It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

USA Today Avoids Charlie Hebdo Muhammad Cartoons, But Allows Muslim Cleric to Pen This Op-Ed

page: 3
41
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 09:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010 a reply to: Jamie1 No they are not scared they are just not pea brained enough to insult an entire religion because of what some psychopaths did.


dang, Buster Christianity is insulted everday on ATS, the entire religion.

Christianty is the target of atheist all over America.

Not Islam,

Do you think that is HATE speech?




posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Jamie1
And the result of that editorial choice is that lot's more folks are getting right tuned up about the evil of Islam. Now there's a surprise.



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 09:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Stormdancer777


originally posted by: buster2010 a reply to: Jamie1 No they are not scared they are just not pea brained enough to insult an entire religion because of what some psychopaths did.


dang, Buster Christianity is insulted everday on ATS, the entire religion.

Christianty is the target of atheist all over America.

Not Islam,

Do you think that is HATE speech?


Christianity (exclusively) is only the target of locally-minded and "small-a" atheists. And even the "big-A" Atheists -- who will find fault with Islam as much as Christianity -- don't have a right to tell you what to believe. However, typically they can insult Christianity without fear of reprisal because (as far as I know) the founding documents for Christianity don't say to kill people who insult Christianity.



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: CrikeyMagnet

And I don't want to be angry or hate, I would love to see everyone get along on ATS.


I just see the double standard, and yes they pick on Christians more here, and the posters are leaving because of it.

Many of the Christian posters are gone.



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: VirusGuard

I glad you said Sheep and not Pigs. After all we would not want to offend our Muslim cousins sensibility's by way of mentioning an apparently unclean animal, however tasty they may be!

Opps!
LoL


edit on 8-1-2015 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 10:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: CrikeyMagnet
So... did anybody actually read the article this referenced article was commenting on?

Original Op-Ed

I think the point is being missed. He's not (at least overtly... I can't speak to his personal beliefs or actions) advocating violence against anyone. He's saying that if we deliberately ignore warnings around topics which are directly referenced in religious doctrine, we are ACCEPTING the risk that someone will want to retaliate.

The suggestion that every news outlet should reprint the cartoons... that's the most obvious "missed the point" suggestion going. It's not just freedom of speech we have to deal with, but freedom of people to practice their religion (which views publishing images of Muhammad as an insult to their prophet, and is specifically included as something people should be killed over).

Now, I don't think anyone has the right to press their religion on anyone else -- much less kill anyone because they don't believe in the same god/God/gods/prophets/prophecies/animal spirit -- but I do think people need to read the article with a critical eye... not read a response to the article with a different bias, and take that as the same thing.

If anything, he's advocating understanding of the religious impact of unlimited freedom of speech. And he's right. If we're aware of the potential consequences of our actions (consequences which could be delivered by one or two fanatics even without any sort of backing from a religious community), and take those actions anyway, have we not accepted the risk of those consequences?


Yes, I read the entire article.

And yes, you accurately articulate the view expressed in the article.

I'll sum it up:

"We believe it's ok to kill you for printing cartoons.

If you print them anyway, and we kill you, don't complain. You were warned."


This is the essence of terrorism. Threaten people, put them in fear, so you can control their actions.

And you think this is reasonable?



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 10:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck
a reply to: Jamie1
And the result of that editorial choice is that lot's more folks are getting right tuned up about the evil of Islam. Now there's a surprise.





Played? In what way? Please elaborate?

After the series of attacks by Islamic extremists in the last month or so, including murdering 130 school children in Pakistan, do you think people should NOT be getting "tuned up" about the evils of these people?



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 10:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Jamie1

Without bothering to read further than the OP....because frankly, this isn't at ALL surprising to me.

As I said in another thread you started, sympathizers and apologists abound. Many of them within the states as well.

......it's sickening. There is NO defense, no justification, no rationalization of the murder of civilians....for any reason.
I try to ignore the rest, but that is dangerous as well. We cannot ignore them but we cannot give them so much attention that others might be "turned on" to their sick, ideological delusions....err, I mean views.

Those who attempt to rationalize and/or justify acts of terror are the same ilk as terrorists themselves. I say, sink them with the same ship....but to the bleeding hearts, the apologists, and the insanely optimistic about their surrounds, that is "nazi-esque" speech and I am evil for saying so.

The world, and it's human inhabitants......is f'n backasswards.



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 10:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: hoagy1199
a reply to: Jamie1

Every religion has radical viewpoints in it but why does Islam have so many and so violent?


Perhaps it's the many US foreign policy 'acts' in the middle east, that enrages people? Many have seen the (western) violence in their home country for years, and at some point the cup is full and they mix up religion and hatred?

No matter what, killing cartoonists as revenge, is not gonna solve anything. Just worsen the whole matter


Ohh ETA: I wonder, where is the super smart PRISM-thing in this matter? Guess it will play a huge role in finding the perpetrators?
edit on 8/1/2015 by kloejen because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Jamie1

You picked Anjem Choudary to represent Islam in this case?



You're as bad as USAToday for muddying the waters of ATS with that #s views on Islam.



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 10:14 AM
link   
One more thing and I am done, because this is a losing battle, and my intent is to not upset anyone,

Christian Genocide Is on the Rise as World Leaders Have 'Stood by and Watched,'

www.christianpost.com... 3/

World Watch List
www.opendoorsusa.org...

www.abovetopsecret.com...
Church Bells Fall Silent in Mosul as Iraq’s Christians Flee
www.abovetopsecret.com...

"The final death knell for the Christians of Iraq,”
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The United States Is the Chief Facilitator of Christian Persecution
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Atheists Face Death Penalty In 13 Countries, Discrimination Around The World According To Freethought Report
www.huffingtonpost.com...



In 13 countries around the world,

all of them Muslim,

people who openly espouse atheism or reject the official state religion of Islam face execution under the law, according to a detailed study issued on Tuesday. And beyond the Islamic nations, even some of the West's apparently most democratic governments at best discriminate against citizens who have no belief in a god and at worst can jail them for offenses dubbed blasphemy, it said. The study, The Freethought Report 2013, was issued by the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU), a global body uniting atheists, agnostics and other religious skeptics, to mark United Nations' Human Rights Day on Tuesday. "This report shows that the overwhelming majority of countries fail to respect the rights of atheists and freethinkers although they have signed U.N agreements to treat all citizens equally," said IHEU President Sonja Eggerickx.

edit on 103131p://bThursday2015 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 10:15 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

You kinda missed the point of the OP, didn't you.

It wasn't a "representation of Islam" as much as it was the irony that USA Today would publish his rubbish but distance themselves from "that which is offensive" (all the while, publishing offensive "justifications and rationalization" for acts of terror)

I'm sure you see the irony there, and the implications....

Again, apologists and sympathizers EVERYWHERE! (not you....USA Today



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 10:17 AM
link   
I have been to many churches and not one taught me to hate, every church I have ever been to taught me love.

Love my enemies do good to those that hate you

Christianity has gone through many reforms, Islam needs the world to do them a favor and encourage them into reformation, the way I see it in some cultures Islam is heading backwards.



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Jakal26

Apologies Jakal.

I read "Anjem Choudary" & "Really? That whole thing about Islam meaning peace is a misconception???" & made an assumption!!!

I've just seen the question marks behind the OP's words which adds a different context to the statement.



I stand by call Choudary a # though... :
He cherry picks verses more than the Islamophobes.
edit on 8-1-2015 by CharlieSpeirs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 10:23 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs




I stand by call Choudary a # though... : He cherry picks verses more than the Islamophobes.


In this regard, we stand in solidarity.

(No apologies necessary)




posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 10:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Stormdancer777

To be fair through the churches rhetoric regarding infidels 900 years ago was rather different. Chances are you would have been told that "To kill an infidel is not murder rather it is the path to heaven" and sent of on some holy crusade to foreign lands to participate in state sponsored murder. And all in the name of God.

These days things are rather different, we call it progress or so i'm lead to believe. Something rather a few off the Muslim orientated nations could be doing with if you ask me.
edit on 8-1-2015 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 10:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Jamie1


The ones being played are the apologist, unless they are willfully in denial.

It may be already to late to turn this $hit storm around, the world has been complacent way to long, how can this be fixed, is this the way we will have to live our lives forever?

feels hopeless
edit on 103131p://bThursday2015 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 10:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Jamie1

Here is one thing he blatantly lied about in his article...


Islam means "The Muslim World"...

Muslim means "One who submits to God"...



He is so confused that he mixed up the two & it's not in the least bit surprising considering his history.



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 10:27 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake
I realize the church history.



posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 10:30 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

That's one reason it's insulting to hear people say Islam is in the dark ages...


When Christianity was in the dark ages Christians were wilful as a whole with witch hunts & sectarianism...


In this day & age it's only a minority of Muslims who would drag us back to those times...




The comparison is faulty at best...



new topics

top topics



 
41
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join