meandmy4? Posted December 1, 2007 Report Share Posted December 1, 2007 No I dont think she did Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyMalc Posted December 1, 2007 Report Share Posted December 1, 2007 Just found this link on the BBC website, which makes for interesting reading, and a strong reason why we wouldn't want to stop aid to Darfur. These dodgy geezers would love to watch their own people starve and blame the West for it. :angry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EGAR Posted December 1, 2007 Report Share Posted December 1, 2007 When I first came to Ireland, I knew SFA about the RC *habits* of the Irish and was quite appalled by open coffins in private houses at the wakes etc pp. It took me over a year to learn the basics of *appropriate* behaviour here in that small rural community, especially when it came to religious practises like wakes and *stations in the house*. I tried my best to oblige as much as I could but after the priest called me a *little pagan girl* in my neighbours house (at a *station*) I found it very hard to keep my peace. Any sort of religious fanatism gets my hackles up as alot of that is resposible for the unstable political situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheplover Posted December 2, 2007 Report Share Posted December 2, 2007 I find the whole thing saddenning. It is rare for me to make any comments regarding "the outside world" but this episode has really annoyed me. We have accepted being bombed, we have accepted living in a country which has changed - where we now have to queue for hours longer at airports because of new security rules, having armed policemen on the streets of london, stopping and checking cars, barracades around parliament, because that is the way we are. Although " a few" have been arrested over the bombings etc., it doesnt mean there aren't others ready to take their places. And this as a country we have accepted and just get on with it. We still even let people speak against us on Hyde Park Corner Im not saying we should stomp all over the world and do as we want, but I am also against sending aid to a country that cannot make rational decisions and whose religion to my mind is interpreted to suit the occasion for political gain. I agree that she may have unintentionally broken the law but lets be fair here - her class named a teddy bear after a common muslim name - she hasnt killed anyone, supplied or taken drugs, or indeed committed so bad a crime that the whole world needs to hear about it on the news but we have ac·cept (k-spt)v. ac·cept·ed, ac·cept·ing, ac·cepts v.tr. 1. To receive (something offered), especially with gladness or approval: accepted a glass of water; accepted their contract. 2. To admit to a group, organization, or place: accepted me as a new member of the club. 3. a. To regard as proper, usual, or right: Such customs are widely accepted. b. To regard as true; believe in: Scientists have accepted the new theory. c. To understand as having a specific meaning. 4. To endure resignedly or patiently: accept one's fate. 5. a. To answer affirmatively: accept an invitation. b. To agree to take (a duty or responsibility). 6. To be able to hold (something applied or inserted): This wood will not accept oil paints. 7. To receive officially: accept the committee's report. 8. To consent to pay, as by a signed agreement. 9. Medicine To receive (a transplanted organ or tissue) without immunological rejection. As is my understanding we have not 'accepted' anything. To accept is to agree, to take that something is inevitable, we should live with it. Who's accepted that we should/will be bombed?? There is also something called free speech, which is why you are legally allowed to say (what I think is very xenophobic and bitter) comments like yours posted above. You may not respect what someone says, but you respect their right to say it. New laws however prohibit speeches/actions that will stir up racial hatred or deliberately lead to someone using terror for political means. Why do you think Abu Hamza was arrested?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snow Posted December 2, 2007 Report Share Posted December 2, 2007 You may not respect what someone says, but you respect their right to say it. Indeed. However that was rather spoilt by the following: what I think is very xenophobic and bitter) comments like yours You may think the remarks are xenophobic and thats fine but as for "bitter"? I see absolutely no reason for you to ascribe that emotion to the posters words, she herself says she was "saddened" and "annoyed". If you do intend to go down the semantic arguments route it's advised that you tread carefully and ensure that you stick to discussing the issues and not the person posting an opposing viewpoint. Otherwise another thread goes *poof*. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotslass Posted December 2, 2007 Report Share Posted December 2, 2007 I also can't see that the (to us) "irrational" decisions made by the rulers of any nation are a reason to withdraw support from its people...if anything, they need our help even more. That's assuming of course that we in the UK have any right to hold the moral high ground and make such judgements; our own record on rational decision-making is hardly perfect. As I may have said before, we seem to have no problem with entertaining the masters of Saudi Arabia, whose people are subject to all kinds of (to us) abuse. I wonder why that is? To get back to the original question - I think we're agreed that she intended no slight to Islam. I think it is quite possible that certain clerics may be using the case to incite fear and hatred among their followers but I am conscious that we in the west are equally guilty of that kind of behaviour. It isn't our clerics who "incite", naturally, because religion isn't generally an issue in the UK; we let the popular press and certain political groups do it instead. Until we stop fearing each other, nothing will change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cycas Posted December 2, 2007 Report Share Posted December 2, 2007 I also can't see that the (to us) "irrational" decisions made by the rulers of any nation are a reason to withdraw support from its people...if anything, they need our help even more. I don't know enough about Sudan to be able to say if it applies in this case, but I believe there have been situations where governments have more or less been sustained by the injections of aid into their economies. Economic problems are, or course, terrible for the poorest members of society, but they can also precipitate political change. I'm not sure that stopping aid to Sudan is the right thing to do in this case, but I think the argument that says that there are many other places where aid would also be enormously valuable and help many people, and that it's perhaps not unreasonable to expect some cooperation from the authorities in Sudan does have some merit. One assumes the Sudanese government doesn't want to see an increase in poverty either. Though I suppose it may be making a calculated gamble that a potential loss of British aid might be more than compensated for by increased help from other parts of the world who are impressed by an anti-Western stance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyMalc Posted December 3, 2007 Report Share Posted December 3, 2007 Cycas, have a look at the link I posted above, the Sudanese government clearly doesn't give a sh*t bout their people Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murtle Posted December 3, 2007 Report Share Posted December 3, 2007 maybe a good way to get more support for the Sudanese government....and more aid for Darfur......?! who knows..... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7124447.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merledogs Posted December 3, 2007 Report Share Posted December 3, 2007 (edited) I saw a news report last night where the reporter said it was only a very small minority who wanted her executed and that a lot of people they spoke to off camera thought that the Sudanese government had overreacted. Edited December 3, 2007 by madmerle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jemimap Posted December 3, 2007 Report Share Posted December 3, 2007 She has been pardoned and released Linky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cycas Posted December 3, 2007 Report Share Posted December 3, 2007 Cycas, have a look at the link I posted above, the Sudanese government clearly doesn't give a sh*t bout their people Yes, I read it, but a) I'm really not convinced by one person's account of an entire administration, I'd want to know a lot more about the reporter and whether he has his own axe to grind b) if the Sudanese government are seriously that corrupt, all of them, then it seems to me very improbable that the aid is genuinely going where it's supposed to. c) if there's one principle that is particularly stressed in Islam, it's helping the poor. If Sudan are motivated by wanting to make a good impression on other Islamic powers, then if nobody else feeds their population, they will have to do it. I am glad to hear that she has been released. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts