Muhammad and the Bomb (threat)

RE*AC*TOR · 08-02-2006 11:58AM

Suff wrote:

NO they didnt!!!!! they had a big political agenda.

No state/country in this world which use Full Islamic Law.

If there was one it would have been a peaceful state.

You can't deny that the Taliban was a fundementalist Islamic regime and the closest any state has ever come to a 100% Islamic State.

Suff wrote:

in the MiddelEast Freedom of Speech is not allowed due to "POLITICAL" reasons and not religious!!!

Surely the current discussion shows that at least a certain element of freedom of speech restriction is due to religious reasons?

Also please spare us all the ":mad: :mad: :mad: " and the "!!!!!"
No one's attacking you personally.

Suff · 08-02-2006 11:58AM

the_dart wrote:

What I can't comprehend though, and this is more evident in London, why have a minority of extremist muslims come to a country where they are not willing to accept and uphold the laws and culture of that country?

I dont think that they are all foreign!
Just because you're a Muslim doen't mean you are a foreigner!
Last year over 1000 Germans converted into Islam..so do they become Extremists Islamic foreigners?

as for the Extremists Islamic foreigners within that protest...I would say they are running from political prosecution (in their home land) as tahat's always the case.

Suff · 08-02-2006 11:59AM

*mod edit*; off topic

Wibbs · 08-02-2006 12:23PM

Suff wrote:

Last year over 1000 Germans converted into Islam..so do they become Extremists Islamic foreigners?

Actually, with the Muslims I've known over the years the non "foreign" recent converts to Islam were by far the worst extremists, when compared to lifetime Muslims. I think that's the same with any religion though. Born again Christians are usually far more "christian". This I found even more so with newly converted Male Muslims. The demographics of Islamic conversion tend to show that more women than men convert. Usually when they marry into the faith(non muslim men can't marry Muslim women anyway so that might explain that one though).

it got to be a joke

More scaremongering I'd say tbh Suff. The idea that they're targeting african americans for a start. Those generally belong to the nation of Islam, which is considered a heresy by 99% of ordinary Muslims anyway. If the Saudi's are paying for that, I'd ask for my money back.

mike65 · 08-02-2006 12:28PM

That article is so full of sh-ite I would'nt know where to start.

Mike.

Freddie59 · 08-02-2006 01:28PM

Suff wrote:

really?!!! how would you know?
to make a point so no one will repeat this again:

liberalbuster wrote:

in the MiddelEast Freedom of Speech is not allowed due to "POLITICAL" reasons and not religious!!!

Get your facts right Mr!!! :mad: :mad:

The population of christains in Syria are more than the popluation of Ireland! do you think we would mock them!
as in regard to Jews.... they mock the Zionist state of Israel and not the Jewish faith! no faith has been ever mocked in the Arab Media. a

political figures yes.

if I hear anti-Semetic again I'll go mad!!! :mad:
Arabs are Semtic!!!!

Add more fuel to the Fire!!! nice one! :eek:

I've picked this one to reply to because you seem to have lost track of yourself.

1. It's fairly clear you are anti-semitic (The Zionist stae...blah...blah). Just more warmongering rhetoric. Maybe sometime you could bring yourself to just say 'Israel' or 'The Israeli people' Try it. It's not hard.

2. The cold hard facts are that a liberal, western, FREE state allowed it's citizens to express themslves free. Other closed, narrow minded states chose to take offence. In fairness they're entitled to. However, what they're NOT entitled to do is to burn down buildings, threaten civilians, attack embassies, etc.

3. You cannot, as much as you would like to, separate Politics from Religion in the Middle East. They are intertwined. And, unless someone is blind or deaf, it's glaringly obvious. Case in point: Salam Rushdie writes a bokk. The Government of Iran declare a death sentence on him, using religion as the excuse. And I presume you are now agreeing that freedom of speech does not exist in the Middle East.

Suff, this is a no-win situation for the radical muslims. They nearly want to declare war over a cartoon - an effigy. How many times have we seen radical muslims dancing on effigies of this or effigies of that on out TV screens?

And do we in the West, for example, go to, let's say, Clonskeagh and attempt to storm the local mosque. No. And why? Because we are all dults living in a free society which thrives on freedom of speech and debate. That's why you and I are having this discussion.

You can dress it up any way you like. The behavior of bthe past week is completely unacceptable and alien to us in the modern civilised, democratised Western FREE world. And that is the cold hard fact of the matter.

Freddie59 · 08-02-2006 01:36PM

Suff wrote:

the most evil men in modern history were Christians (Benito Mussolini, Adolf Hitler , Joseph Stalin, General Francisco Franco of Spain , GENERAL HUMBERTO BRANCO of Brazil, COLONEL HUGO BANZER
President of Bolivia, GENERAL JORGE RAFAEL VIDELA
President of Argentina and GENERAL AUGUSTO PINOCHET
President of Chile)

You're 100% right of course, apart from two things:

1. Hitler was not a Christian. Check your facts and have a look before commenting:

"The claim is sometimes made that Hitler was a Christian - a Roman Catholic until the day he died. In fact, Hitler rejected Christianity."

That's from http://answers.org/history/hitquote.html

Very interesting reading.

2. The West, unlike the middle East, removed and defeated these despots. I don't see any middle East government trying to control or subdue Iran.

Indeed, surprise, surprise, your old homeland is actively supporting Iran in their nuclear development. I wonder why? Very interesting. http://www.iranmania.com/News/ArticleView/Default.asp?ArchiveNews=Yes&NewsCode=39767&NewsKind=CurrentAffairs Comments?

lazydaisy · 08-02-2006 01:49PM

Suff wrote:

The population of christains in Syria are more than the popluation of Ireland! do you think we would mock them!
as in regard to Jews.... they mock the Zionist state of Israel and not the Jewish faith! no faith has been ever mocked in the Arab Media. :

Oh I beg to differ. Here's plenty to ponder, and thats just the tip of the iceberg.

http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-21.htm

http://www.adl.org/main_Arab_World/default.htm

http://silentrunning.tv/?p=705

Suff wrote:

if I hear anti-Semetic again I'll go mad!!! :mad:
Arabs are Semtic!!!!:

Dont go mad. You're going to hear it alot. Yes anti-semitic does mean originally anti-people from the ME, to include both Jews and Arabs, but the meaning anti-jew has superceded the older meaning.

Hobbes · 08-02-2006 01:58PM

1. It's fairly clear you are anti-semitic

Sorry to nitpick but Muslims are also semitic.

RE*AC*TOR · 08-02-2006 02:03PM

Hobbes wrote:

Sorry to nitpick but Muslims are also semitic.

Well stop nitpicking then. The usage of the term anti-semitic has come to represent anti-jew. We appreciate the origin of the word - but can you not also appreciate what it has come to mean?

Gegerty · 08-02-2006 02:16PM

Here's my 2c worth of freedom of speech. Muslims have shown their true colours. One of the cartoons showed Mohammad with a bomb as a turbin and the muslim world goes out on a rampage and issue bomb threats, oh the irony! You can't paint all muslims with the same brush, blah blah blah. A muslim is a muslim. It's the fundamental flaw in your beliefs, by the mere fact that you are muslim means I can paint you with the same brush. Now I admit alot of ignorance as to what exactly it is you believe in, but 1 thing I do know is that its bulls*it and I won't have it forced in my face and I won't pussy foot around you just becasuse you've read the Bulls*it Koran and hear voices from god. I won't let you intrude in my way of life and threaten my childrens future security because of your bulls*it beliefs. In Afganistan they tried to attack a US military base. Whats it got to do with the US? Any excuse for a riot, any excuse for a war with people who don't believe in the same things as you do.

Suff · 08-02-2006 03:17PM

Gegerty wrote:

just becasuse you've read the Bulls*it Koran and hear voices from god. I won't let you intrude in my way of life and threaten my childrens future security because of your bulls*it beliefs.

Watch your mouth! :mad:

pH · 08-02-2006 03:32PM

It's fairly clear you are anti-semitic

Hobbes wrote:

Sorry to nitpick but Muslims are also semitic.

You may be sorry to nitpick, but I'm afraid it's not nitpicking, it's has nothing to do with the word "anti-semitic".

Despite the use of the prefix "anti," the terms Semitic and Anti-Semitic are not antonyms. To avoid the confusion of the misnomer, many scholars on the subject (such as Emil Fackenheim of the Hebrew University) now favor the unhyphenated term antisemitism. Yehuda Bauer articulated this view in his writings and lectures: (the term) "Antisemitism, especially in its hyphenated spelling, is inane nonsense, because there is no Semitism that you can be anti to." [1], also in his A History of the Holocaust, p.52)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-semetic

Anti-semetic has a tradional use "anti-jew" (for a full history read the wiki), the fact that "semetic" referes to a family of languages that includes arabic in not relevant.

Suff · 08-02-2006 03:32PM

Freddie59 wrote:

Maybe sometime you could bring yourself to just say 'Israel' or 'The Israeli people' Try it. It's not hard.

NEVER! it's for the Palestinian people regardless of their faith (Jews, Christians, Muslims)

Freddie59 wrote:

You cannot, as much as you would like to, separate Politics from Religion in the Middle East. They are intertwined.

NO, the goverments in the ME are always trying to remove/isolate religion-influenced people from goverment. {read on the brotherhood of Islam groups, they have been fought everywhere to this day, in Syria, Eygpt, Kuwait and Saudi}

Freddie59 wrote:

Salam Rushdie writes a bokk. The Government of Iran declare a death sentence on him, using religion as the excuse.

Which is exactly my point. goverments use religion but never actually comply with it. the states have declared a Holy war on "Terror", if you listen to Bush's speechs everynow and then they are all Religion based.

Freddie59 wrote:

The behavior of bthe past week is completely unacceptable and alien to us in the modern civilised, democratised Western FREE world. And that is the cold hard fact of the matter.

No its not, just go back 20 years or so and see what were the headlines in the west.
anyway all the above is debatable..., are you sure.. Civilised? Modern, Free?

Gegerty · 08-02-2006 03:49PM

Suff wrote:

Watch your mouth! :mad:

Or what? you'll Jihad my ass? I can say what I want, in the same way I can say I think the catholic bible is bulls*t. That's the beauty of living in a free and democratic society. Why don't you go over to the tora bora mountains and get butt raped by the Taleban if you want to live in a suppressed society.

Hobbes · 08-02-2006 03:50PM

pH wrote:

Anti-semetic has a tradional use "anti-jew" (for a full history read the wiki), the fact that "semetic" referes to a family of languages that includes arabic in not relevant.

Then just say anti-jewish. Or anti-Israel. Want to know why they don't do this? Because it is easier to link the two.

For example Anti-American is generally spouted as those people who hate America when it is generally Anti-"American Government/administration". But it is easier to argue against someone like.

Person1: I think Bush is an idiot.
Person2: Your Anti-American! Why do you hate Americans?

Now you may accept "Anti-semite" but you would be better off asking the person if they are against the religon, the people or the administration of a country in particular rather then thinking that they are all connected.

Hobbes · 08-02-2006 03:53PM

Gegerty wrote:

Now I admit alot of ignorance as to what exactly it is you believe in,

There is your problem right there. Prehaps you should go learn up on the subject you are hating before forming an opinion.

ShayHT · 08-02-2006 03:54PM

All football fans are hooligans
All skinheads are neonazis
All priets are paedophiles
All Irish are terrorists
All English are scum
All....All....All

There are over a billion Muslims on the planet, there are thousands rioting. Just because some do does not mean all are, or are even supporting them.

Gegerty wrote:

Why don't you go over to the tora bora mountains and get butt raped by the Taleban if you want to live in a suppressed society.

Bit harsh there!

Gegerty · 08-02-2006 04:02PM

Hobbes wrote:

There is your problem right there. Prehaps you should go learn up on the subject you are hating before forming an opinion.

You're missing my point. My point is I don't want to learn up on it. I don't want to know anything about it. I don't care what they believe in, I don't care if they get upset over a stupid cartoon, in fact thats their problem not mine. What I won't tolerate is being told I must listen and learn about their beliefs. Why should I? Why should I give a toss? I said I admit ignorance when it comes to their beliefs, don't twist that around and say I'm admiting that what I'm saying is ignorant.

the_dart · 08-02-2006 04:11PM

“sorry...who gave Syria that title? ahh Bush!, so if he said it then its 100% true, final word, holy words????”

1/Syria was directly involved in the murder of the Lebanese Prime Minister.

2/Syria funds and arms Palestinian terrorists that have bombed and killed innocent Israelis.

3/Syria sold arms to Saddam and gave night-vision goggles to Iraq just before the invasion (it shows what side they’re on).

4/Syria have a huge stockpile of Chemical weapons and with the means to deliver them – they have SS-12 “Scale-board” Ballistic Missiles which can carry over 8,000kg of material (Biological, Nuclear or Chemical) with a highly accurate, reliable range of 800km.

Now that sounds to me like a rogue state that should either disarm and join the War on Terrorism (just like Libya) or else there is scope for future conflict there.

“Last year over 1000 Germans converted into Islam”

I don’t believe the figures but even so in a country that has a population of over 80million, it is quite small.

“as for the Extremists Islamic foreigners within that protest...I would say they are running from political prosecution (in their home land) as tahat's always the case.”

Well, if they can’t accept and uphold our laws then why don’t they move to a different country such as Iran which is a theocracy and upholds Islamic Law.

the_dart · 08-02-2006 04:12PM

"NEVER! it's for the Palestinian people regardless of their faith "

It's Israel and the Israeli people. It's a lovely country and they're lovely people. How can you come on here and represent Islam as being a peaceful religion when the next minute you're discriminate against the Jewish and Israeli people.

Gegerty · 08-02-2006 04:14PM

ShayHT wrote:

There are over a billion Muslims on the planet, there are thousands rioting. Just because some do does not mean all are, or are even supporting them.

Oh that makes it ok then. Attacking an embassy in years gone by, done by any other nation would have been considered an act of war. They're using their religion as justification for an act of war. They are also backed up by at least one nations leader (Iran). Are you saying that a nation cannot be held resposible for their leaders beliefs and comments? There is something fundamentally flawed here.

Suff · 08-02-2006 04:16PM

Gegerty wrote:

You're missing my point. My point is I don't want to learn up on it. I don't want to know anything about it. I don't care what they believe in, I don't care if they get upset over a stupid cartoon, in fact thats their problem not mine. What I won't tolerate is being told I must listen and learn about their beliefs. Why should I? Why should I give a toss? I said I admit ignorance when it comes to their beliefs, don't twist that around and say I'm admiting that what I'm saying is ignorant.

Sounds like ignorance. anyway how do you expect people to take listen to your opinion/analysis on a subject you have no clue about???

Now that talk would be considered as Bull****!

ShayHT · 08-02-2006 04:23PM

Of course it doesn't make it ok, i think it is wrong.

But you are missing my point, you keep saying "they", and not "the ones doing the rioting"

And if you are talking "acts of war" theres countries doing far worse things than attacking an embassy... that is what i call a mob rioting.

And no, a nation cannot be held responsible for their leaders beliefs and comments, are you trying to say good ol GWB should invade Iran?

Gegerty wrote:

Oh that makes it ok then. Attacking an embassy in years gone by, done by any other nation would have been considered an act of war. They're using their religion as justification for an act of war. They are also backed up by at least one nations leader (Iran). Are you saying that a nation cannot be held resposible for their leaders beliefs and comments? There is something fundamentally flawed here.

the_dart · 08-02-2006 04:23PM

"NO, the goverments in the ME are always trying to remove/isolate religion-influenced people from goverment. {read on the brotherhood of Islam groups, they have been fought everywhere to this day, in Syria, Eygpt, Kuwait and Saudi}"

I have respect for the Kingdom of Jordon who seem to have managed to do it. I have respect for the Jordanian people who are totally against fundamentalist Islamic terrorists. I have repect for most Muslims who denounce terrorists and aren't throwing anut over this cartoon.

Let me explain it to you. Cartoons like that are posted all the time. So you got offended by the mohammed cartoon, fine. Cartoons get published satiring Jesus too. Fine. That might offend practising christians. Why can't you accept free speech and accept it. Not all people feel the same way about Mohammed as you do. Fine. I mean... I'm trying to think of things that might offend me in a cartoon...

... OH! - I got one - what would offend me in a paper is a cartoon mocking the Holocaust (as a paper in Iran is hosting a compeition to see who cna draw the best cartoon about the holocaust). I would find that offensive. I don't most people would. However despite that, I wouldn't go around burning embassies, protesting, threatening journalists nor would I blame the whole nation of Iran for this cartoon that's going to be published soon. Nor would I refuse to buy Iranian products (although I don't know of any that I buy). And when this cartoon is published, you may get a reaction saying, that offends me, and the people will just move on. Now why can't you do the same?

Because even if you are unable to accept freedom of speech then at least accept that an Iranian paper has now adopted this phrase "an eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth" and therefore you're a hypocrit if you're still whining about it tomorrow.

Suff · 08-02-2006 04:25PM

the_dart wrote:

1/Syria was directly involved in the murder of the Lebanese Prime Minister.

No hard proof of that still.

the_dart wrote:

2/Syria funds and arms Palestinian terrorists that have bombed and killed innocent Israelis.

They are called freedom fighters, the USA arms Israelis to have bombs to kill innocent Palestinians. work both ways.

the_dart wrote:

3/Syria sold arms to Saddam and gave night-vision goggles to Iraq just before the invasion (it shows what side they’re on).

I dont know if thats a fact or just a US claim , even so...sure I am against the War/ "Invasion" as you put it yourself.

the_dart wrote:

4/Syria have a huge stockpile of Chemical weapons and with the means to deliver them – they have SS-12 “Scale-board” Ballistic Missiles which can carry over 8,000kg of material (Biological, Nuclear or Chemical) with a highly accurate, reliable range of 800km.

Where did you get that info, I'd like to see it for reference,..really.

the_dart wrote:

I don’t believe the figures but even so in a country that has a population of over 80million, it is quite small.

Its Still good if you think a 1000 or so a year, also you have to think of the future where these people will have familes and will increase in numbers

The point here......you can bring up stuff on Syria as you like, it's not perfect I agree but neither is the States or Israel. they all have problems that must be addressed and changed for the good of the people.

Now lets stay on topic ok

Hobbes · 08-02-2006 04:25PM

Gegerty wrote:

You're missing my point.

I am not missing the point at all. You have no clue what it is your hating. You said it yourself you are ignorant.

Tell me how many Muslims have you heard of rioting in Dublin? or Ireland?

RE*AC*TOR · 08-02-2006 04:30PM

What about the majority stadning by and allowing these actions to take place? Where is the voice of the majority calling for and end to violence?

Suff · 08-02-2006 04:32PM

the_dart wrote:

However despite that, I wouldn't go around burning embassies, protesting, threatening journalists nor would I blame the whole nation of Iran for this cartoon that's going to be published soon. Nor would I refuse to buy Iranian products (although I don't know of any that I buy). And when this cartoon is published, you may get a reaction saying, that offends me, and the people will just move on. Now why can't you do the same?

mod edit: racist comment

the_dart wrote:

an Iranian paper has now adopted this phrase "an eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth"

It is sad and unforthunate that Iran have decided to take the same route as the Danish Newspapers, the Iranians claim they are testing the level "Freedom of speech" of the West by puplishing these cartoons.

However if we all use the term you quotes above the world will become blind!

Suff · 08-02-2006 04:34PM

RE*AC*TOR wrote:

What about the majority stadning by and allowing these actions to take place? Where is the voice of the majority calling for and end to violence?

I would say they are over shouted by the protestors, sure what side the media will show you?? which is a better scoop as they say!?