European countries cannot justify Insulting Islam under the excuse of freespeech.

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
Suppose all the European newspapers fired their editiors and did exactly what they were ordered to by mullahs on the other side of the planet.
.

Muslims only Asked for apology and to stop publishing the pictures.. and thats it.. end of story... and harm is done. No one should be sacked. and before anyone disagrees I will say that more than 89% of Muslims agree with this.


[edit on 3-2-2006 by Deep_Blue]

[edit on 3-2-2006 by Deep_Blue]

Originally posted by Deep_Blue
Muslims only Asked for apology

Why should anyone apologize?

and to stop publishing the pictures

The pictures were published 6 months ago. These wild protests are the only reason they are still in the news.


Some of the cartoons are pretty offensive. Obviously the people who made them intended them to be offensive. Why would they apologize? Why should the politicians in denmark apologize, they have nothing to do with it. If it would actually make you feel better, hey man, I apologize that you were upset by this stuff. Its not nice to upset people.

What irks me about this is the response from some of the supposed leaders in the west. Bill Clinton said the cartoons were wrong and offensive and on the news tonight they said the state department (I think, it may have been another major department) has now come out and said the cartoons were offensive and wrong.

Thats crap!

The west has the opportunity here to stand up and tell the whole closed minded world that free speech is not wrong, that its a human right and they need to get used to it. If someone doesn't like free speech then they can crawl back under the rock of ignorance that they live under.

It is an opportunity that is being thrown away by the weak leaders of the west that are bowing to the ignorance of religion.

Political power in the hands of religion has always, always led to tyranny. Political power in the hands of religion will always lead to tyranny.

Just my thoughts. Love and light my friends,

Wupy

Originally posted by makeitso

Deep_Blue
The editor of Shihan newspaper was sacked immediately, and the copies were withdrawn from the market:

And the Danish newspaper pulled the cartoons, and appologized also.

Also check this:
Jordan king condemns Prophet Muhammad caricatures quote:
King Abdullah II of Jordan condemned the cartoons in comments published Friday by Petra. ' Equally, whilst we respect and revere freedom of speech, we condemn needless desecration and injury of Islamic sensibilities, such as the recent cartoons misrepresenting and vilifying my ancestor the Prophet (may peace and blessings be upon him)

And the Danish government condemned and appolgized for the cartoons.

So what is your point? I called you on your soliloquy condeming europeans, while you blindly ignore the fact that Jordan published them to. Are you now going to boycott Jordan or not? Both did the same thing.

The boycott against Denemark should stop , If Denemark have apologized and stopped publishing the pics.

But the propblem is that other European countries are competing each other in showing the pics. Thats why the problem is not over yet.

But the propblem is that other European countries are competing each other in showing the pics. Thats why the problem is not over yet.

No I dont think that is it. The problem is not over because the imams intentionally stirred up a firestorm. Nobody would have republished if those imams had not gotten the other muslim leaders to make this such big news. As has been pointed out over and over, this was intentionally stirred up by muslims, several months after the fact. Intentionally causing the masses to be angered.

For example:

The International Association of Muslim Scholars has called for an "international day of anger" about the cartoons. The Scholar calling for this is Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi. If you look up Qaradawi's pronouncements, you find that he sympathises with the judicial killing of homosexuals, and wants the rejection of dialogue with Jews in favour of "the sword and the rifle". He is very keen on suicide bombing, especially if the people who blow themselves up are children - "we have the children bomb" Reference

But even more to the point, the cartoons would never have been created in the first place if it were not for the impression that the islamic community has itself intentionally allowed to become pervasive worldwide. The veiw that even Muhammad al-Hamadi acknowledges is islam's fault. And you also should be honest with yourself about that perception.

The caricature that has sparked the loudest outcry depicts Muhammad wearing a turban shaped like a bomb. Muhammad al-Hamadi, writing in the United Arab Emirates' Al-Ittihad, argued that the perception of a link between Islam and terrorism is not merely a figment of European cartoonists' imaginations:

"The world has come to believe that Islam is what is practiced by Bin Laden, Zawahiri, Zarqawi, the Muslim Brotherhood, the Salafis, and others who have presented a distorted image of Islam. We must be honest with ourselves and admit that we are the reason for these drawings. Any harm to the Prophet or Islam is a result of Muslims who have come to reflect the worst image of Islam and certain Arabs who have not conveyed faithfully the life and biography of the Prophet."

Look at the pictures that people are posting, showing muslims protesting, and tell me that this perception is without merit.


[edit on 2/3/06 by makeitso]

Islamic fundies are insuted by the very existance of most of the world since most of the world hold them to be stone-age assholes who would kill someone who disagrees with them rather then give a moment of consideration to an opposing view. Christian fundies are bad but they do not go about blowing themselves up along with innocent people unfortunate enough to be in the vacinity of imbeciles.
How did I do?
I liked the stone-age thingy and the inbeciles thingy. All true of course but I really liked the image. The inage is one that Shi'ia have worked hard to win and I say they've won the right to the image the old fashioned way.
Stupid, Stupid, Stupid!
skep

Hmm maybe the Saudi Government should appologise for the Supression of Christianity in that Country and for the burning of Christian Bibles they seize? No?
Then Islam can hardly complain about the pictures, because at the end of the day thats all they are ... pictures. No ones supressing Islam in Europe or anywhere else in the free world, Muslims are given the right to practice their religion as they please, when they please. But that does not give them the right to flood the streets of our capital cities calling for people to be killed because of a bloody cartoon.
The cartoons were in bad taste, i think we can agree on that, but radical Muslims will jump on any band wagon to push forward their twisted agenda, and no im not painting all Muslims with the same brush, your vocal and potentialy violent minority are doing that for you.
I personaly find what the Saudi Government does to non-Muslims offensive, but you dont see me calling for Muslims to be killed.
Link
Perhaps People who live in glass houses shouldnt throw stones?

Having learned the English language, where "can I," has become permission rather than "may I," the answer to your question is they can. That they "cannot do such and such," is different from they "may not do such and such, " by a large stretch. But whether they may do what they are doing, is a matter of politics. The deed has already been done. If you understand the history of the United States, caricature has always been a central point of free speaking. Whether it is wise to caricature Mohamed is another question, but we do routinely caricature our Presidents.

Also it takes an insulted party to see the difference between satire and serious commentary. Humor is desperately needed in a a world of seriousness that threatens us all. Do any caricature you want folks, not because you can, but you may and must do so if that is your statement in today's world. One should find actual cases in which human beings are subject to harm far more seriously than what caricature shows in whose name such actions tend to be performed. That goes for any figure in history, but the intended effect is to produce thought.

[edit on 3-2-2006 by SkipShipman]

Deep Blue, in New Zealand they have not only shown them on the news, then interviewed a leading islamic academic afterwards (who was appoplectic) they have now been published in two newspapers.

Please add New Zealand to your hit list and remove Denmark in future.

I am glad that none of the above posts came with a decent point to challenge my powerful point of view:

Originally posted by Deep_Blue

All parties has to be treated equally and must be given equal rights of freespeech.
.
.
So either you allow offending every one or just prohibit offending them all.
.
.

when it comes to free speech it's all or nothing: we either have it or we don't. And if we were to have free speech for one writer but not for another, then we wouldn't have free speech at all.

www.spiked-online.com...
Exactly that is what I am talking about
.
.
Do the governments in the European countries have selective memory regarding the laws that they have?
.
.
The evidence is overwhelming that European governments have selective memories and double standards about what is freespeech and what is not.
[edit on 3-2-2006 by Deep_Blue]

All the points that you brought can be easily answered..and I commented about things like these before in another thread:
www.abovetopsecret.com...'


[edit on 4-2-2006 by Deep_Blue]

[edit on 4-2-2006 by Deep_Blue]