Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 95

Thread: Now this, if true, is indeed astonishing!

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Ummon's Avatar Indefinitely Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    19,146

    Default Now this, if true, is indeed astonishing!

    Shortened, translated version. Danish shortened untranslated original here: http://www.jp.dk/indland/artikel:aid=3599524:fid=11364/

    On various blogs we have these translations:
    http://piagratia.blogspot.com/2006/0...n-germany.html
    http://democracyfrontline.org/news/?p=182
    http://sixdaysmore.blogspot.com/2006...ny-awakes.html

    The Quran reported to the Police

    By Kent Olsen, correspondent to Jyllands-Posten

    A broad alliance of grass-roots movements have gone to the prosecutors of several states to hinder the dissemination of the Quran. According to the indictment, the Quran is not just a religious and historic book, but also a political book, which is incompatible with the constiution.

    Berlin

    At the prosecutor’s office at Gorch-Forck-Wall 15 in Hamburg, an unusual letter was received Monday morning, containing an indictment filed this weekend. The indictment targeted the Quran, charging that the holy book of the Moslems, according to the accuser, is incompatible with the German constitution.

    The accuser is “Bundesverband der Bürgerbewegungen (BVB)”, which concerns itself with, in its own words, “defending basic rights and freedoms” against Islam. The extensive international furore, allegedly caused by the Muhammed cartoons, has made clear the relevancy of the alliance. Its homepage is decorated with a Danish flag with the words “Support Denmark! Defend the Free World.” superimposed on it.

    The indictment has been filed in several states, including Hamburg, Niedersachsen, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Bayern and probably more.

    In several talkshows on German TV, conservative politicians have pointed out that the Quran is incompatible with the German constitution. The Turkish-born writer Serap Cileli said on January 29 this year that “the Quran must be considered a historic document. It is not compatible with our constitution and Human Rights.”

    Now the alliance wants the matter tried at the courts.

    Potent Political Book
    The author of the indictment in Hamburg, Jutta Starke, says that the Quran was reported to the police two or three years ago, but that the report was dismissed on the grounds that it was a book of only historical interest.

    “The events of the last months have made clear that the Quran isn’t just a historical book, but very much a potent political book, a thing which we document extensively in the indictment,” Jutta Starke says.

    She says it is a task of sisyphean dimensions to inform the media, politicians and churches of the true intentions of Islam in the enlightened world of the West.

    “We are grateful to Jyllands-Posten that discussions about Islam have now become possible,” says Jutta Starke.

    “You suffer for all of Europe and that’s why we find it indecent that Europe hasn’t loudly, in unison, taken a stand for Freedom of Speech against the laws of the Quran.”

    The indictment consists of five pieces of paper and a number of appendices. The indictment says that it is not against Islam’s spiritual message, but against the judicial and political message.

    The decisive count of the indictment “is in the Quran’s status vis a vis the Federal Republic of Germany’s constitution”. In the appendices to the indictment, 200 points have been listed “where the Quran is against and claims itself above the constitution.”

    The Quran has an Answer to Everything
    It is pointed out that the Quran to Moslems is the end all, be all in matters of faith, in matters of society and state and in the discourse with people of different views. The Quran says that it is the words of Allah. According to the views of several, including leading, Moslems in Germany, it is literally and absolutely true at all time and in all places, the indictment says.

    The newly elected German-born chairman of the Moslem Central Council of German, Ayyub Axel Köhler, is quoted in the indictment:

    “A constitution after the principle of the division of powers into the legislative, the executive and the judicial powers, is nowhere to be found in the Islamic theory of the State. From an Islamic viewpoint, this is obvious, since the laws - the laws of God - in the form of sharia, are already made and thus no legislative power is needed, in that sense of the word. Only Allah is the legislative power.”

    Muslim Chancellor
    A prominent Moslem, Ibrahim El-Zayat, is quoted as saying that he thinks it is possible that “the Federal Chancellor in 2020 is a Moslem, born and raised in Germany, that the Federal Supreme Court has a Moslem judge, and that a Moslem representative will be on the Federal Radio/TV Council to secure the Moslem citizens’ constitutionally guaranteed rights.”

    “This land is our land and it is our duty to make positive changes. With the help of Allah, we will make it a paradise on Earth, by making available the Islamic ummah (ED: Islamic community) and all of mankind. Allah doesn’t change the situation of a people till the people have changed the situtation,” El-Zayad is quoted as saying.

    Violence against the Infidels
    The indictment is against the 200 verses of 114 suras (ED:chapters) of the Quran that are not compatible with the constitution, including demagoguery, incitement to murder, murder and mutilation, war, acceptance of thievery against infidels, meaning all non-Moslems. Verses are also pointed out where the equal rights of men and women are not upheld and where people of different faiths are oppressed.

    Example: “The unbelievers among the People of the Book (Jews and Christians): They are the vilest of all creatures.” (Sura 98:6)

    According to the indictment that paragraph violates Article 4 of the Constitution and Paragraph 166 of the Penal Code.
    Comments?

  2. #2

    Default

    Trying to get a religious book banned is not a good thing, but I am glad that some one has the guts to do it!
    Muslims would probably try to the exact same thing if the bible said that we must kill all non-muslims. Petty arguements like these are part of Europe now and are only going to get worse....

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Perikles
    Trying to get a religious book banned is not a good thing, but I am glad that some one has the guts to do it!
    Muslims would probably try to the exact same thing if the bible said that we must kill all non-muslims. Petty arguements like these are part of Europe now and are only going to get worse....
    jp, I just want to make this clear, so I will use everything I can to do it.

    The Qu'ran does not say Christians should be killed or segregated. They are not infidels. Non-"believers" are. How many times shall I say it?
    Last edited by Perikles; April 21, 2007 at 04:45 AM.

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacus-Popat
    jp, I just want to make this clear, so I will use everything I can to do it.

    The Qu'ran does not say Christians should be killed or segregated. They are not infidels. Non-"believers" are. How many times shall I say it?
    Thank you for clarifying this. If I remember correctly though in the Qu'ran it says that Christians and Jews maybe allowed to practice their own religion, as long as they follow some humiliating rules(can't remember them off the top of my head). I'm quite sure it also says that Idol worshipers and those who believe in more than one god are infidels and should be killed.
    If any one knows any better than I do, please correct me.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Al-Baqara 2:62
    Those who have attained to faith [in this divine writ], as well as those who follow the Jewish faith, and the christians, and the Sabians -all who believe in God and the Last Day and do righteous deeds-shall have their reward with their Sustainer; and no fear need they have, and neither shall they grieve.
    Quote Originally Posted by Al-Baqara (The Cow) 2:111
    And they claim, "None shall ever enter paradise if he be a Jew" - or, "a christian". Such are their wishful beliefs! Say: "Produce an evidence for what you are claiming, if what you say is true!"
    However, there are a few quotes condemning Jewish/Christian actions in Rome.

  6. #6

    Default

    Burn the bible! Burn the Q'uran! Burn the Torah!

  7. #7
    Ummon's Avatar Indefinitely Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    19,146

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacus-Popat
    However, there are a few quotes condemning Jewish/Christian actions in Rome.
    There are other, worse things as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by RZZZA
    Burn the bible! Burn the Q'uran! Burn the Torah!
    Well, that wouldn't be exactly what we are stygmatizing them (and not all equally) for? :wink:

    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacus-Popat
    Yes, lets. Funny, no-one mentions the Vedas, or Bhagavat-Gita, or Guru Granth Sahib. These are major religions, yet remain unnoticed. Does an act of barbarity bring a religion into the world?

    Meh, off topic...
    They aren't mentioned probably, because they aren't well known. What I know of hindu texts seemed to me very positive and interesting, on the other hand.

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Perikles
    Thank you for clarifying this. If I remember correctly though in the Qu'ran it says that Christians and Jews maybe allowed to practice their own religion, as long as they follow some humiliating rules(can't remember them off the top of my head). I'm quite sure it also says that Idol worshipers and those who believe in more than one god are infidels and should be killed.
    If any one knows any better than I do, please correct me.

    Yes, the humiliating terms are that they must wear turbans and dance for Muslims every night.
    Read Spartacus-Popat's post.
    Last edited by Perikles; April 21, 2007 at 04:44 AM.
    Death be not proud, though some have called thee
    Mighty and dreadful, for, thou art not so.

  9. #9
    Ummon's Avatar Indefinitely Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    19,146

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sextus Loverlord
    Yes, the humiliating terms are that they must wear turbans and dance for Muslims every night.
    Read Spartacus-Popat's post.
    I fear, not true. There are terms in the Quran and Hadiths, including the payement of extra taxes and lesser rights. The lessened duties reflect in a dimished capability to wear arms as well, which is a way to further submit them. Christian men as witnesses for example are worth 1/2 of a muslim man in a process (as much as a muslim woman) and Christian women 1/4. Etc.

  10. #10

    Default

    Look at Iraq...what a hellhole, the circumstances of which are the fault of RELIGION. Religious differences is whats causing Iraqi's to take a break from killing heathen Americans to killing fellow Iraqi's. I'm not saying that I wish Iraqi's would unify, cuz I dont know what would come of that, I just wish all the religious nuts would sit down and STFU for once. But they dont, Religion and faith is all some of these people have...its more important to them than living.


    Burn!

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Perikles
    Thank you for clarifying this. If I remember correctly though in the Qu'ran it says that Christians and Jews maybe allowed to practice their own religion, as long as they follow some humiliating rules(can't remember them off the top of my head). I'm quite sure it also says that Idol worshipers and those who believe in more than one god are infidels and should be killed.
    If any one knows any better than I do, please correct me.
    There are no humiliating rules. If they are living in a Muslim country, they have to pay an extra tax and can not join the army.

    Adnan
    Last edited by Perikles; April 21, 2007 at 04:44 AM.

  12. #12

    Default

    Is that not humiliating? To have to pay extra compared to your fellow man because you are different? If not humiliating, it is segregation.

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MasterAdnin
    There are no humiliating rules. If they are living in a Muslim country, they have to pay an extra tax and can not join the army.

    Adnan
    Don't we have Hindus in our army? I read this article about the first Sikh officer in the Pakistan army. Search the Dawn website.
    Death be not proud, though some have called thee
    Mighty and dreadful, for, thou art not so.

  14. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MasterAdnin
    There are no humiliating rules. If they are living in a Muslim country, they have to pay an extra tax and can not join the army.

    Adnan
    As Spartacus-Popat said, 'Is that not humiliating?' Having to pay a tax based on your religion is wrong and is definitely humiliating.
    If here in Britain we created a tax just for muslims there would be an out cry, I know this is a 'religious' law but this is also the '21st century'.

  15. #15

    Default

    The banning of any book is wrong. Acts should be disallowed, but not thoughts. When we go down that road, we become a post literrate society that only remembers what was said on the last talk show. Books are integral to free speech.
    I won't argue that leading people to violence is wrong, but many people also interpret violent things out of the christian bible. The KKK for example. Islamists agree that the Quran is right at all times, but they don't go around murdering innocent people (barring terrorist groups of course, but they're no better than the KKK). All books are open to interpretation.

    This very proposal is an avatar of what I consider to be a real problem within our society. Workarounds. The government sometimes stops people doing something by force, instead of simply telling them not to, and why it's wrong. People might interpret violence out of the quran, so the proposal is to ban it outright, not to help people interpret a nonviolent way of worship. My grandmother lives in a quiet little village in France, and through it goes this placid river that's wonderful to fish in, and great ot swim in. Now, however, there's a fat sign informing us taht swimming is not allowed and you are liable to a hefty fine if you try. If you go to the city council, you'll be told (sharply) that it's dirty. How dirty? Dirty as in drop a hand in it and out comes a stump? Dirty as in drink 25 litres of the water and you'll get a mild flu? Just dirty, they say. Go away.
    In case you care, it's safe to swim in, but not to drink in large quantities
    I don't need a nanny for a government. I don't need a bar stopping me getting to the tracks when a metro isn't at the station. I can figure out for myself that jumping in isn't a good idea. (that's a bad example. It might save a disabled person's life I guess)
    Shouldn't we be steering for a government that quietly gives us information and perhaps a little advice, instead of making the decisions for us?

    edit: woops hellheaven beat me to it

  16. #16
    hellheaven1987's Avatar Comes Domesticorum
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    The Hell called Conscription
    Posts
    35,615

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kid
    The banning of any book is wrong. Acts should be disallowed, but not thoughts. When we go down that road, we become a post literrate society that only remembers what was said on the last talk show. Books are integral to free speech.
    I won't argue that leading people to violence is wrong, but many people also interpret violent things out of the christian bible. The KKK for example. Islamists agree that the Quran is right at all times, but they don't go around murdering innocent people (barring terrorist groups of course, but they're no better than the KKK). All books are open to interpretation.

    This very proposal is an avatar of what I consider to be a real problem within our society. Workarounds. The government sometimes stops people doing something by force, instead of simply telling them not to, and why it's wrong. People might interpret violence out of the quran, so the proposal is to ban it outright, not to help people interpret a nonviolent way of worship. My grandmother lives in a quiet little village in France, and through it goes this placid river that's wonderful to fish in, and great ot swim in. Now, however, there's a fat sign informing us taht swimming is not allowed and you are liable to a hefty fine if you try. If you go to the city council, you'll be told (sharply) that it's dirty. How dirty? Dirty as in drop a hand in it and out comes a stump? Dirty as in drink 25 litres of the water and you'll get a mild flu? Just dirty, they say. Go away.
    In case you care, it's safe to swim in, but not to drink in large quantities
    I don't need a nanny for a government. I don't need a bar stopping me getting to the tracks when a metro isn't at the station. I can figure out for myself that jumping in isn't a good idea. (that's a bad example. It might save a disabled person's life I guess)
    Shouldn't we be steering for a government that quietly gives us information and perhaps a little advice, instead of making the decisions for us?
    It is because Quran never teaches people go aroung and kill innocent. The weakness of Quran, is it doesn't tell you anything exactly. You can explain one sentence in different way. For example, "Jihad" in Quran has two meanings, the higher one means to practice your soul into more peaceful stage, just like what do the monks do. The lower jihad means physical way, which means protecting youself if some enemy attack you first. Both I all agree. But some people may explain it to another way, they may explain the lower jihad as a way to conquer unbelieving people, which cause what happen today.
    Quote Originally Posted by Markas View Post
    Hellheaven, sometimes you remind me of King Canute trying to hold back the tide, except without the winning parable.
    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    Cameron is midway between Black Rage and .. European Union ..

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Perikles
    Trying to get a religious book banned is not a good thing, but I am glad that some one has the guts to do it!
    Muslims would probably try to the exact same thing if the bible said that we must kill all non-muslims. Petty arguements like these are part of Europe now and are only going to get worse....
    Where as the bible merely states that if you arent a god fearing catholic your going to hell.

    Yes.... MUCH better obviously.



    Athieism 4 teh win.
    Last edited by Perikles; April 21, 2007 at 04:41 AM.

  18. #18
    mongoose's Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    USA, Connecticut.
    Posts
    2,429

    Default

    I hardly think that it should be banned or anything, but it's an awful book that condones unimaginable evil(I'm assuming that it's alot like the OT, if it's not, then I take that statement back.) You'll say the samething about the OT and even parts of the NT, and I would agree. They're both evil, but neither should be banned. We can read Mein Kampf if we want to, after all.

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mongoose
    I hardly think that it should be banned or anything, but it's an awful book that condones unimaginable evil(I'm assuming that it's alot like the OT, if it's not, then I take that statement back.) You'll say the samething about the OT and even parts of the NT, and I would agree. They're both evil, but neither should be banned. We can read Mein Kampf if we want to, after all.
    Have you read the Quran? Or for that matter, have you read the Old Testament? Neither support violence or evil, in fact, the purpose of them is to stop violence and evil.

    Adnan

  20. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MasterAdnin
    Have you read the Quran? Or for that matter, have you read the Old Testament? Neither support violence or evil, in fact, the purpose of them is to stop violence and evil.

    Adnan
    The New Testament is less violent than the Old Testament.
    The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be used until they try and take it away.
    Staff Officer of Corporal_Hicks in the Legion of Rahl
    Commanding Katrina, Crimson Scythe, drak10687 and Leonidas the Lion

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •