also, it's utterly stupid. When you trade off the likelihood that the act of flushing a religious book down a toilet will produce the desired behavior, versus the immense political and social backlash against flushing the book, how can you justify the risk-versus-reward tradeoff?Geneva Conventions said:
Instigator
Banned
I also find it a bit ridiculous that an object can be revered so much.
But the guards at Guantanamo probably knew what they were doing and expected some of the detainees to be broken by this seemingly irrelevant act. I'm just surprised that kind of thing only got out now.
But the guards at Guantanamo probably knew what they were doing and expected some of the detainees to be broken by this seemingly irrelevant act. I'm just surprised that kind of thing only got out now.
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
All of this discussion about flushing the Koran down the toliet is good and all, and I know that we're expected to hold ourselves to a higher standard than the people who are working against us, but flushing the Koran down a toilet, if it did happen, at the moment there are only vague references and half-remembered instances, is pretty small potatoes compared to beheading civilians, and posting the video on the Internet for the world to see, let alone strapping bombs to your chest, and blowing innocent people up. Let alone flying planes into buildings killing hundreds of innocents, let alone... ah you get the picture.
The thing is, if this is the sort of crap people reference to casually when they say that we ("we" being the U.S.) are doing to break the Geneva convention, then my initial reaction is "well fuck the Geneva convention." All things considered, that's not a reaction I should be having.
bob_arctor
Tough_Smooth
Kung Fu Jedi said:
Missing...the...point...
themadcowtipper
Smells faintly of rancid stilton.
"I forsee Someone getting BANNED!"
bob_arctor
Tough_Smooth
Nerevar said:
But it's the reaction the Bush administration wants you to have. Disdain. They're big on that shit.
bob_arctor said:
I think what the Bush administration wants is irrelevant to the point I made ...
Edit: To clarify, if the Geneva Convention is so broad that it defines an act such as this as torture then I think it is a fundamentally flawed document. I mean, torture based on religion would be (IMO) only offering pork sausages to Muslim or Jewish detainees, and otherwise letting them starve (or something along those lines). Any rational person would not conceive of this as torture, again IMO.
:lol :lolgaleninjapan said:
Just what the hell kind of "liberal guy" are you?
As bob_arctor said, 1.) that's really not the point, and 2.) most of the prisoners at Guantanemo Bay, Al-Ghraib, and other prisons are not guilty of or associated with (besides nationality) any of these acts.Kung Fu Jedi said:
Kabuki Waq
Member
BAsically its saying we dont care about you or your religion and we dont want you here.
honestly thats the message it gives atleast to me.
honestly thats the message it gives atleast to me.
galeninjapan
Banned
-jinx- said:
Thats not why I started this thread. I really think its ridiculous that people are getting mad about this type of behavior. What do they expect in an army prison camp?
enjoy bell woods
Banned
This guy's friends with Olimario in real life. What did you honestly expect?
galeninjapan
Banned
MIMIC said:
Because all liberals are the same...
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
human5892 said:
1) I understand completely why they are upset, and I respect their reasons. For millions of muslims it is the most sacred of all documents, and goes far beyond what many of us in the western world can relate to. However, we are talking about the reaction to that alleged flushing of that book down the toilet, and it's interesting that doing that can cause the reaction that it did, and bring on cries about the Geneva Convention, when many of the people we are fighting against could give two shits about the Geneva Convention. I didn't miss the point at all, just pointing out that it's an interesting reaction to everything. I did, afterall, admit that the US it expected to hold itself to a higher standard.
2) I would agree with you on this, and I for one didn't mean to imply that all Muslims fall into the category of the people commiting these acts. I visited a Muslim country last year, and found the people to be very friendly, interesting, and wonderful. But the people that we are fighting against are willing to use those tactics against us in this "War", and yet the US gets no end of grief for this action, which again, has not been proven to have happened.
Kabuki Waq
Member
galeninjapan said:
If you say you dont give a shit about muslims than how can you hope to understand?
the act of actually flushing the Koran symbolizes the hate that ppl have for muslims.
...not to have their sacred texts flushed down the toliet in a flagrant disregard for Geneva Conventions, inciting further resentment and outrage from the Middle East and escalating tensions in Iraq and elsewhere, all while not getting any useful information whatsoever from the prisoners since these kinds of interrogation techniques have been repeatedly proven ineffective would be my guess.galeninjapan said:
I understand what you're saying here and in the rest of your post, but what it really boils down to is "two wrongs don't make a right" -- in fact, in this case two wrongs makes everything a lot worse, as I alluded to in my response above to galenin. Of course, I completely agree that those who commit those acts of terror and disregard the Geneva Convention should be held accountable, U.S. or otherwise.Kung Fu Jedi said:
galeninjapan
Banned
Kung Fu Jedi said:
Interesting point, I get the feeling that most muslims dont really consider the terrorists and extremists as muslims, in the sense that they are. Is that correct?
Ok, my words were a bit harsh, I take them back. What I meant to say was I care more about the wellbeing of america then the muslims.
Instigator
Banned
galeninjapan said:
Especially when they randonly blow stuff in their countries.
Who said that it was defined as "torture?"Nerevar said:
The Geneva Conventions detail procedures for conducting warfare and related activities, and forbidding torture is only one provision. Discrimination based on religion is another category of forbidden actions.
The real problem with Guantanamo is that the Bush Administration is claiming that the Geneva Conventions don't apply since the people there are "enemy combatants," which is a category not specifically covered. (There are provisions in the GC for "prisoners of war" and "internees," but what the hell is an "enemy combatant?") Have the people imprisoned there had access to lawyers? ("Prisoners of war must have the right to legal advice, particularly in the case of preparing powers of attorney and wills." Convention III, Art. 77) Have they been sending and receiving letters? ("Prisoners of war must be allowed to send and receive letters and cards. Specifically, they must be allowed to send at least two letters and four cards a month." Convention III, Art. 71) Have representatives from neutral countries (or their country of origin) been allowed to visit and check on conditions? ("Representatives of the protecting powers shall have permission to visit all places where prisoners of war may be, particularly to places of internment, imprisonment and labor. They must be able to interview the prisoners without witnesses, either personally or through an interpreter." Convention III, Art. 126)
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
galeninjapan said:
Yep. Most don't want to be associated with them, and what the Terrorist factions do are actually against what the Koran preaches on so many levels. The Terrorists find ways to twist those words to make them fit what they want and to make sell their Holy War, not unlike the way things work here with the Administration.
The average person I met on the streets was interested in knowing what the average American was thinking about the War, Post- 9/11 relations, what we thought about Muslims in general. It made for very interesting discussions, with neither side ever getting offended by the questions and answers.
galeninjapan
Banned
Kung Fu Jedi said:
Thats pretty cool, what country did you go to?
Kabuki Waq
Member
galeninjapan said:
you do realize there are alot of muslim americans?
galeninjapan
Banned
Kabuki Waq said:
Really? When did that happen?
1) Prisoners should expect to be treated in accordance with the Geneva Convention, international law, and U.S. law.galeninjapan said:
2) I personally expect my country to act in an ethical, honest manner...especially because of all the jingoistic bullshit Bush and friends spew about "spreading freedom and democracy." If you're going to talk it, you'd better walk it.
Kabuki Waq
Member
galeninjapan said:
?
do you really not consider Muslims Americans? was this thread just so you could tell us about your distate for muslims?
-jinx- said:
Fair enough, but I don't think the terms of the document should be stretched far enough to prevent you from hurting someone's feelings by defacing a "Holy book" which is nothing more than personal property. Maybe it's because I'm one of those secular, atheist-types, but going on and on about how this is a "flagrant violation of the Geneva Convention" is self-defeating in the sense that it lowers my (and I'm sure many others') opinions of the document as a whole. I mean, would we prosecute an individual for burning a Bible, or a crucifix (in a strictly non-KKK way) on cable TV in the United States? It's similar to the asinine flag-burning debate. This is all IMO, and I'm sorry if I offend anyone, but it's crazy to me that people consider this some sort of gross international violation.
EDIT: Speaking flag burning, how does this relate to the discrimination based on nationality? Can we send notice to the Saudi or Jordanian governments that we disapprove of their people violating the Geneva Convention by willfully desecrating the American flag? It just all seems so asinine to me.
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
galeninjapan said:
Egypt. And it was awesome.
That's the thing, though -- it's not just "hurting their feelings". It's not the same as prosecuting someone for burning the Bible. It's a very serious offense.Nerevar said:
If I could draw an analogy to something like it in the West, I would, but as I said, I don't think we have anything that even remotely compares. As someone mentioned above I suppose it's sort of like the "piss Christ" to a devout Christian, but even worse because of the context of the prisoners and their jailers.
- Status