Muhammad and the Bomb (threat)

CiaranC

The west needs to understand the difference between freedom to speak your mind and the freedom to be insulting and vulgar while hiding behind the "Freedom of Speech".

Freedom of speech means that from time to time you are going to hear speech that offends you. That is the nature of free speech.

If you dont like it, you are free to go live in a country which restricts freedom of speech.

Suff

CiaranC wrote:

Freedom of speech means that from time to time you are going to hear speech that offends you. That is the nature of free speech.

If you dont like it, you are free to go live in a country which restricts freedom of speech.

ohhh now I'm told to leave this country !!!
you didnt like what I said !?

Wibbs

Suff wrote:

The west needs to understand the difference between freedom to speak your mind and the freedom to be insulting and vulgar while hiding behind the "Freedom of Speech".

No, what the Muslim world needs to understand is that the freedom to print/speak your mind is precisely the freedom to be insulting, informative, whatever you like without fear if physical threat. Legal and financial threat ok. I may not like certain aspects of Muslim teaching, some of which may be disturbing to western ears and if you want to print or otherwise distribute same, I'll respect and indeed fight for your right to do so. Why can't you extend the same rights to others that happen not to agree with you?

Funny that only in the west you would find a statue of Christ with ofensive words and some male parts (How sick) if the west has lost its morals values do you want the world to copy it!

Again if you want freedom of expression, you must take the bad with the good. If you want to copy our freedoms you must be prepared for some unpleasantness. It's part of the price. You can say you want freedom of the press, but it's not freedom in any meaningful way if it's only your point of view/morals/religion that's represented. Censorship of crap(and I agree it is crap) like that is the thin end of the wedge.

Moral values, respect towards religious icons from whatever religion can only show the level of RESPECT ,UNDERSTANDING and TOLLERNCE that people have for each other


at the moment the West seems to be running low on that.

The east isn't exactly running high on that at all. In fact I can't think of a Muslim country that is even close to as tolerant as any European country.

CiaranC

I never told you to leave this country. If you are to live in the west as a muslim, you need to understand the fundamental rights and freedoms we have won over the past 50-100 years and respect them.

Wibbs

Suff wrote:

ohhh now I'm told to leave this country !!!
you didnt like what I said !?

No Suff, that would be way out of order, but you have to try and see this from the wests point of view. Many would value our freedom to print this as much as your freedom to be upset by it. Dunno if I put that right.

mike65

When in Rome...etc!

If secular westerners want to be at home in thier own world then the freedom to insult and cause offence must be protected.

Mike.

Hagar

Suff wrote:

ohhh now I'm told to leave this country !!!
you didnt like what I said !?

That is exactly what Westerners are told to do in Arab States.
They're Arab Rules not ours.
But don't Arab rules apply everywhere?

Pazaz 21

I agree with most people that to truly have freedom of speech we must tolerate the bad, otherwise it wouldn't really be freedom of speech, now would it ?

I know this is a little off topic but,

Does the Quoran(sp) teach any kind of tolerance ?

Wibbs

Pazaz 21 wrote:

Does the Quoran(sp) teach any kind of tolerance ?

The Islam forum might be the better place to ask. There's a couple of knowledgable boyos over there. I've been roasted once or twice.:D

flogen

While many of the protesters (especially the more extreme ones) are bemused by freedom of speech, this is not a fair shield in this instance IMO.
Freedom of speech, like all rights, comes with responsibilities; in other words if you want to practice your human rights you have to respect other peoples rights too;
People are making comparisons to Anti-Semetic cartoons in the Middle East, and while these are very insulting to the Jewish faith they are not targetting Jewish figures of worship where the Danish cartoons etc. are (I'm not making justifications, but cartoons with Sharon as a Nazi while likely to offend seem to be aimed more at Sharon, a politican than the Jewish faith in general; the point being made that Sharon, in his massacre of Palestinians in the past, is no better than the SS).
As I said before, satire on a religion or a portion of the followers of religions should be expressed freely where justified, but the satarists should be careful not to insult the entire religion, which they have done here.
Now, was it the intention of the satarists to make an observation on the subversion of Islam by extremists, or where they just trying to poke fun at a religion for the sake of it?

Freddie59

Wibbs wrote:

The Islam forum might be the better place to ask. There's a couple of knowledgable boyos over there. I've been roasted once or twice.:D

Speak for yourself!:D

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054865348&page=2

These guys are no more than schoolyard bullies with AKAs. They MUST be faced down at every opportunity. Come on Wibbs!

Ray007

I am just amazed at how out of proportion this all getting.
To be honest ,the most incredibly thing is to see the muslims in London chanting against the western world. Why do they live there, then? Maybe they would prefer to live in Afganistan or Pakistan or those lovely countries[sic].
It is just a comic. I don't see how offensive that is compared to other things.

All they are looking is publicity.

Hagar

The Danish and Chilean Embassies in Syria have been set on fire according to the last radio news I heard. They don't seem to have any grasp of geography.*


* Both Embassies are in the same building.

Cork

Salman Rushdie, a Danish cartoon...........what next?

Western Countries value freedom of speech.

It is worth protecting.

Have they an openion on the Simpsons?

mike65

Don't forget Theo Van Gogh killed by a Muslim in 2004.

Meanwhile here's a new non-offensive look cartoon

Mike.

Suff

Freddie59 wrote:

These guys are no more than schoolyard bullies with AKAs. They MUST be faced down at every opportunity. Come on Wibbs!

Bullies with AKA's!!!!
nice attitude, why dont you come over to the Islamic forum for a chat!

Hagar

mike65 wrote:

Don't forget Theo Van Gogh killed by a Muslim in 2004.

Meanwhile here's a new non-offensive look cartoon

Mike.

Die Infedel dog! The black line is the same colour as The Prophet's, PBUH, 3rd wife's best dress.

JustAnother

Snickers Man wrote:

I have a memory, dating back to the 70s, of the British Christian Clean-up-TV campaigner Mary Whitehouse taking a succesful case against a gay magazine for 'blasphemous libel' after it published a story, or a poem or something in which a Roman soldier commits necrophile acts on Christ's body after it was taken from the cross.

The publishers argued that blasphemous libel was such an out of date law that the case should not proceed and that it only protected Christianity and in a multifaith country like 70s Britain it should be considered obsolete. The judge argued that far from there being no law to protect religions they should all be protected and the case proceeded.

Whitehouse won.

That's the case known as the Gay News case after the magazine that published a poem by James Kirkup called The Love that Dare Not Speak Its Name. In 2002 a well-publicised public reading on the steps of St Martin-in-the-Fields church didn't lead to a blasphemy prosecution.

Some Muslims in the late 1980s tried taking a blasphemy action against Salman Rushdie. The case didn't succeed because the English legal system recognised blasphemy against Christianity only. A House of Lords select committe was even more specific - blasphemy only exists against the Church of England.
http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld200203/ldselect/ldrelof/95/9515.htm

JustAnother

RE*AC*TOR wrote:

The picture with the bomb in the turban, is a valid observation. The Koran is being interpretted by certain people in a way that encourages them to use lots of bombs.

Trouble is, that's just one interpretation - many of those offended are probably reading it as saying Islam calls all of its' followers to be terrorists.

RE*AC*TOR wrote:

*edit* and by the way, there are plenty of overtly anti-semetic cartoons in publications in certain islamic countries, so what's good for the goose etc.

I seem to remember being taught as a child that two wrongs don't make a right.

JustAnother

mike65 wrote:

I was just watching the BBC news and they ran a feature without showing any pix just text. It looks like they are running scared.

Maybe they're being extra cautious given the unfortunate coincidence that Nick Griffin won his case around the same time.

Cork

RTE ran a feature on Prime time without showing the cartoons.

luckat

It may not be a question of being scared. Maybe they just have good manners?

Freddie59

Suff wrote:

Bullies with AKA's!!!!
nice attitude, why dont you come over to the Islamic forum for a chat!

I'm already there! Do you really think comments like that intimidate people? Grow up.

Suff

Freddie59 wrote:

I'm already there! Do you really think comments like that intimidate people? Grow up.

you called Muslims "Bullies with AKA's"
so who needs to grow up here??

the_dart

“can understand the anger around the world and the violent langauge thats been used. at the begining when the pictures were published the muslim community asked the newspaper to stop and apologies”

Sounds like censorship.

“the community turned to the goverment for help, ...nothing...no one is going to acknowledge the insult.”

I don’t see why Governemnts should have to interfere with the press. That’s something that dictators do, something very common in Islamic countries. Besides the point, the Danish President and at least one Danish ambassador apologized for the cartoon. The reaction to the Danish apology: two of their embassies were burnt down.

“the last resort was the large protests and the Boycotting of Danish products.
which I suport!”

I’ve increased my spending on Danish products. I’ve decided to drink Carlsberg Danish beer instead of my usual now.

“the burning of the Danish flag just yet!”

The flag is a representation of the Danish people. You think the action of one paper is representative of the whole of the Danish people? Sad.

“there is a difference between the freedom of speech and the freedom to insult!”

How come in the Islamic world you’re always insulting the Jews? – I don’t see Israeli people going around burning embassies and throwing rocks and burning flags and threatening journalists etc. How come Jewish people can have a civilized debate and you can’t?

“Thank God for America.”

Amen to that.

the_dart

"RTE ran a feature on Prime time without showing the cartoons."

That's because RTÉ is a biased, left-wing organisation.

Freddie59

Suff wrote:

you called Muslims "Bullies with AKA's"
so who needs to grow up here??

Well what would you call them then? Let's see........groups storming unarmed civilian embassies around the World with sub-machine guns. I'm trying to think of another name, but bullies with AKAs seems to be the most apt description.

Of course, these extremely brave acts are probably viewed differently in some quarters. I'm sure you wouldn't be condoning it if your wife or child worked there.

Freddie59

the_dart wrote:

“can understand the anger around the world and the violent langauge thats been used. at the begining when the pictures were published the muslim community asked the newspaper to stop and apologies”

Sounds like censorship.

“the community turned to the goverment for help, ...nothing...no one is going to acknowledge the insult.”

I don’t see why Governemnts should have to interfere with the press. That’s something that dictators do, something very common in Islamic countries. Besides the point, the Danish President and at least one Danish ambassador apologized for the cartoon. The reaction to the Danish apology: two of their embassies were burnt down.

“the last resort was the large protests and the Boycotting of Danish products.
which I suport!”

I’ve increased my spending on Danish products. I’ve decided to drink Carlsberg Danish beer instead of my usual now.

“the burning of the Danish flag just yet!”

The flag is a representation of the Danish people. You think the action of one paper is representative of the whole of the Danish people? Sad.

“there is a difference between the freedom of speech and the freedom to insult!”

How come in the Islamic world you’re always insulting the Jews? – I don’t see Israeli people going around burning embassies and throwing rocks and burning flags and threatening journalists etc. How come Jewish people can have a civilized debate and you can’t?

“Thank God for America.”

Amen to that.

Very, very well put. Ditto to that.

Suff

the_dart wrote:

Sounds like censorship.

which is needed in some cases around the world otherwise it will lead to chaos!

the_dart wrote:

I don’t see why Governemnts should have to interfere with the press. That’s something that dictators do, something very common in Islamic countries.

really??? check the press on the otherside of the Atlantic!!

the_dart wrote:

the Danish President and at least one Danish ambassador apologized for the cartoon.

they didn't!! the refused to do anything other than say..."it's Freedom of speech"

the_dart wrote:

I’ve increased my spending on Danish products. I’ve decided to drink Carlsberg Danish beer instead of my usual now.

Good for you, you know that they are losing over 2 million euro a day!
I dont think you can drink the quivelent to that??..........can you !?

the_dart wrote:

The flag is a representation of the Danish people. You think the action of one paper is representative of the whole of the Danish people? Sad.

No,...the danish goverment did stand beside the newspaper.

the_dart wrote:

How come in the Islamic world you’re always insulting the Jews? –

we make fun of the Zionist state and not the Jews! for your good knowledge there is a difference! search google for Jews against Zionisum.

the_dart wrote:

I don’t see Israeli people going around burning embassies and throwing rocks and burning flags and threatening journalists etc. How come Jewish people can have a civilized debate and you can’t?

HAHAHA!!!! where have you been?
They use Weapons, bombs,assassinations, deportation, presionment...

Is that civilised in your mind!??

the_dart wrote:

“Thank God for America.”

I agree as long it for social/technology/health stuff

but NOT for their mad/evil/biased foreign affairs!:mad: :mad:

Freddie59

Suff wrote:

really??? check the press on the otherside of the Atlantic

This is usually because of a threat to National security, usually to prevent those who support/harbor terrorists from attacking the USA - the country to which all of us owe our freedom several times over. Long may they reign. Heaven help us all were they ever to capitulate.

Suff wrote:

they didn't!! the refused to do anything other than say..."it's Freedom of speech"

Why should they apologise? As I have already said, were Catholics to react in the same childish way as Muslims for "insults" the World would have been wiped out long ago.

Suff wrote:

No,...the danish goverment did stand beside the newspaper.

And rightly so. This is Europe, not Iran.

Suff wrote:

we make fun of the Zionist state and not the Jews! for your good knowledge there is a difference! search google for Jews against Zionisum.

Who would 'we' be? If you are Islamic you are splitting hairs. You cannot make fun of one without insulting the other.

Suff wrote:

HAHAHA!!!! where have you been?
They use Weapons, bombs,assassinations, deportation, presionment...

Is that civilised in your mind!?

No - no more cilised than the actions of those who provoke them (Quassam rockets during an agreed ceasefire, for example). Amazingly, these ceasefires usually occur when the terrorists are on the ropes and nearly whipped. Where do they then hide out? In the middle of civilian areas.

Suff wrote:

I agree as long it for social/technology/health stuff

but NOT for their mad/evil/biased foreign affairs!:mad: :mad:

Ah - the classic Muslim perspective. It's very Father Ted-esque. Oh down with America and that sort of thing. Interesting though. If you read a book called Holy War Inc by Peter L. Bergen it gives an amazing insight into the mentality of the terrorist psyche. Just before meeting ObL, Bergen met with his second in command who appeared in the classic Arab dress, very traditional.

He then whips out a laptop and GSM phone. When Bergen pointed out that this seemed at variance with his beliefs he retorted, like Suff has, that 'of course we despise America and all it stands for, but this technology is very good'. Obviously, this mirrors Afghanistan, where the Taleban tried to enforce an extreme Islamic state.

They would spend their days driving around in 4x4s, wearing jeans, and enjoying all the Western trappings while the other 99.99% of the poulation had everthing from TV to kite flying prohibited. Of course the highlight of the week were the Friday executions for serious offences against Islamic law (http://www.amnesty.org/ailib/aireport/ar99/asa11.htm). I think this link says it all.

Now, Suff, do you really think that the West will EVER succumb to this 'evil empire' operation? Extremely unlikely. The West has faced down far worse in the past - and won. This will be no different. Yes, the Axis Of Evil does indeed exist. America's behavior, in comparison to that in the attached link, is almost saintly.

Indeed, God Bless America.