Hihihi.... Quran itu bilang lu hrs ngasih bini lu ke nabi kalo dia naksir bini lu kayak si Zaid ngasih bininya.
Kitab kayak gitu hrs dibakar apa kagak? ________________________________ From: ndeboost <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Fri, April 8, 2011 10:29:25 AM Subject: [proletar] Re: More On Koran Burning Kalau bapakmu ngasihkan ibumu, yang waktu itu baru dinikah, meski gratis-tis ga bekalan keterima karena nurutin Al Qur'an. Namun ga tahu kalau ke bangsanya kebo, yg ga (mau) tahu ada tuntunannya. --- In [email protected], item abu <itemabu@...> wrote: > > Hehehe.... emangnya apa salahnya ngebakar kitab yg ngehalalin merkosa, > pedophilia, ngerampok, ngebunuh, perbudakan, ngibul dll? > > > > > > > ________________________________ > From: ndeboost rambitesemak@... > To: [email protected] > Sent: Thu, April 7, 2011 5:36:01 PM > Subject: [proletar] Re: More On Koran Burning > > > Kertas Al Qur'an kurang empuk sbg pengganti roll-tissue. Ada kok yg > lebih pas, dan lebih tebal lagi. Apa lagi bila sdh kedaluwarsa, > ketimbang menuhin lemari. > > Utk dipakai kompos? Ga ekonomis. Disamping labourous juga mahal. Satu Al > Qur'an (atau buku sucimu) bekas bisa utk beli 10 kg kompos siap pakai. > Bahan hidro karbon perlu lk 3 bulan (cara standard) agar jadi kompos. > Namun kalau ngotot, ya boleh juga. 'Mangnya @dapurmu perlu komopos? Utk > make up? Utk dimakan? Kompos ga baik utk pencernaanmu, kecuali kamu ikut > Nabi Nuh saat banjir besar. Perahunya terkatung-katung, KATEBE, hampir > setahun. Ga ada pemasok nawarin logistik, jadi makanan yg di stok either > habis, jadi kompos atau penumpangnya saling mangsa. > > Utk dibakar? Polusi. Utk bahan bakar mungkin lebih baik. Sekalian mainan > abunya, ketimbang "mainan" semangka. Kamu kan masa kecil ga bahagia? > Atau kamuflase, stok (sisa) Al Qur'an palsu pura-puranya dibakar, > ketimbang ketahuan petugas dan jadi masalah legal. Kan tetangga > seringnya malsu Al Qur'an? > > Keknya ga ada umat Islam pada malsu atau mbakarin Bibel. Biasanya yg > dipalsu kwalitasnya sangat bagus. mBakarin Bibel? Wekekekek.., sayang. > Kan di simpan bisa jadi barang antik? > > Cuma nDeboost pengin tahu, mbakar dan melecehkan Al Qur'an 'mangnya > ajaran Yesus apa iblis? > > --- In [email protected], item abu itemabu@ wrote: > > > > Gua pribadi sih ga setuju kalo Quran dibakar begitu aja, itu cuma > ngerusak > > alam, nambah karbon dioksida dan nyia2kan kertas yg dibuat dr pohon. > > > > Drpd Quran dibakar begitu aja, mendingan Quran itu dipake kertasnya > buat > > bersihin pantat abis beol misalnya. Atau, bisa jg Quran dibuang ke dlm > tempat > > taik biar cepat jadi kompos. > > > > Betul ga tuh yg gua bilang? > > > > > > > http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/263916/more-koran-burning-andrew-c-\ \ > mccarthy > > > > > > More On Koran Burning > > April 5, 2011 10:59 A.M. > > By Andrew C. McCarthy > > Jonah, my problem with the Koran burning stunt is that it is > > counterproductive. I hear what you’re saying about decency. But > on that score, > > I don’t find the burning any more offensive in principle than I > do its opposite > > extreme: the bizarro hyper-reverence with which the Koran is handled > by the > > Defense Department. > > Down at Gitmo, the Defense Department gives the Koran to each of the > terrorists > > even though DoD knows they interpret it (not without reason) to > command them to > > kill the people who gave it to them. To underscore our precious > sensitivity to > > Muslims, standard procedure calls for the the book to be handled only > by Muslim > > military personnel. Sometimes, though, that is not possible for > various > > reasons. If, as a last resort, one of our non-Muslim troops must > handle or > > transport the book, he must wear white gloves, and he is further > instructed > > primarily to use the right hand (indulging Muslim culture’s > taboo about the > > sinister left hand). The book is to be conveyed to the prisoners in a > â€Å"reverent > > manner� inside a â€Å"clean dry towel.� This is a > nod to Islamic teaching that > > infidels are so low a form of life that they should not be touched > (as > > Ayatollah Ali Sistani teaches, non-Muslims are â€Å"considered in > the same > > category as urine, feces, semen, dead bodies, blood, dogs, pigs, > alcoholic > > liquors,� and â€Å"the sweat of an animal who persistently > eats [unclean things].� > > This is every bit as indecent as torching the Koran, implicitly > endorsing as it > > does the very dehumanization of non-Muslims that leads to terrorism. > > Furthermore, there is hypocrisy to consider: the Defense Department > now piously > > condemning Koran burning is the same Defense Department that itself > did not > > give a second thought to confiscating and burning bibles in > Afghanistan. > > Quite consciously, U.S. commanders ordered this purge in deference to > sharia > > proscriptions against the proselytism of faiths other than Islam. And > as > > General Petraeus well knows, his chain of command is not the only one > destroying > > bibles. Non-Muslim religious artifacts, including bibles, are torched > or > > otherwise destroyed in Islamic countries every single day as a matter > of > > standard operating procedure. (See, e.g., my 2007 post on Saudi > government > > guidelines that prohibit Jews and Christians from bringing bibles, > crucifixes, > > Stars of David, etc., into the country â€" and, of course, not > just non-Muslim > > accessories but non-Muslim people are barred from entering Mecca and > most of > > Medina, based on the classical interpretation of an injunction found > in what > > Petraeus is fond of calling the Holy Qur’an (sura 9:28: > â€Å"Truly the pagans are > > unclean . . . so let them not . . . approach the sacred > mosque�). > > I don’t like book burning either, but I think there are > different kinds of book > > burnings. One is done for purposes of censorship â€" the attempt > to purge the > > world of every copy of a book to make it as if the sentiments > expressed never > > existed. A good modern example is Cambridge University Press’s > shameful pulping > > of all known copies of Alms for Jihad (see Stanley’s 2007 post > on that). The > > other kind of burning is done as symbolic condemnation. That’s > what I think > > Terry Jones was doing. He knows he doesn’t have the ability to > purge the Koran > > from the world, and he wasn’t trying to. He was trying to > condemn some of the > > ideas that are in it â€" or maybe he really thinks the whole > thing is > > condemnable. > > This is a particularly aggressive and vivid way to express disdain, > but I don’t > > know that it is much different in principle from orally condemning > some of the > > Koran’s suras and verses. Sura 9 of the Koran, for example, > states the > > supremacist doctrine that commands Muslims to kill and conquer > non-Muslims > > (e.g., 9:5: â€Å"But when the forbidden months are past, then > fight and slay the > > pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie > in wait > > for them in every stratagem (of war) . . .�; 9:29: > â€Å"Fight those who believe not > > in Allah nor the last day, nor hold forbidden which hath been > forbidden by > > Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, from > among the > > people of the Book [i.e., the Jews and Christians], until they pay > the jizya > > [i.e., the tax paid for the privilege of living as dhimmis under the > protection > > of the sharia state] with willing submission, and feel themselves > subdued�). I > > must say, I’ve got a much bigger problem with the people > trying to comply with > > those commands than with the guy who burns them. > > I think the big problem with what Jones did is the gratuitous insult > to all > > Muslims, including the millions who do not subscribe to the violent > jihadist or > > broader Islamist construction of Islamic scripture. They have found > some way to > > rationalize the incendiary scriptures â€" and if it works for > them, who the hell > > am I to say they’re wrong? They are our natural allies in this > battle, and as > > I’ve often pointed out, without their help, we could not have > done things like > > infiltrate the Blind Sheikh’s terror cell, gather vital > intelligence, thwart > > terrorist attacks, and refine trial evidence into compelling proof. > > These people regard the Koran as the most important of their > scriptures. When > > someone burns the Koran in an act of indiscriminate, wholesale > condemnation, > > the message to them is that their belief system is incorrigible. > Freedom of > > speech means that we have to allow that argument to be made, and > I’m not > > entirely sure it’s wrong. But good Muslim people give us > reason to hope that > > what ails Islam can be reformed. I don’t see the upside in > alienating those > > people. I think you can condemn the condemnable aspects of the Koran > without > > condemning everything. But that’s just my opinion, and Mr. > Jones is as entitled > > to his as I am to mine. And for what it’s worth, I doubt my > opinion would be > > much more popular than his in Mazar-e-Sharif. > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ Post message: [email protected] Subscribe : [email protected] Unsubscribe : [email protected] List owner : [email protected] Homepage : http://proletar.8m.com/Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
