Muhammad and the Bomb (threat)

the_dart

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

So, what you're saying is, you're against freedom of speech? - Well thanks for coming out and saying that. Do you realise how many people in this country you're offending?

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

I think its very seldom that the US government interfere with their press seen as they value their freedom of speech laws even more than we do. Plus their main stream media is completely private, no government interference.

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

Perhaps that is the what you're getting on the biased Al Jazera, if you had been watching Sky News yesterday you would have seen Kofi Annan urging muslims to accept the Danish leaders apollogy.

"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 !?"

I'd like to know where you got those figures please. Even if you're telling the truth, 2 million a day isn't going to visibly affect a country like Denmarks Balance of Trade. If anything it will affect those who are boycotting the goods and thats all.

"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."

"we" - so you take part in it? So, you're full of hatred for the Jews then? What did they ever do to you?

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

Sounds like you're average Islamic dictatorship to me.

lazydaisy

Suff-

Would you consider yourself a moderate?

lazydaisy

This is part of the strategy. Bully the media and make people afraid to have an opinion.

Why the **** should the cartoonist or denmark apologise? It is his right as an artist to say what he wants. If you dont like it that's your problem.

Appeasement will not work with ignorant, uneducated, angry, intolerant and violent people. You give in once it will never end.

Its a new holocaust they want. Maybe Europe will wake up one of these days and smell reality.

Yes, we should all be supporting Denmark at this time. Im dissappointed to hear they have apologised.

Karoma

With any drawing, there is some abiguity as to it's exact meaning. As such, can someone actually show the page and not just the pictures? (Was it supporting an article?)

Hobbes

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.

And Ireland too. Or do you forget the Irish Government censoring all pictures of Bush wearing his wifebeater? Or when RTE was forbidden to interview certain people like Gerry Adams and Larry O'Toole.

I think its very seldom that the US government interfere with their press

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/oct2001/cens-o19.shtml
http://www.nwu.org/pic/0204free.htm

(although the links are wasted on you because you tend to dismiss links rather then research the story).

But times US media has been censored? You forget Janet Jacksons Nipple? Think that will happen again? Not thanks to the FCC.

Why the **** should the cartoonist or denmark apologise? It is his right as an artist to say what he wants. If you dont like it that's your problem.

Oddly enough, no it isn't. Of course a cartoonist could draw anything they wanted but you will find that newspapers outlets won't print it.

Anyway the more I read about this, it has less to do with the cartoon and more to do with the middle easts perception of what they believe the west is like and this cartoon just adds fuel to an existing fire.

Hobbes

Karoma wrote:

With any drawing, there is some abiguity as to it's exact meaning. As such, can someone actually show the page and not just the pictures? (Was it supporting an article?)

The article was posted in September 2005 in response to a writer trying to get someone to draw a picture of Muhammad for a childrens book. There are islamic laws forbidding the dipiction of drawing Muhammad. So the writer ignoring that told various cartoonists to create pictures of "what they thought of Muhammad". It is not just one picture that was offensive, it was numerous pictures.

Muslim community petitioned the paper for an apology and were told to feck off. They then told the government of the insult and again were ignored. At that where we are now numerous middle eastern countries see this not just as a crappy cartoon but as a mindset that the west basically thinks that all Muslims are like this. For example one of the cartoons depicts Muhammad welcoming suicide bombers into Heaven when according to the Islamic faith this is not true (only fundies believe this)

Now they are over-reacting, however they didn't just see the picture and think lets riot. They have been trying to get an apology only for some time.

adharc

Let's be clear about Muhammed. He was a warrior and he and his descendants fought tribes, the Christians, the Jews etc in many bloody battles. He may be a prophet to some but he is also an historical character and subject to historical discussion. The Koran preaches destruction of Christians and Jews.
I don't believe in insulting peoples beliefs but the recent cartoon has unleashed the true nature of Islamic fundamentalism. The burning of our European partners flags,the USA flag, the threats of death, beheading,death to Jews and Christians I find deeply offensive and demand an apology from the protagonists and nations involved.
I find the persecution of Christians in many Arab countries, the subjugation of women, the intolerance to discussion and learning and art, the wilful destruction and denial of education deeply offensive to me.
I find the butchering of innocent hostages, the bombing of Western people all in the name of religious fundamentalism offensive.
I find the threat to destroy the State of Israel has no place in this modern world and deeply aggressive and offensive.
At least we have the civility to respect our fellow man's views, nor do we parade and shoot guns in the air and burn Arab embassies and parade with death to.. flags and incite hatred.
Might I suggest that Stephen Spielberg makes a movie on the life and times of Muhammed!

Hobbes

If these cartoons (printed in September) show how easy they go off the handle why was there no fatwas for South Parks Super Best Friends?

I find deeply offensive and demand an apology from the protagonists and nations involved.

Ooh the Irony. The muslim community only asked for an apology to begin with and were told to feck off.

Freddie59

Hobbes wrote:

And Ireland too. Or do you forget the Irish Government censoring all pictures of Bush wearing his wifebeater? Or when RTE was forbidden to interview certain people like Gerry Adams and Larry O'Toole.

It was appropriate at the time.

Hobbes wrote:

But times US media has been censored? You forget Janet Jacksons Nipple? Think that will happen again? Not thanks to the FCC.

Yeah. But at least it's only her nipple. You could see the rest of her. Unlike Muslim countries, where women are treated like a sub species and are forced to cover everything (except their eyes for obvious reasons). Indeed, some idiotic tourists actually know this going there and go along with it.

Hobbes wrote:

Anyway the more I read about this, it has less to do with the cartoon and more to do with the middle easts perception of what they believe the west is like and this cartoon just adds fuel to an existing fire.

Actually it isn't. It's about a bunch of fundamentalist extremists trying to foist their 'values' on a democratised, FREE, society.

Freddie59

Hobbes wrote:

If these cartoons (printed in September) show how easy they go off the handle why was there no fatwas for South Parks Super Best Friends?



Ooh the Irony. The muslim community only asked for an apology to begin with and were told to feck off.

And rightly so. This is our culture - not theirs. If they want to live here I can only quote 'When in Rome'. I was amazed to see a Mosque in Clonskeagh on 6:1 the other night. Does anyone know if other religions are permitted within Islamic countries like, say, Iran, and if so, how many Christian churches have been allowed to be built in Tehran?

the_dart

Adharc just made some excellent points. It's a pitty that all our token left-winger, Hobbes, could respond with was a pittyful:

"If these cartoons (printed in September) show how easy they go off the handle why was there no fatwas for South Parks Super Best Friends? ...Ooh the Irony. The muslim community only asked for an apology to begin with and were told to feck off."

Perhaps because he is unable to respond. My theory on the reason for this is that Hobbes for some reason, maybe because the main-stream media in Ireland has been left-wing for so long, he has so much of America and seemingly even our own country and the West.

I have question or two.

1/ do the people against this cartoon support those who burnt down 4 embassies in the middle east?
2/ do you people support the protesters in London who held placards saying "butcher those who mock Islam", "massacre those who mock Islam", "Europe, your 9/11 will come" and "Freedom - go to hell"

(I particularly liked the last two [sarcastic])

Hagar

I always thought that blasphemy was a sin directed at a deity. Since Mohammed was just a man, holy man I'll grant you, but just a man nevertheless how can anyone be guilty of blasphemy against a human being?

flogen

Freddie59 wrote:

And rightly so. This is our culture - not theirs. If they want to live here I can only quote 'When in Rome'. I was amazed to see a Mosque in Clonskeagh on 6:1 the other night. Does anyone know if other religions are permitted within Islamic countries like, say, Iran, and if so, how many Christian churches have been allowed to be built in Tehran?

This argument is pointless though; it doesn't solve anything.
So Western (and Christian) countries are more tolerant of other religions while Middle Eastern (and Muslim) countries are not; so what you're saying is the Muslims should accept the insult; after all, we let them in here in the first place, right?
Surely the basic ideas which allow free religion are being ignored to some degree; what's the point in being allowed to preach your religious beliefs here if you're going to face widespread insult directed at it? I don't believe the cartoons were meant to offend Islam as a whole, but the ignorance of the cartoonists means they have.

Suff

Freddie59 wrote:

Does anyone know if other religions are permitted within Islamic countries like, say, Iran, and if so, how many Christian churches have been allowed to be built in Tehran?

This is silly....

Christianity came from the MiddleEast Dah! so there are Christian arabs.
Lebanon has a 50/50 Christian/Muslim population, Syria has over 4 Million Christians and over 3,000 Jew.
Jordan, egypt, Palestine, moroco, Yamen,...just to name some has a good Christian/Jewish population to this day.

In the gulf states (Kuwait, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain,Saudi) where Islam counts as %100 of the poplulation you have Churches built for the foreigners/non nationals who live/work there.
Yes in Tahran there are Churches for the christian Iranians.

secret_squirrel

Freddie59 wrote:

Unlike Muslim countries, where women are treated like a sub species and are forced to cover everything (except their eyes for obvious reasons).

Nice sweeping generalisation there. Instead of generalising why dont you actual go away and find out exactly how many muslim countries require the burka worn by law? And with links please. I'd wager its a very small number indeed.

Hobbes

Freddie59 wrote:

It was appropriate at the time.

I'd wondered where you had toddled off to. So "at the time" makes it right?

where women are treated like a sub species

Compared to here where a woman has no rights to travel if she is pregant if it is thought she is going to have an abortion. Or her life is not considered during delivery.

Or did you know that Women in the UK were not allowed to be served at the bar until the 80's. Of course I'm sure it was right "at the time".

It's about a bunch of fundamentalist extremists trying to foist their 'values' on a democratised, FREE, society.

While its them probably rioting, they are far from the majority. For example do you see any rioting in Dublin? For that matter why would Lebanon Government apologise to Denmark for the damage to the Embassey if they were trying to foist values on them?

Freddie59

Hobbes wrote:

I'd wondered where you had toddled off to. So "at the time" makes it right?

I didn''t toddle off anywhere Hobbes! Someone barred me from a forum so that I could not express a viewpoint which differed to theirs. I suppose it's a classic surpresssion of freedom of speech! Wouldn't expect any less though, given the forum I was in.;)

Hobbes wrote:

Compared to here where a woman has no rights to travel if she is pregant if it is thought she is going to have an abortion. Or her life is not considered during delivery.

A generalisation again. It is up to the woman, and/or her hsuband/partner to decide. I would always choose the life of the mother. Of course, here in the West my wife would actually have a say in the matter.......unlike the regimes you espouse. She would also not have to wear the equivalent of a blanket.

Hobbes wrote:

Or did you know that Women in the UK were not allowed to be served at the bar until the 80's. Of course I'm sure it was right "at the time".

Amazing!! I must have been at a party for transvestites in Liverpool in 1974. If it was they were the best-looking ones I've ever seen!

Hobbes wrote:

While its them probably rioting, they are far from the majority. For example do you see any rioting in Dublin? For that matter why would Lebanon Government apologise to Denmark for the damage to the Embassey if they were trying to foist values on them?

Lebanon.......great example! I suppose the Syrians will be next. Yeah they're not foisting values - just torching a building. This heroic attack says it all.

Hobbes

Freddie59 wrote:

I didn''t toddle off anywhere Hobbes! Someone barred me from a forum so that I could not express a viewpoint which differed to theirs.

No you were banned from the forum because you were told to take the topic to another forum and if you wished to complain not to do it in the thread in question.

They also don't like offtopic banter here so if you still feel hard done by take it to feedback or PM with me. I won't be replying on the issue here again. Anyway its only a week ban, not permanent. Just enough time for you to reflect on what got you banned and hopefully come back as a decent contributor to the discussion.

Of course, here in the West my wife would actually have a say in the matter

No she wouldn't. If she got pregnant and wanted an abortion and made her wishes public before attempting to travel she would not be allowed to travel. The only way to get around the ban would be to claim she was going to commit suicide.

Add to that if during the delivery there are complications the babies life comes first over the mothers.

Amazing!! I must have been at a party for transvestites in Liverpool in 1974.

Maybe you were. There was a law about it, and it was questioned in the courts around that time.

Lebanon.......great example! I suppose the Syrians will be next.

I'm sorry you did say they "were all" forcing thier opinions on the rest of the world?

Freddie59

Hobbes wrote:

No you were banned from the forum because you were told to take the topic to another forum and if you wished to complain not to do it in the thread in question.

Not so - and well you know it! For anyone who would like to see for themselves: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054865348

Hobbes wrote:

No she wouldn't. If she got pregnant and wanted an abortion and made her wishes public before attempting to travel she would not be allowed to travel. The only way to get around the ban would be to claim she was going to commit suicide.

Yes she would. The big issue here is that she IS free to travel (without having to have her husband condone it - or the local religious leader).

Hobbes wrote:

Add to that if during the delivery there are complications the babies life comes first over the mothers.

No it doesn't - the parents decide. Aren't we straying a little off topic Mr Hobbes......

Hobbes wrote:

Maybe you were. There was a law about it, and it was questioned in the courts around that time.

I presume you will be backing this up.......as is the case in other fora?;)

Hobbes wrote:

I'm sorry you did say they "were all" forcing thier opinions on the rest of the world?

While your sympathies very obviously lie with the fundamentalist, radical Muslim viewpoint let's get back on topic.

The name of this one's Muhammed and the bomb. See how easy it is to be distracted? And we're still free to have a public discussion.:eek:

Freddie59

Suff wrote:

This is silly....

Christianity came from the MiddleEast Dah! so there are Christian arabs.
Lebanon has a 50/50 Christian/Muslim population, Syria has over 4 Million Christians and over 3,000 Jew.
Jordan, egypt, Palestine, moroco, Yamen,...just to name some has a good Christian/Jewish population to this day.

I merely asked were there any other relions allowed. Interestingly, I found the quote below on:http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/inscr/mar/assessment.asp?groupId=63010

Christians, in general, are allowed to participate in Iran's economic and social life and have achieved a high standard of living. However, Christians, including those recognized by the state as official religious minorities, have encountered officially sanctioned discrimination in the areas of employment, education, public accommodations, the legal system and property ownership (POLIC103 = 1; POLIC303 = 1; POLIC403 = 2; POLIC603 = 2; POLIC703 = 2; POLIC803 = 2). Many Christian schools were taken over by the government after the 1979 revolution. All Iranian students must be instructed in Islam regardless of their religion

Imagine the uproar here if the Government occupied a Mosque and forced the Catholic religion to be taught. Yes, Mr. Suff, great religious tolerance in the middle East alright.

Suff wrote:

In the gulf states (Kuwait, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain,Saudi) where Islam counts as %100 of the poplulation you have Churches built for the foreigners/non nationals who live/work there.
Yes in Tahran there are Churches for the christian Iranians.

I refer you to the quote above.

Suff

Freddie59 wrote:

Imagine the uproar here if the Government occupied a Mosque and forced the Catholic religion to be taught. Yes, Mr. Suff, great religious tolerance in the middle East alright.

you're really silly....that's politics and the sh*t that comes with it! the "GOVERMENT" doesnt represent islam you know...there is'nt a single state in the world that has a %100 religious ruling. Iran, Saudi are no different they have law made up and nothing to do with islam.

What about the North huh?? both are christains and they cant stand the sight of each other..still!! it's politics not religion.

In schools in the ME, during religion lectures students are seperated into different classes depending on their religion. no force of which you speak of...I would know as I'm Syrian, I have Christains and Jewish syrian friends back home.

It would be good idea to learn about the religion from books more than FOX, CNN.

lazydaisy

Freddie59 wrote:

Not so - and well you know it! For anyone who would like to see for themselves: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054865348:

Yes well we all know that freedom of speech doesnt cut both ways.

Freddie59 wrote:

Yes she would. The big issue here is that she IS free to travel (without having to have her husband condone it - or the local religious leader).:

Nor will she be held criminally accountable for it. And yes she is free to travel. How many women have been arrested at Dublin airport because they told someone they were having an abortion. What nonsense.

Freddie59 wrote:

No it doesn't - the parents decide. Aren't we straying a little off topic Mr Hobbes......).:

And that is not the case in the US. MOthers life is put before the babies. But lets face it Ireland doesnt have the greatest record when it comes to womens rights, a fairer comparison would be with the west in general.

Whats highly ironic about Hobbes pc brigade is that Islam is not dissimilar from conservative Catholicism.

What Hobbes defends is anti-woman, anti-free speech, pro censorhip, anti debate, anti- artistic. He is a fake leftist. Real leftists promote these ideals and not the organisations which try to squash them.

Believe those warnings that the protesters are marching with. Hitler wrote a book about what he was going to do. No one believed him. These constituencies have told us what they will do. Our biggest mistake would be not to believe them.

Burning down buildings is an act of violence and terrorism. Drawing cartoons is not.

Here are the cartoons in case you are wondering what has caused all the fuss.

http://www.humaneventsonline.com/sarticle.php?id=12146

Google under Images Plantu - the cartoonist for le monde and you'll see far cleverer and far more poignant cartoons. You dont see the subjects of those setting buildings on fire all over the world and threatening France with a new holocaust.

Hobbes. Would you consider yourself a moderate? Do you attempt to justify the violence these cartoons have caused? Would you say that you are representative of most moderates?

I may not like your opinion but I will defend your right to have it and to speak it.

Freddie59

lazydaisy wrote:

I may not like your opinion but I will defend your right to have it and to speak it.

And there lies the nub of the issue. You have described freedom of speech in those few words. Well done! It must be remembered that Osama bin Laden, when asked what his idea of the perfect Islamic state was replied with 'The Taliban have it just right in Afghanistan'. For all of you who may be curious, here's a report on the treatment of women in that'perfect Islamic State.

Try and justify this, Messrs Hobbes and Suff:

http://www.amnesty.org/ailib/aireport/ar99/asa11.htm

Freddie59

Suff wrote:

you're really silly....that's politics and the sh*t that comes with it! the "GOVERMENT" doesnt represent islam you know

There, there, of course it doesn't.:eek:

Suff wrote:

What about the North huh?? both are christains and they cant stand the sight of each other..still!! it's politics not religion.

Oh dearie me. You really don't understand that situation very well, do you?:rolleyes:

Suff wrote:

In schools in the ME, during religion lectures students are seperated into different classes depending on their religion. no force of which you speak of...I would know as I'm Syrian, I have Christains and Jewish syrian friends back home.

I quoted Iran - probably the most fundamentalist state there. By the way, is Syria a member of the axis of evil? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/1988810.stm Will your Government be apologising anytime soon for the disgraceful behaviour in Damascus? I don't mean to offend, but if you dislike the West so much why are you here?:o

Suff wrote:

It would be good idea to learn about the religion from books more than FOX, CNN.

Actually I prefer the Euronews 'no comment' section, where they show you news footage without commentary. In fairness I learned an awful lot about Islam on that channel last time I watched. Machine-gun toting masked gunmen 'storming' unarmed civilian embassies......because of cartoons.:mad: Yes I learned an awful lot that day - the pictures spoke volumes. Then to see a mocked-up suicide bomber in London........very tactful indeed.:mad: :mad:

pH

The Bomb cartoon is hardly a terrorism image. It seems to be conveying a 'ticking bomb' metaphor, with the image of a bomb in the head, perhaps conveying a sense that Islam may 'go off'. If you wanted to draw muhammad as a terrorist then a bomb-belt would be a far more effective picture than wearing a bomb as a hat.

The fundamental issue seems to be that you cannot draw a picture of muhammed at all. I cannot see how any member of the Islamic faith can expect that rule to apply to any non-muslims. I believe that forms of naturalistic pictures/decorations are forbidden, but no muslim could expect christians or atheists to follow that rule could they?

If muslims want to live by a set of rules then that's absolutely fine - they can't/won't draw pictures of the prophet that's fine. We cannot head down the path of various groups of people taking offense at others actions, western society just cannot function if eveyone wants their rules to be applied to everyone else. Our society is by definition a 'live and let live' one.

Freddie59

pH wrote:

The Bomb cartoon is hardly a terrorism image. It seems to be conveying a 'ticking bomb' metaphor, with the image of a bomb in the head, perhaps conveying a sense that Islam may 'go off'. If you wanted to draw muhammad as a terrorist then a bomb-belt would be a far more effective picture than wearing a bomb as a hat.

The fundamental issue seems to be that you cannot draw a picture of muhammed at all. I cannot see how any member of the Islamic faith can expect that rule to apply to any non-muslims. I believe that forms of naturalistic pictures/decorations are forbidden, but no muslim could expect christians or atheists to follow that rule could they?

If muslims want to live by a set of rules then that's absolutely fine - they can't/won't draw pictures of the prophet that's fine. We cannot head down the path of various groups of people taking offense at others actions, western society just cannot function if eveyone wants their rules to be applied to everyone else. Our society is by definition a 'live and let live' one.

Very well said. But our society (in paricular it's freedoms and those enjoyed by women) are held in utter contempt by the radical fundamentalist fanatics. We have to protect it at all costs.

CiaranC

Suff wrote:

you're really silly....that's politics and the sh*t that comes with it! the "GOVERMENT" doesnt represent islam you know...there is'nt a single state in the world that has a %100 religious ruling. Iran, Saudi are no different they have law made up and nothing to do with islam.

This is the same line peddled by communists. Every time a communist government rose to power it descended into a totalitarian nightmare. Of course the communists just shrug and say 'thats not true communism'.

The reality of Saud, Iran, Afghanisthan or Indonesia is the reality of the Islamic state. Perhaps you will understand why people are keen to avoid it.

Hobbes

the_dart wrote:

Adharc just made some excellent points. It's a pitty that all our token left-winger, Hobbes, could respond with was a pittyful:

Yea yea.. Don't attack the poster. Attack the post.

Perhaps because he is unable to respond.

It was an open question. Despite what Ph mentions depicting Muhammed is not illegal (except in certain countries). the_syco on one of the threads posts a link detailing every depiction of Muhammad to this point. South park being one of them.

that Hobbes for some reason,

Again, attack the points I make rather then me directly. I let your earlier comment about me supporting Fundies slide, but I considered that the limit.

1/ do the people against this cartoon support those who burnt down 4 embassies in the middle east?
2/ do you people support the protesters in London who held placards saying "butcher those who mock Islam", "massacre those who mock Islam", "Europe, your 9/11 will come" and "Freedom - go to hell"

Of course we don't. A lot of muslims don't either. However from what you have written so far you seem to think there is a corrolation.

I see somewhat Irony in this incident too..
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4686410.stm

Freddie59

Suff wrote:

It would be good idea to learn about the religion from books more than FOX, CNN.

Learned a bit more about fanatical Islamics from Sky News today. Apparently the guy dressed in the fake suicide bomb in London last week is.........wait for it..........a convicted drug dealer. Now, most drug dealers are addicts themselves. Where does this sit within Islamic teachings? So it's OK for him to peddle drugs and ruin people's lives, but not OK for a Danish caricaturist to draw a cartoon?

RE*AC*TOR

Suff wrote:

you're really silly....that's politics and the sh*t that comes with it! the "GOVERMENT" doesnt represent islam you know...there is'nt a single state in the world that has a %100 religious ruling. Iran, Saudi are no different they have law made up and nothing to do with islam.

you mean like the Taliban? They imposed strict Sharia law, hardly a beacon of light for us hedons now was it?