Inciting racial hatred to burn the Quran.

[Gary L]

Police in Gateshead have arrested six people on suspicion of inciting racial hatred after a video appearing to show Qur'ans being burned appeared on the internet.
Officers from Northumbria police detained two men on 15 September and four more yesterday, a force spokesman said. All six have been bailed pending further inquiries.
"The arrests followed the burning of what are believed to have been two Qur'ans in Gateshead on 11 September," the spokesman said. "The incident was recorded and a video placed on the internet."
In a video posted on YouTube, six young men in hooded tops and scarves can be seen pouring petrol on a book and setting it alight, before burning another.
On the video, which appeared to have been filmed behind a pub, they cheer as the first book bursts into flames.
Northumbria police said the men were not arrested for watching or distributing the video, but on suspicion of burning the Qur'an.

Apart from religion and race being 2 seperate things. do you have to be another race to believe in the Quran?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010...-quran-burning

[Mr Angry]

Step back everyone...it's another attempt at starting a muslim bashing thread by the poster pretending they are "interested in debate" .

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

Step back everyone...it's another attempt at starting a muslim bashing thread by the poster pretending they are "interested" in "debate".

Get out of my thread.

---------- Post added 24-09-2010 at 00:04 ---------- Previous post was 23-09-2010 at 23:49 ----------

Northumbria police said the men were not arrested for watching or distributing the video, but on suspicion of burning the Qur'an.

They were arrested on suspicion of burning the Quran.so is it religious hatred or racial hatred, or is it free speech gone out the window?
burn the bible, burn the quran, burn a flag?

[Stuart]

We've never had true free speech in this country. It can't exist in any country purely due to the fact that if it did, the human race would quickly destroy itself.

We are, however, relatively free (compared to a lot of other countries) to express our opinions. But, with that freedom comes responsibility.

Burning the Qu'ran is offensive to muslims. In much the same way as burning The Bible would be offensive to Christians.

[Gary L]

But to some people any religious book is pages of mumbo jumbo. but burning the mumbo jumbo offends people.
but actually burning a picture of somebody, or burning a countries flag. we just standby and do nothing.

Is it even racial hatred burning either?
is it religious hatred then?
is it therefore an arrestable offence to criticise a religion?

Salman Rushdie was protected by the government when he criticised. but that was then and this is now.

[Mr Angry]

Shock!


Loaded racist / racism related question from GaryL who, when challenged, tries, rather pathetically, to move the goalposts.

Gary, let me simplify this for you mate.

Your original question was "do you have to be another race to believe in the Quran?"

The answer is "No".

Your second question "so is it religious hatred or racial hatred" is answered, funnily enough, in the first sentence of the originial article you linked to which states "Police in Gateshead have arrested six people on suspicion of inciting racial hatred".

The clue is in what the police arrested them for - which was "racial hatred".

Most adults understand that in the context of modern democracy "Free speech" does not give anyone the right to "burn the bible, burn the quran, burn a flag".

Yes, Salman Rushdie was protected by the government when he criticised Islam.

However, as you yourself have acknowledged, "that was then and this is now."

What is it that you don't understand about your own statement?

[Gary L]

Stop people. he's doing that thing where he's telling me he is right and I am wrong.

They were arrested on suspicion of burning a book.

[Mr Angry]

GaryL, you're obviously uneasy with being challenged.

Nowhere in this thread have I told you that you are "wrong". I have simply pointed out the contradictory anomalies contained within the "questions" which you "pose".

However, your unease at my having done so is entirely understandable given the transparent racist undertones of your self contradictory posts.

You've exposed yourself - and no end of feigned naivety or crass stupidity in the guise of attempted "humour" can disguise your intent with these posts.

Well done.

"They were arrested on suspicion of burning a book."

Again, you've answered your own "question" and exposed yourself as someone who pretends not to understand perfectly logical statements of fact just to excuse / facilitate your wanton desire to post loaded quasi rascist threads for the entertainment of yourself and a select few posters who consider CF to be their own little stormfront.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

Ah, you're obviously uneasy with being challenged.

Yes that'll be it. I usually lie down and die don't I?

We are what we call debating.

---------- Post added at 00:37 ---------- Previous post was at 00:34 ----------

Suppose the whole world was in a catonic state. would we still see an opportunity to create a divide. a divide that actually might not have been there, but we make sure it is split right down the middle by stepping in and calling one side them, and the other side us.

The muslims are offended. the christians are offended.
I'm neither. what help do I get as an atheist?

would anyone give a damn even, if we were all catonically occupied?

For the love of a sky pixie. I wish people would all spell the koran / quran / qu'ran in the same way!!!

Just what *is* the right way to spell it?

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Gary L

Yes that'll be it. I usually lie down and die don't I?

We are what we call debating.

I'm not suggesting that you normally lie down and die.

You do, however, skulk off when afforded any sort of indepth answer to your questions - as amply evidenced by chris's reply to your rather weak attempts to bait him on the matter of "temptation".

No Gary we are not debating.

Debating - beyond your concept of it - does not normally involve you answering / providing answers to your own "questions" without even having the wit to realize that you've done so.

That is more akin to psychosis than debate.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Tuftus

For the love of a sky pixie. I wish people would all spell the koran / quran / qu'ran in the same way!!!

Just what *is* the right way to spell it?

I think that everytime I see the word!

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Gary L

We are what we call debating.

Mr. A is debating. You are squirming, deflecting, dodging and ignoring the questions asked of you. Needless to say, you are not winning this 'debate' you speak of.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

You do, however, skulk off when afforded any sort of indepth answer to your questions - as amply evidenced by chris's reply to your rather weak attempts to bait him on the matter of "temptation".

WTF?! is this a troop gathering exercise?

and another thing. I can't keep up with you and take you seriously much when you keep editing your posts after I've commented on them. I keep reading additions or ammendments to them.

---------- Post added at 00:56 ---------- Previous post was at 00:54 ----------

Originally Posted by danielf

Mr. A is debating. You are squirming, deflecting, dodging and ignoring the questions asked of you. Needless to say, you are not winning this 'debate' you speak of.

Does somebody have to win?
will you win by closing the thread by posting pointless comments to it in order to get it closed?

[Mr Angry]

No Gary, it's not a troop gathering exercise - it's a fact.

You run away from cogent debate when your "arguments" are exposed for what they are.

What they are, in the main, are little more than thinly veiled attempts at stirring up racist malcontent or throwing insults at others by masking your disdain for them as some sort of half witted teenage theological debate on your part just because they might elect to follow a religious belief or faith.

No end of the use of "smilies" or glib comments / attempts at humour on your part will change the fact.

EDIT.

Contrary to your paranoia nobody is trying to close your thread. In fact now that you raise the matter you're quite capable of asking that the thread be closed should you wish to do so given the fact that you've answered all of the "questions" you asked in your initial post within the first two posts you made.