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.

 

100's of Muslims protest Muhammad cartoons in London…But how many protest terror?

page: 18
0
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78

Originally posted by martin3030
The vast majority of Muslims in the UK are law abiding,hard working and make a valuable contribution to this country.
The vast majority have distanced themselves from those who have chosen to manipulate the cartoons episode to vent their threats against the West.
There is an increased hardening of tolerance now in the UK its people will NOT be bullied into threats we are not a nation which has ever been known to lie down and be walked all over.
We share an enjoyment of democracy which we have always fought to keep and will do so in the future.
There is no place in Britain for the extremists whose intention is to change our way of life as we know it.
These extremists represent but a tiny percent of the population.
The Country will never submit to these terror merchants.

Well yea martin but which are the ones?
How do you know how do you sort them out?
I agree that among them there are alot that dont wish disasters.
They can be calm and all the sudden unpredicatable and before we know it they can detonate them selfs in the sub way or in another public place with lot's of people around.
Can you pick out which ones are violent and which ones are not?
If something hapens we are not even prepered for such a big scale event in europe.
It takes only one to press the button and take hundreds or even more with him.
We should just leave them alone and get out of there and then ask them nice to go home and maybe after a while try to comunicate after we have put our diffrences away.
Guess it's not possible since bush is hungry for war and oil.

They acuse people because one man.
If bush says something they think every one says the same.
If a cartoonist draws something they think we all drew it.
They dont make the diffrence they dont sort us, so why should we?





posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 08:57 AM
link   
Explorer
Yes you pose questions that I nor anyone can answer.
The suicide bombers WILL get through and short of Xray machines on every street corner and concrete blocks infront of buildings its difficult to stop.
Intelligence has undoubtably stopped a lot of incidents and maybe there ARE plans in place for a big incident in Europe.................I dont think the man in the Street will be told about them tho.
Our destiny is being chartered by some things Bush is responsible for but some of that has been neccesary to counter other things.
Of course it only takes one to press the button...........The peace that we have enjoyed for the last 60 years has endured primarily because of that button and mans fear of the aftermath.
Things have changed now however............the people who would like to have their finger on the button dont care about the aftermath,dont care about dying and would do it without question in the name of religion and the so called evil of the West.



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Somebody answer me, please! Why is religion a protected subject?


The Danish cartoons were (in my eyes) about the politics in the
Islamic religion. Terrorism.

I have seen political cartoons taking aim at the pedophilia problem
in the Catholic church. I have seen them take aim at the practice
of no artificial birth control in the Catholic Church. I saw one that
slammed the Catholic Church on stem cell research saying 'it got
Galileo wrong too'.

Some of the cartoons did cross over into the belief system of the
Catholic Church - such as slamming the teaching that artificial
birth control is against scripture (see - 'Onanism').

Most religions on the planet have politics in them. It's just the
way it is. The beliefs of the religions cross over into how to
behave in life ... which effects sociology and politics.

I don't think political cartoons have religion as a protected subject.
To require that would be impossible. There is too much cross over
from the beliefs into the sociology and political aspects in life.



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 09:10 AM
link   
The TV news is reporting that Iran is declaring the
Danish muslim cartoons to be the work of Israel
and the Jews.


Guess the Danes are off the hook? Or are they
now under the hypnotic spell of Israel and thus
co-culprits in some massive Jewish plan to
destroy the world?


UGH!



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 09:22 AM
link   
No worries. As long as there is any troubles with those lunatic moron fanatics, the blame will always fall on Jews and US. They dont have the balls to look at themselves in the mirror, despite their hot air of bravado and so called manhood, or should we say, the lack of it, these baby killers.



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 09:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kacen
I think the problem here is putting freedom of speech before serious matters.

They react violently...so is it that bad an idea to suppress some freedom of speech for the greater good? We can't tell Muslims how to act, and these ones will act this way. It was insanely stupid and somewhat arrogant to reprint the cartoons just to spite them. For the greater good they simply should not be printed.

Freedom of speech is great, but if it causes things like violent muslim protests, then its best to suppress some of it rather than continueing it on reasons of pride.


I've read through this thread and don't recall a response to this.

There are so many things wrong with what you posted! First of all what you propose is called appeasement. Check throughout history and you'll find that appeasement never works. It just creates a "slippery slope" where - having determined that you are spineless - the terrorists will only come back to take more. You will end up progressively weaker, while the terrorists grow progressively stronger - until when you finally decide that you've had enough, you are too weak to fight back.

How does that end up being your "greater good"?

Wake up and stand up for your rights and the rights of all people living in freedom.

Don't ever voluntarily give up your rights!


[edit on 2/7/2006 by centurion1211]



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 09:35 AM
link   
The drum beat just goes on and on. In the name of the Prophet, and in the name of almighty Allah, for the sake of a few cartoons of dubious taste everyone must die. It's never been pointed out more obviously that all we ever needed to learn about dealing with bullies, we learned in the playground as kids. Never backdown, or placate, because then all you've got is the bully. Enough, round up the protestors, using whatever force is neccessary and ship 'em out to their country of origin, whereever that might be.

Trying to keep saying that not all Muslims are fanatics as I have sure is getting harder to do in the face of lots of evidence to the contrary, and darned little in refutation(is that a word). There are moderates out there, but boy, they sure do seem to be outside the mainstream, and certainly not in the positions of power.



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by seagull
Trying to keep saying that not all Muslims are fanatics as I have sure is getting harder to do in the face of lots of evidence to the contrary, and darned little in refutation(is that a word). There are moderates out there, but boy, they sure do seem to be outside the mainstream, and certainly not in the positions of power.


- So you would have us all hand ourselves over to their mirror reflection amongst 'our own'?

No thanks to 'their extremists and fascism' so we'll embrace 'ours'?!

How does that work?

[edit on 7-2-2006 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 09:48 AM
link   
Looks like Moscow is taking a stand on this: They are getting their freedom on!

upi.com...



Moscow museum to exhibit Mohammed cartoons
MOSCOW, Feb. 7 (UPI) -- A Moscow museum has announced it will exhibit the entire series of cartoons of Mohammed that have caused riots throughout the Islamic world.

Yury Samodurov, director of the Sakharov Museum and Public Center, said on Russian television that the center was ready to organize a public exhibition of the cartoons satirizing the founder of Islam that originally were published in a Danish newspaper, Pravda.ru reported Monday.

"We must show the whole world that Russia goes along with Europe, that the freedom of expression is much more important for us than the dogmas of religious fanatics," Samodurov said.



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
The Danish cartoons were (in my eyes) about the politics in the
Islamic religion.


That is the fundamental problem with Islam--It's not simply a religion; but also a socio-political system with its own set of codified laws (Sharia). This means it's very much like any other oppressive social system such as Fascism and Communism.

I believe the west will eventually get sucked into a world war with Islam. From our perspective, it will a war against a brutal and oppressive ideology. From the perspective of Muslims, it will be a religious war.



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by Kacen
I think the problem here is putting freedom of speech before serious matters.

I've read through this thread and don't recall a response to this.


You musta skimmed over my response, then, thinking it was probably some 'leftist garbage'.
Or perhaps you have me on ignore? Anyway, you'll like this one, I guarantee.

Centurian, you know, we gotta stop agreeing like this!
Our long-term personal battle might have to take a back seat!


www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 09:53 AM
link   
Didn't say that at all. The moderates are out there, without a doubt. However, they need to step up and be heard, even more than they are! Not once have I advocated answering their fanaticism with some of our own brand. I would just as soon live and let live, however, letting some foaming at the mouth fanatic, or two rule the day ain't living, it's placation.

Fanatics of any ilk annoy me. For that matter implying I am one annoys me as well. Hmm... that building looks tinder dry to me. Where are my matches?



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
Looks like Moscow is taking a stand on this: They are getting their freedom on!


Wow! That's a step in the right direction, as far as I'm concerned. I'm not generally supportive of 'rubbing their faces in it', but to stand down, or in any way, show deference to people who use violence to make their point, is just rewarding their irrational response. Hopefully, these radicals will get the message that the more they terrorize, the more people are going to exert their own rights.

They cannot control the world, no matter how much they'd like to.

skippy, I know you meant this thread to go more the way of "why aren't Muslim's protesting terror?" but it seems to have taken on a life of its own and has turned into a really great freedom of speech thread! It's your best thread ever, in my opinion. Good job.



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by seagull
Didn't say that at all. The moderates are out there, without a doubt. However, they need to step up and be heard, even more than they are! Not once have I advocated answering their fanaticism with some of our own brand.


- What would you call mass deportations and the discarding of the present law then?


I would just as soon live and let live, however, letting some foaming at the mouth fanatic, or two rule the day ain't living, it's placation.


- What "rule the day"?
How has your life been materially upset by these demos anymore than it ever has been by any other?

I don't applaud any of those breaking the law but I sure as hell am not for making the kind of sectarian/racist/fascist changes that the 'hard line' you talked of earlier would entail.


Fanatics of any ilk annoy me. For that matter implying I am one annoys me as well. Hmm... that building looks tinder dry to me. Where are my matches?


- Perhaps you ought to try and relax a little?



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

The purpose of political cartoons is NOT to 'promote better understanding
between cultures' and it isn't to 'aid in unity'. [...]


Please do not lecture me on the purpose of satire. I know what it's for. What I am protesting is on the wisdom of reprinting something that is known to be inflammatory.

What I was getting at was that when something is burning, do you fan the flames, feeding the fire or do you work to figure out a way to put it out?

Does freedom of speech mean that someone can act irresponsibly and be bailed out in the name of "freedom"? Does it mean you can push someone around and then complain you are not getting your freedom of expression when he pushes you back?

It's not a question of appeasement, or censorship. It's a question of common sense and courtesy.

Let me put it in another perspective. Mr. Ahmadejinad (maybe I'm referring to the Iranian Prez, maybe I'm just referring to a fictional character of the same name) walks on to a stage and says "We must wipe Israel off the map!"

Now, does he have the right to say that? Damned straight! Freedom of speech, baby. But is he right in doing that? No! What's he doing? Looking for trouble? That was very irresponsible of him.

So where do we draw the line? I suppose that's the tough question, but I believe simple common sense will tell you where it is.

On another note, was it Marlon Brando or someone else who made some insult about the Jews a long time back. Does he have the right to do that? Yes! He's excersicing his right to freedom of speech. Is he right to do that? I suppose the fact that his career went down the drain after that shows otherwise.

That's what I was trying to say. Why promote schism when you can just opt not to?



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 10:21 AM
link   


[edit on 7-2-2006 by redhat]



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Beachcoma

What I am protesting is on the wisdom of reprinting something that is known to be inflammatory.

If they were not reprinted, most of the world would still believe the lies about the fake pictures. They would still believe there were a "pig nose" picture and a picture containing pedophilia as well as one containing animal sex. Because those pictures were presented by the imams from Denmark. They might even have made them as well. At least they knew they were not the actual pictures. This is why these pictures should be reprinted. But the reprinting is a lie as well. They are actually NOT reprinted over and over as someone claim. But they should. Because of the actions of these imams.



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 10:26 AM
link   
Mass deportations? I thought the protests were only a small minority? I don't equate a few hundred, out of however many Muslims live in Great Britain, protestors being deported with massive. I am not advocating the deportation of all Muslims, that would be as silly as advocating the ban of Islam itself. If they are protesting peacefully fine, and dandy, more power to 'em. Once violence occurs, and it may, arrests must follow. If naturalized, deportation. If native born, jailtime. Treat them as any other common criminal. Kowtowing to them simply out of fear that it may be percieved as bigotted or racist? Just remember who it is that is going to be hurling most of those charges. The same ones who have cartoons depicting the Jews as using the blood of children in their religious rites. Who cares what they think.

You are right, that building is much too tall (single story), I'll go have cup of coffee instead, 'cause it's too early for a beer.



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Beachcoma
Does freedom of speech mean that someone can act irresponsibly and be bailed out in the name of "freedom"? Does it mean you can push someone around and then complain you are not getting your freedom of expression when he pushes you back?


You've used the words 'act' and 'push' above. Those are physical actions. Speech, songs, drawings are NOT physical actions. If you say something, sing a song or draw a cartoon, it harms no one. If you burn a building or cause a death, it's an ACTION and it hurts people.



Let me put it in another perspective. Mr. Ahmadejinad (maybe I'm referring to the Iranian Prez, maybe I'm just referring to a fictional character of the same name) walks on to a stage and says "We must wipe Israel off the map!"


He hasn't hurt anyone with his words! If and when his people get up and move and get their guns and start killing people, then they have crossed the line into action.



So where do we draw the line? I suppose that's the tough question, but I believe simple common sense will tell you where it is.


It's an easy question to answer! We draw the line at ACTION. You can say, sing, draw whatever you like, but when you burn others' property or shoot someone or physically push someone, you've crossed the line between 'speech' and 'action'.

Why is this so hard to understand?



posted on Feb, 7 2006 @ 10:39 AM
link   
Believe it or not there are some who probably find these cartoons slightly entertaining. And who are you to tell them they can’t be drawn or printed for other people to see.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join