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% Unconditional Support for Denmark

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 09:15 PM
link   
The fundamental right of freedom of speech protects satirization of public figures. The so-called "Prophet" Muhammad is a public figure.

Any time a news agency reports on the so-called "prophet" Muhammad, they should disclaim whether he was a prophet. Unless you are a Muslim, you probably doubt Muhammad was actually a prophet, and you may also doubt that such a thing as a prophet can exist.

Riots against Danish embassies proves unquestionably the violent and closed-minded nature of Islam and Muslims. They are unable to tolerate satire or humor of any kind regarding their brainwashing.

Islamic law applies only to Muslims. Danes have no restriction of violating foreign laws in their own state.

The latest cartoons were drawn by right-wing hypocrites. They would certainly react likewise if Muslims drew such caricatures of Jesus.

www.csmonitor.com...

Columbus

mod edit: corrected link


[edit on 12-10-2006 by UK Wizard]




posted on Oct, 13 2006 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Columbus
The fundamental right of freedom of speech protects satirization of public figures. The so-called "Prophet" Muhammad is a public figure.

That right, any right, must not go against other people's rights, that is the first rule of living in a society, your rights stop where other people's rights start.



Riots against Danish embassies proves unquestionably the violent and closed-minded nature of Islam and Muslims. They are unable to tolerate satire or humor of any kind regarding their brainwashing.

No, it proves that those people who attacked the embassies where violating other people's rights, that is the only thing that it proves.
You do not have any proof that all those people were Muslims, and even if they were, that does not mean that Islam has a violent and closed mind, it only proves that those people have a violent and closed mind (or a personal agenda).



Islamic law applies only to Muslims. Danes have no restriction of violating foreign laws in their own state.

I suppose that in Denmark anyone can be taken to court with a charge of slander. Why aren't those cases dismissed as "an attack against free speech"?

Because everything must have its limits, and when you say something that offends other people, then you must know that you will have a good possibility of having to answer about that in a court.



The latest cartoons were drawn by right-wing hypocrites. They would certainly react likewise if Muslims drew such caricatures of Jesus.

In this case they are clearly provoking violent acts from the radical Muslims, so those acts can be considered a direct result of that provocation, and the responsibles for the cartoons cannot say that they wheren't expecting a reaction like that.



posted on Oct, 21 2006 @ 04:25 AM
link   
Sorry, I have been unable to reply to this thread. The page was stuck loading and the [post reply] button never appeared for days.

The so-called "Prophet" Muhammad is dead and consequently is unable to enjoy rights.

Satire is protected speech.

If the rioters were not Muslim, who were they? You are asserting a conspiracy, that someone is attempting to defame peaceful Islamic people by staging a riot, meanwhile ignoring the non-violent condemnation of Denmark. A high degree of evidence is required to support such a ridiculous claim. Make no mistake, the non-violent condemnation is just as morally wrong as the violent one.

Slander and libel are meaningless if the person being attacked is not alive, unless the comments directly contributed to the person's death.

When you say something that offends people, the people who take offense are responsible for their actions. Offense is far more often taken than given.

It is true that the right-wing fundamentalist Christians seek to provoke the right-wing fundamentalist Muslims.

It is true that the terrorists want America to stay in Iraq as much as the Bush administration wants to stay in Iraq. Their two agendas are the one agenda.

All peaceful people want the US out of Iraq. All violent warmongers want to stay and fight. There is no prize in Iraq. What, oil?

For us it is almost too obvious to need stating. Apparently it desperately needs stating. So why is this not stated?



posted on Oct, 21 2006 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Columbus
The so-called "Prophet" Muhammad is dead and consequently is unable to enjoy rights.
Being dead, he is also unable to defend himself from any personal attack, so I was thinking of the rights of those who see him as a fundamental piece of their religion, the cartoons were not supposed to provoke a reaction from someone who has been dead for almost 1400 years, they could only have as target the people who see him as the last of the prophets that preached the only god, the same god that the Christians and the Jews see as the true god.



Satire is protected speech.
As I said, all rights have its limits, the fact that satire is protected speech (who decided that?) does not mean that anyone can say anything they want and get away with it just because it is "satire".

In situations like that, the only way that our societies use to see if it was a case of a common use of someone's rights or if it was a case of abusing those rights is to take the case to the courts.

That is why some journalists have been convicted for defamation, when those journalists said that they were only using their right of free speech.



If the rioters were not Muslim, who were they? You are asserting a conspiracy, that someone is attempting to defame peaceful Islamic people by staging a riot, meanwhile ignoring the non-violent condemnation of Denmark. A high degree of evidence is required to support such a ridiculous claim.
Yes, a high degree of evidence is required to support such a claim, that is why I did not make any claim, I only said that you (or anybody else) did not had any proof of all those people being Muslims, nobody can look to someone and say what is his/hers religion just by the way that person looks or acts.

Religion is not something that is printed in people's foreheads, and is something that does make part of any human being when he is born, is something that people choose based on what they think, regardless of race, country or their financial situation.

I can only say for sure that those people who were attacking the Danish embassy were taking part of a violent action against people who didn't do anything, in my conscience I cannot say if they were Muslims in the same way I cannot say if they were soccer fans or hockey fans.

The most probable situation is that they were all Muslims, but we can never know for sure.


Make no mistake, the non-violent condemnation is just as morally wrong as the violent one.
Does that mean that the people who do not like the "satire" have no right to voice their opinions, not even peacefully?



When you say something that offends people, the people who take offense are responsible for their actions. Offense is far more often taken than given.
Yes, but if you want to live in peace with the people around you, you must think of what those people may feel if you say something that involves them or their rights, at least that is what I try to do.



posted on Oct, 21 2006 @ 06:17 PM
link   
I agree that they were trying to provoke the Muslims. Unfortunately, no Muslim's rights were violated in this action.

Someone they have undue reverence for was depicted as ridiculous. I could do the same with a cartoon of Jesus. I would surely face the attacks of Christians for doing so.

Nevertheless, I see both Muhammad and Jesus as ridiculous. That is my opinion and my right so express so. If this had taken place in an Islamic state, heads would come off. I remind you of Salman Rushdie. I do not face quite the degree of hate from Christians, but I know they want me to be punished. They always say what I'll get from their petty "god" because they can't get away with it themselves.

It might state in the Quran that the "believer" is forbidden to depict the Prophet Muhammad. I can't find any proof of that. If you want to believe such a ridiculous commandment, go ahead. It still doesn't affect me or any other non-believer.


...nobody can look to someone and say what is his/hers religion just by the way that person looks or acts.

Actually, you can see and measure someones reaction to stimulus. If I am talking to even a moderate Christian and expose some fallacy of Christ, even the moderate's face turns red. With anger, to beat down the shame. The moderate simply isn't by personality violent and will suck it up and try to patronize me. Screw them. They choose ignorance.


Religion ... is something that people choose based on what they think,...

Surely you are joking! I have fought religion for many years. No one chooses religion. Religion chooses you. If you are not born into an evangelical family, the evangelicals hunt for you! They witness and testify to you at every opportunity! They will get you, when you are weak, when life has you in a corner, the offer becomes tempting. Then the brainwashing starts, the guilt trip, the ritualistic prayer. Thinking plays no part in maintaining an inherently ignorant position. If you think for yourself in the church you will be attacked viciously and excommunicated. The same applies to all religions. They all grow the same way, an infectious mental virus that attacks when your intellectual defenses are the weakest.


Does that mean that the people who do not like the "satire" have no right to voice their opinions, not even peacefully?

That is not really happening. Islam is actually strangled by its own restrictions to the point where there has been no response either way. There is no legitimate depiction of Muhammad to counter the cartoons. And moderates take no position against the violence.


Yes, but if you want to live in peace with the people around you, you must think of what those people may feel if you say something that involves them or their rights, at least that is what I try to do.

Yes, but if people around you don't want to live in peace, making a joke can get your head cut off. Dixie Chicks. I believe that suitable overrules your position.


I cannot say if they were soccer fans or hockey fans.

LMAO. The Danes have the best teams? It is the unthinking part in the drunk, the common sports fan, and the common religionist. Barbarians all.

Why we don't see such riots more often? There has been an escalation of what's acceptable. It's much harder to pull back on such things unless it reaches a critical level in the community, not the Danish community, the communities in the Middle East. For them, this is still acceptable, and maybe more is possible before they start to say, enough.

Columbus
The Dove



posted on Oct, 21 2006 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Columbus
It might state in the Quran that the "believer" is forbidden to depict the Prophet Muhammad. I can't find any proof of that. If you want to believe such a ridiculous commandment, go ahead. It still doesn't affect me or any other non-believer.
I don't think it says it, at least I do not remember it. Also, what is forbidden is the representation of people in general, that is why the traditional decorations of Muslim buildings are limited to geometrical forms.



Actually, you can see and measure someones reaction to stimulus. If I am talking to even a moderate Christian and expose some fallacy of Christ, even the moderate's face turns red. With anger, to beat down the shame. The moderate simply isn't by personality violent and will suck it up and try to patronize me. Screw them. They choose ignorance.
Can you say what is my religion from what I have said and from my reactions so far?



Surely you are joking! I have fought religion for many years. No one chooses religion. Religion chooses you. If you are not born into an evangelical family, the evangelicals hunt for you! They witness and testify to you at every opportunity! They will get you, when you are weak, when life has you in a corner, the offer becomes tempting. Then the brainwashing starts, the guilt trip, the ritualistic prayer. Thinking plays no part in maintaining an inherently ignorant position. If you think for yourself in the church you will be attacked viciously and excommunicated. The same applies to all religions. They all grow the same way, an infectious mental virus that attacks when your intellectual defenses are the weakest.
I was not joking, and I still think that religion is a choice. I know that I have made my choice regarding religion some years ago and I haven't found any reason to change it, and I wasn't forced to take my position by anyone.


LMAO. The Danes have the best teams? It is the unthinking part in the drunk, the common sports fan, and the common religionist. Barbarians all.
I used that only as an example, I don't even know if they play hockey in Denmark, I could have said ballet fans or opera fans, for example.



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 03:46 AM
link   

I know that I have made my choice regarding religion some years ago and I haven't found any reason to change it, and I wasn't forced to take my position by anyone.


Without knowing more about you, I doubt you are Christian, since you didn't react to my Christian barbs.

Regardless, you will never find a Christian or Muslim who considers themselves forced into their faith. They do sometimes say that they were chosen rather than they chose. You won't find people who choose to be Christian either. It occurs as a psychotic break during a period of weakness and ritualistic exercise.

Your firewall and antivirus must be disabled, then you must have the virus uploaded to your brain. That is the process I went through and it is typical for those not born into a family of "reborn".

Only after freeing my mind did I begin to understand the violence of the experience and of the Church in general.

Islam is the same. I see many parallels. The 9/11 highjackers were part of a Quran (bible) study group not unlike the ones I was part of.

Columbus
The Dove



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join