Time for contemplation

Posted by Picasa
Good and bad to me are relative. Like when one thing is considered bad in a specific situation, it could be good in another. Like lying for instance or even stealing; they strike us as bad yet we practice them when we feel that it’s best for a specific situation. So is good a propensity in humans? Or do we need set rules to direct us? In other wards; can a human being naturally differentiate between good and evil / situation? Or does he need rules and regulations to strictly follow regardless of the situation?

31 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. Papillona ®
    Nov 18, 2005 @ 13:43:00

    We don’t need rules. We all know bad. We can see bad and we can feel it. We know it’s bad when we feel guilty about it. It usually happens once you strongly go against your values and beliefs. We totally know what’s bad by nature.

    Values naturally differ from one to another. So what’s “good” to you could mean “bad” to me or vice versa. Sometimes “bad” and “good” could be relative just as you mentioned.

    What rules should we follow? Who’d set those rules? Based on what?
    Perhaps based on God’s standards of righteousness you can judge yourself to see what’s bad and what’s good which could also differ according to one’s beliefs and ethics.

    Rules and regulation were set for those who have no values. Those who would do anything regardless of consequences. Government can however deter “bad” by punishing those who kill, steal etc.. in a way or another.

    But how about other kind of “bad” that neither a government nor anybody can punish you for?

    you know, I can go on and on and on..


  2. 9oot
    Nov 18, 2005 @ 14:56:00

    Good and bad depends on what you have been taught and grow up believing in. So, for instance if your father is a crook and you grew up learning his ways, then you would see it as ok. (E.g.: government officials who take bribery and see it as an extra income they deserve, since the government salaries are low).
    I truly believe that good can be distinguished easily if only we would listen to our hearts. And its part of human nature as is evil. Never the less, rules are necessary to protect the rights of others and not to restrict our freedom. Only the basics of ethics can be regulated, the rest is up to the individuals.
    Finally, you need to remember that if we were all good, then life would be terribly boring.


  3. Temetwir
    Nov 18, 2005 @ 17:38:00

    human beings are born knowing whats right and whats wrong

    above hypothesis is based on the connotation between purity slash innocence and children

    given that el denya imte7aan, humans are bound to come across a lot of misleading things in the journey of life

    those who switch and keep taking the path with which “life” leads them, will not care whether something is bad or not – that doesnt necessarily mean they dont know it

    OTOH, the best thing anyone can strive for is to be as near as possible to the maximal projection of child innocence (NOT NAIVETY – I INSIST), which in other words, is the closest thing to the original manner of human-conduct

    how does one learn to do so? i propose it is only thru religion


  4. mishari26
    Nov 18, 2005 @ 18:07:00

    I think the original root of everything we unanimously call good or bad comes to us from God through his messengers. Like, who invented marriage? who invented “killing the killer”? why is stealing bad? what are the rules of possession? when does something transfer ownership in a “good” way? who set these rules? there are some things we all agree are bad or good, and I don’t see how those concepts could have evolved into human societies.

    Excellent topic AyyA. regardless of where one stands, its a very interesting subject to me atleast.


  5. meWHO!
    Nov 19, 2005 @ 00:39:00

    I think a human being knows right from wrong..and it depends on the enviroment and the socity if we want to look at smaller things..I think rules should be defined from a combinitation of common sense and the culture..and rules that are written in books should be looked at when you get confused and really cant make a choice or differentiate between right and wrong.


  6. Erzulie
    Nov 19, 2005 @ 13:55:00

    I don’t think good and bad are relative. They’re intertwined with religion, culture, traditions, and so forth. However, I do believe that everyone has that nagging gut feeling, that little itch that knows which path to walk on. Also, it’s based on the situation at hand. And by the way, I love your layout 🙂


  7. AyyA
    Nov 19, 2005 @ 17:39:00

    “We can see bad and we can feel it” very interesting. So what you are saying is that “bad” gives us negative emotions and I assume that “good” on the other hand gives us positive emotions. But what are emotions? Can we define them? Where do they come from? What is their original source? And where do you get your values and beliefs? Ok, you answered that: nature. And what I also understood is that you are saying that “God’s standards of righteousness” is natural and that we humans do not need standardized ethics to guide us because these beliefs we are born with, we have them embedded within us. Now this should apply to all humans I suppose, then who are the ones with “no values”, unless you mean that we humans are born with values and tend to neglect them as we grow older. In this case society rules should be applied to the ones that are caught in the bad act as per their standards. But dear standards differ from one society to another, and I believe that religion is the main cause for that and not common sense.

    Although a role model (father, teacher, mentor, etc) can have an impact on one, but it is not necessarily true that they will end up like them. And the evidence is clear; we see a lot of sons who would not want to copy their fathers and are skeptical about their behavior. So when you said one should listen to one’s heart I assume you mean that good is a natural trait, but is evil natural? I doubt that, otherwise the majority will feel good when they do bad and again good and bad here are relative to one’s beliefs. Where does he get such beliefs? And yes, I do agree with you “rules are necessary to protect the rights of others and not to restrict our freedom” but does that mean that religious laws are not acceptable? Or, man made laws would suffice?

    I do see your point; a human being is born with a natural tendency to differentiate between good and bad, but other factors affects his innate beliefs as he grows. So in this case he has to have a reference to get him back on track. But what makes you think that religion is the only source to get your lost soul back? Crime cases did not differentiate between religious and non-religious people. Wouldn’t it be more logical if he goes back to his original “child innocence” ? go back into himself and purify it? And since it is embedded in there somewhere, can’t he retrieve it?

    “I think the original root of everything we unanimously call good or bad comes to us from God through his messengers” how did you get this belief? Societies had laws even before god send his messengers. In fact way back to the Stone Age, they were man made and gradually modified to suit each society. History had proved that conventional religion did not have any significant effect on human morals.

    Rules that are written in books? What books?


  8. AyyA
    Nov 19, 2005 @ 17:54:00

    How do you explain what we term as “the white lie” then? Or when someone has to steal to save his family from starvation?
    PS. Thank you sweetie 🙂


  9. Temetwir
    Nov 19, 2005 @ 18:05:00

    yes but “child innocence” has the connotation of everything “noble” and “kind” in adults

    again, i reinsist on it not being naivety.. and thus, how would man retrieve what is lost if it were not guided?

    guided, i say, but by whom? if it is the case that guidance thru fellow man – then we are faced with the fact/question: ‘what if the man dictating such guidance is not in his purest form neither?’

    we go in a circular eternal loop just becoz we cannot decide who is ‘worthy’ of such a task of guidance..

    however we save ourselves a lot of trouble – this is where the english term ‘leap of faith’ comes in – when we risk it all and believe in something larger, ie God (notice am not saying Allah sob7aanah 3alashan i dont make this more controversial than it is)

    now.. if Mishari26 would allow me, i read what u said to him and here is my take:

    u say “society had rules before god sent his messengers” .. how so? if the first “human” was a messenger himself, naby allah Adam .. how can it be that society ever had rules BEFORE messengers?

    ofcourse, just because a messenger is present does not ensure eternal peace and harmony and all things good.. otherwise, shlon el denya tekon imte7aan?

    for this i argue: naby Allah nou7, or Lou6 for example.. and MANY MANY others

    do we suggest that because their “people” have not abided to their message then surely their messages werent ‘good enough’?

    on the contrary, i believe that this proves my point that it is those few who actually long for the ‘age of innocence’ and pure-form that follow


  10. 9oot
    Nov 19, 2005 @ 20:17:00

    My dear ayya, evil is natural as good. And some “so called bad” can actually make us feel good. E.g. killing some one for revenge ( according to the laws, we should let the authorities do that), having sex without marriage (unacceptable by all religions), stealing what you think is rightfully yours and offer it to the poor ( Robin Hood), …….

    As for the question of which laws?: some of the religious laws are acceptable but not all. Laws can be a combination of both, man made and religious, whatever makes sense to the wise. Mind you, some religious laws can be very acceptable in this day and age, IT IS THE FORM OF THIS PUNESHMENT THAT IS NOT.


  11. Papillona ®
    Nov 19, 2005 @ 22:39:00

    “standards differ from one society to another, and I believe that religion is the main cause for that and not common sense” I totally agree.

    Ayya, the thing is there’s no clear cut. nothing is definite in this issue. ilmas2ala nesbeyya.

    and to answer your question, I found something interesting..

    Where Do Emotions Come From?
    “The word emotion is a fascinating word. Look at it this way: E-motion, or Energy, put into motion. That is what our emotions do. They move energy and bring things into motion, or manifestation. The force behind what we feel is what allows us to create. First we have our thought, or perception. But it is the emotional energy, the fuel, that allows something to get created. “I felt so strongly that I just had to rush out and do it”. Therefore, to create in a positive way, we must generate positive emotions from clear thoughts and perceptions.

    Thought triggers emotion. See what kind of thoughts you are thinking, and what kind of emotion that creates. Tune into how you feel. Use all your senses to ask if something doesn’t feel right or comfortable in the way you are responding or feeling. If you don’t like the emotion you are feeling, change the thoughts you are thinking that are the reason for you creating that emotion. Get a new perspective, in other words. Healing comes from taking responsibility: to realise that it is you – and no-one else – that creates your thoughts, your feelings, and your actions. “

    I don’t really believe we were born with values or beliefs. We gather those values and beliefs as we grow and learn more about life. It sure differs from one person to another. Different societies, different religions and also experiences.. So it all depends on one’s mentality and ability to change or accept things as they come.

    “Those who have no values” are the ones who “change” their values constantly. You know you could always change your openions, but never change values.

    ok let me make it easier..

    i.e. you believe that stealing is bad (value) but one day you change your mind and you convince yourself it’s good under certain circumstances. You can’t consider yourself having values if you keep changing them every now and then depending on your situation.

    I told you I could go on and on..


  12. Misguided
    Nov 20, 2005 @ 03:50:00

    Dearest AyyA,

    Your question has been pondered time and time again throughout history. It is a question we could sit and talk about for hours on end, days… and likely never come to a complete answer. It is a question about life and how we choose to lead it.

    If you consider for a minute that the basic things that are considered evil or bad… that affect life negatively… then most would agree that Death, poverty and pain are bad….

    But even those one could argue against… Some believe that pain during illness cleanses the soul of sin, that poverty makes people worry less about vain possessions,…. even death is considered by some better than life. The ancient greeks when battling the armies of persia… chose death over changing greek laws to persian ones.

    There is an Ancient greek saying that says:

    “Men are tormented not by things themselves, but by the way they think of them”.

    How we judge things good and evil… where it comes from… where does consciousness reside in our psyche is a huge topic.

    But… because I like you I will leave you with this small pearl of wisdom.

    Montaigne took 20 years to finally complete his 850 page essays… his last essay “On experience” is probably the best summary of it all, and the most revealing… here is 2 short excerpts from that essay:

    “To compose our character is our duty, not compose books, and to win, not battles and provinces, but order and tranquility in our conduct. Our great and glorious masterpiece is to live appropriately. All other things, ruling, hoarding, building, are only little appendages and props, at most.”

    “It is an absolute perfection and virtually divine to know how to enjoy our being rightfully. We seek other conditions because we do not understand the use of our own, and go outside of ourselves because we do not know what it is like inside. Yet there is no use on our mounting on stilts, for on stilts we must still walk on our own legs. And on the loftiest throne in the world we are still sitting only on our rump.”

    In the end… he says this

    “The most beautiful lives, to my mind, are those that conform to the common human pattern, with order, but without miracle and without eccentricity”

    Your friend always,


  13. mishari26
    Nov 20, 2005 @ 10:26:00

    Dear AyyA and Temetwir,

    The difference between my PoV and AyyA’s is that I believe in ilQur’an as infallible and that its the word of God, and as far as I understood, AyyA doesn’t? please correct me if I’m wrong.

    So as for human history, the facts that I have are that Adam was the first human, (no idea “when” God created him, no quotes on 10k years or more or less). I also think that there were many types of humans, not just us homo-sapiens. So the archeological finds of different shapes and sizes of human-like skulls do not prove completely gradual evolution for me. I believe evolution exists but in a much more minor role. A species might evolve longer fore-legs, shorter fingers, more insulated nerve conduction. But I don’t think species can evolve “complex” organs just because they needed them. By complex I mean “irreducibly complex”. On the subject I highly recommend a book called “Darwin’s Black Box” by Michael Behe. It talks very scientifically about real challanges to classic darwinnian evolution. The writer is a biochemist, not a philosopher at all. The point in his book that relates to this discussion perhaps is how darwinnian evolution fails in explaining the “leaps” of mutation throughout the natural history, certain periods contain evidence of too much evolution happening in too short of a time to comply with the principle of “gradual changes to better fit the environment”.

    The idea of irreducable complexity is explained like how a mouse-trap requires 4-5 different components to exist before it can catch a mouse. If one of the main components is absent, the mousetrap will not catch mice 70% of the time. It will simply stop catching mice. thats the gist of it. it goes on many different variations which you can find in the book.

    Even though most of the time I don’t have the argumental prowess to convince people of my views I still think it has some value to simply state one’s beliefs as they are. I hope there’s no harm in that?


  14. mishari26
    Nov 20, 2005 @ 10:49:00

    Thanks Teme,

    “if the first “human” was a messenger himself, naby allah Adam .. how can it be that society ever had rules BEFORE messengers?”

    Thats what I believe too 🙂 You say it much more concisely and elegantly than I could have.


    I believe in the story of Adam’s two sons where one kills the other and God sends the crow to teach him how to bury the dead. I believe in it as a true story, not mythology. I also think it portrays how us humans can fail to “leap” to certain basic methods of modeling society. I also believe that the idea of marriage was invented when Adam married his sons (there’s a whole debate about who the wives were etc which I don’t think is even relevant or important). The basic verse in ilQur’an about how Allah “3allama Adam al’asmaa’ kullaha” also relates to this idea of how humans “needed” a basic ruleset to start with. As a computer guy I feel its similar to a computer’s BIOS (basic input output system). The system has to be “initialized” somehow, the basic rules (don’t kill, don’t steal, don’t steal another man’s wife..etc) act like a Owner’s Manual to facilitate basic operation without serious community threatning problems. If the 1st human society immediately faced these problems it could have perished with such a small population.

    So what I’m saying is, I don’t agree that Good/Bad comes from within us. They have been “built-in”. thankfully.


  15. AyyA
    Nov 20, 2005 @ 16:19:00

    Boy, such philosophers we have in house, this is really interesting. I love it

    Oh definitely we need guidance when it comes to state matters, no doubt about that. But don’t you think that religious constitutions are too rigid to adapt to time due to their sacred nature if we consider them as our sole guidance, being rules of the sovereign? While on the other hand human constitutions are more flexible to change so that it would suit each civilization and each century. History had proven time and again that religious constitutions inflicted more prejudice between nations; some of which are against human rights. Yet, there is common morality between all religions. So why not as 9oot said, use the best which suits us from all the ethics that makes sense and the ones that I would follow voluntarily because it protects my rights and does not deter my freedom. As per personal guidance, I believe that no one can be a better guide than human conscience.
    And when I commented to Mishari, I was referring to Archeological facts and not to any religious beliefs. Assuming that not many people believe in religion.

    Then I’d rather call it desire, you know desire is the energy that enforces all our actions. It consists of good and evil. But I still believe that evil is more of a conditioned trait in our behavior than a propensity. Have you seen a bad toddler?

    Interesting; then emotions or energy in motion are activated by desire. Conscience here is the only guide to control such desires and direct them to satisfy self on the condition that this very act does not cause harm to others.
    Amoot 3alaich when you go on and on 🙂

    Yes, we will “likely never come to a complete answer”, no two people are alike. Yet pondering is healthy to question our beliefs and reach the answer that satisfies each of us individually, even if that answer lacked many facts that were beyond my perception but made sense to us. And it does not have to be accepted by others. As you said “It is a question about life and how we choose to lead it”
    But I believe that beliefs are dangerous to be completely lead by any rigid laws that contradicts with common sense, take the suicide bombers for instance, how much can one’s beliefs be directed to kill himself before others for a cause? These people are not psychos as we like to dub them; they are very strong believers and to them; they are doing a favor even to the very innocent ones that are killed in action, for they’d be considered as martyrs and gain haven. With one twitch of beliefs anyone of us could be that suicide bomber. So, directed beliefs. If not internally questioned could be misleading.
    Thank you dear for the invaluable jewel of wisdom 🙂

    It does not matter what is your beliefs or mine. And regardless of religious beliefs; it strikes me how can people take any preaching without question. How can people stop the mind and redesign conscience. And you know through religion this can easily be done. I’m not talking about your beliefs here, nor am I even trying to discard religious preaching as a whole. The fact remains that prophets were great philosophers and thinkers of their time, and we can not just discard their works as nonsense.


  16. Misguided
    Nov 20, 2005 @ 17:39:00

    Dear Ayya and Mishari,

    Firstly, Mishari… Ana kelesh moo fahem????

    Awal tgoolee “So what I’m saying is, I don’t agree that Good/Bad comes from within us.”

    oo ba3den tgoolee” They have been “built-in”. thankfully.”

    You just repeated the first sentence… please clarify..

    Secondly, I didn’t at all try to answer how we judge right from wrong.. that would be a huge discussion…

    I just said that even the worst of things… such as pain, death, and poverty.. maybe considered good at times by some people. SO … even what man fears most and is bad for him… can be made to appear Good if he chooses to..

    So our sense of good and bad comes from somewhere within us… (built-in… learned… evolved…it really doesnt matter to me…not for this discussion anyway). The only point I want to make is that the same thing can be viewed in 2 different ways by the same person.

    Finally… I think I made clear what my idea of a good life is:

    “The most beautiful lives, to my mind, are those that conform to the common human pattern, with order, but without miracle and without eccentricity”.



  17. shosho
    Nov 20, 2005 @ 18:00:00

    Returning the visit.

    Just dropping by to say hi 🙂


  18. DJ
    Nov 20, 2005 @ 19:20:00

    Of course humans are not knowing what’s “good” or “bad” because these are subjective terms…as are “good” and “evil”…measured by sociatal standards. If not taught the difference between the two, people – like all other animals – would live a natural, wild existence. There would be no judging good or evil because there would be no yardstick with which to measure it.
    Granted there seems to be a universal belief that some things – cold blooded murder, for example – are evil. But then again, we have large groups of people who (for whatever reason – religeoun, cultural belief, etc…) still believe that under certain circumstances what most people would consider ‘cold blooded murder’ is not only justified but necessary.
    I think this is a very deep question, and one with many, many possible views. Ayya, you are very good at making us all think! I’m not sure I’m totally prepared to ponder it much beyond this point so early on a Sunday morning. 😉


  19. Temetwir
    Nov 20, 2005 @ 19:37:00

    first of all, religion never did undermine the importance of civilisation or progression of a society

    on the contrary, it urges us to do our best in employing whatever we can into achieving prosperity and all that good stuff

    however, in religion, the reason is not wealth and riches.. rather, it concerns itself with the “spread of the message”.. i know this is a bad metaphor, but think of it as ‘marketing’

    moving on.. you are suggesting the following:

    “rules can, and should be, altered according to a specific time and location”

    this, in itself, defies the need FOR rules.. rules should be there for a reason: being permanent and everyone abiding to them so that we have systemacity
    now.. religion’s teachings are fixed, and it does not limit humanity .. it just “bans” the things that lead to its demolition in the long run – which are, ironically, the SAME things man wants (i am CERTAIN that even, for example, the asian religions ban almost everything el adyaan el samaaweya do)

    that should tell u something about clear/pure human judgement when it is not tainted: man knows what is best for him.. he is just allured by the things that result in his downfall

    consider the diseases associated with wine food and sex for an individual; project this on a number of individuals who form a sect of society; then expand even more

    this could even be intangible.. consider values associated with all that

    what i am trying to say is:
    all things human eventually do not last .. not values, not beliefs not even wealth and empires

    therefore a great dire need there is for a fixed, guided notion: religion

    (not to be taken as personal finger-pointing):
    you speak of rights and freedom .. what rights and freedom do u speak of? ur right to live in a manner that does not earn u the respect a human being deserves? and what freedom is that, which enslaves you to a human-derived idealogy?


  20. Temetwir
    Nov 20, 2005 @ 19:40:00

    a label one gives to himself, does not necessarily mean that he is entitled to it, nor earned it

    for example the spanish inquisition issued by ferdinand and isabella in the 15th century dont mean that what they did is really what christianity preaches

    the same thing can be said in regard to the events of our time..


  21. AyyA
    Nov 21, 2005 @ 14:30:00

    I did get your point the first time dear, I should have categorized my last paragraph in my comment to you as a side note, my fault. But thanks for the clarification and I do agree with you because what you said makes sense.

    Ahleen sweetie 🙂

    Thanks for your insight 🙂

    “religion never did undermine the importance of civilization or progression of a society”? If this is true then how come cutting the hands of the stealer (ga63 yad elsarig) or (rajm elzani) is not An applied punishment anymore in our constitution which is based on elsharee3a Alislamiya ? And why did human interfere in correcting this punishment if it is the words of the divine?
    And I never said that you should change rules per ones liking as you implied, but civilization require altering these rules to suit time progression. What was applicable in ancient years for a certain society is not applicable to societies of today.
    And to answer your last question; I have to say that since I have the freedom to accept these human constitution which had my interest as a human(common sense) then I would choose to abide by it Freely. Moreover I have the right to criticize it, and may be alter it. unlike religious constitutions.


  22. Temetwir
    Nov 21, 2005 @ 23:04:00

    who said our constitution is based on islam/quran/religion for its articles?

    its only “masdar mn masaadir el tashree3” .. and NOT “masdar AL tashree3” .. hope u see the difference

    as to why humans in SOCIETY did not adopt it fully FOR society (u say interfere to correct – which isnt what happens) i really dont know.. i can find no reason as why they would NOT actually,, their loss!

    and as for changing rules due to time (or progression) only proves my POV that something which is temporary can NOT be taken seriously as a rule since u, i and everyone will know that sooner or later they will change

    not to mention.. rules by humans mostly concern themselves with this lifetime.. whereas rules of religion act as guides for this life AND the next 🙂


  23. ولاّدة
    Nov 22, 2005 @ 07:43:00

    يقولون استفتي قلبك ولو أفتوك وأفتوك …في أغلب الأحيان استفتى قلبي

    وكما تقول ليلى مراد أنا قلبي دليلي

    ولكل قلب قوانين خاصة بالصح والخطأ تتغير بالزمان والخبرة

    لذا فلكل قوانينه


  24. mishari26
    Nov 22, 2005 @ 11:30:00


    I’m sorry seems the term “built-in” was confusing and not fitting. I only used it because it was a bit computerish as well 🙂

    My whole point put simply is that we have been “taught” by God that taking away other people’s possessions/lives/wives/freedoms is evil. and likewise gave us basic rulesets to avoid those evil acts and prosper.

    So 7agek 3alai I was mistaken and I said it wrong 🙂


  25. Misguided
    Nov 22, 2005 @ 15:00:00

    Dear AyyA:

    Please remove the annoying flash casino pop-up from your blog…

    You may like to have ads, but it really is ruining the whole experience… I keep hearing coins drop and a picture shows up right in front of what I am reading.


    Dear Mishari,

    No Problemo.. I was just confused with the answer that’s all… 🙂

    your buddy,


  26. AyyA
    Nov 22, 2005 @ 18:38:00

    Sorry guys I took so long to reply to you, I was traveling and just settled down.

    I never said that Islamic constitution is the only source of Kuwait constitution, what I said was the opposite. Otherwise Islamists wouldn’t be fighting over this issue, what I’m saying is that if our constitution was based solely on Islamic laws we would be going years backward. Anyway I gave this as an example of how rigid this might turn out to be if we depend on religious laws to control our lives. And you don’t have to agree with me on that, all what I’m asking is some pondering on this issue. And then again as I mentioned to Misguided no two people think alike.

    Sa7 ilsanich

    I don’t really know what you’re talking about, I don’t seem to have these ads as you mentioned nor did I deliberately add them, weird!


  27. Misguided
    Nov 22, 2005 @ 18:55:00

    Dear AyyA,

    Here take a look at this image below:


    Thats what I get when I visit your page… or some ad for a porn site????

    I know it’s not your intention bes you must have added something in your template that seems to run this malicious code.

    your buddy,

    BTW: this is limited to your blog… and because i have a mac i do not get pop-ups or viruses… so whatever it is… it must be on the template

    P.S. I do not know how else to help… let me know if you are still having trouble figuring it out!


  28. Misguided
    Nov 22, 2005 @ 19:10:00

    Dear AyyA,

    I just figured it out…. I looked at the source code of your site and you are using Fastonlineuser.com

    They are running a script that randomly creates an ad for these sites:

    I got the list of sites they promote from their own webpage..

    AFF :Adultfriendfinder

    Now if you did intend to have ads running… well then I am sorry for creating all the fuss.. perhaps you are looking for alternate streams of income?

    Otherwise I think it’s malicious of them to do this to your webpage without your knowledge… so remove the html code that they gave you for free.

    Just trying to help out,


  29. AyyA
    Nov 22, 2005 @ 19:33:00

    Thanks Misguided, I just removed that from my template, pls let me know if that cleared the problem.


  30. Misguided
    Nov 22, 2005 @ 19:45:00

    Dear AyyA,

    All fixed.. Thats much better…

    Sorry for all the fuss… I just wanted to help 🙂



  31. AyyA
    Nov 22, 2005 @ 19:52:00

    No dear thanks to you, otherwise I would have never known, take care my truly buddy 🙂


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: