The Mohammed Editoral Cartoons

[Kamui4356]

Originally Posted by Mr.Hawq

Siimple the embassies would still be there, if the cartoon images were not even brought up, no riots would even happen. All you can say is that the whole disaster started with the cartoons, and got worse and worse.

And if the people buring the embassies channeled their outrage through more appropraite channels, such as writing a letter to the newspaper saying the cartoons were offensive, and demanded an apology, this would have all been over. Why should a western newspaper be extorted into not printing something because muslims will react violently? The problem lies with the reaction, not the cartoons.

http://www.themodernreligion.com/misc/hh/major_sins.htm

here you go, The fact is that it is a major sin to kill yourself.

Great, now instead of wasting your time here, maybe you should try to get the ever growing radical element back in line with their faith. They seem to have forgotten that things like suicide are a sin... That "forgive when they are angry" part might need a bit of reminding too. Violance and hatred might not be what the koran teaches, but when enough people believe it does, that lie becomes the truth.

people believe in religion, to get their rewards after they die. As we believe we only live just to be observed, the ultimate gift is in Paridise. Without religion, basically you have no faith, no one to depend on, and is life worth living only about 50-70 years, where as you die, you have an oppurtunity to live for eternity. With anything you want.

Such a selfish reason to believe... Ok, what do you do 100 years after you die? A thousand? A million? A billion? Eternity is a long time. Human wants and desired are limited. I would much rather return to nothingness than go on living in some afterlife for eternity. Reincarnation is a bit better, as one wouldn't be aware of their past lives, but eventually there will be nothing left to be reincarnated into as the universe goes cold, and the last stars burn out. What then? If we all just return to the nothingness we emerged from, there's no problem with that.

Really if you guys were Muslims you guys would really understand how serious of a matter the cartoons are.

I could easily say if you guys weren't muslims, you'd see how important freedom of speech is. However, that isn't the point and it isn't helpful. Statements like that are just ethnocentric, and reflect the type of thought that lead up to this being an issue.

[Mr.Hawq]

Such a selfish reason to believe... Ok, what do you do 100 years after you die? A thousand? A million? A billion? Eternity is a long time. Human wants and desired are limited. I would much rather return to nothingness than go on living in some afterlife for eternity. Reincarnation is a bit better, as one wouldn't be aware of their past lives, but eventually there will be nothing left to be reincarnated into as the universe goes cold, and the last stars burn out. What then? If we all just return to the nothingness we emerged from, there's no problem with that.

Well that is your scientific opinion, and are you sure with living an eternity you remeber everything, i have heard on Armaggeden the dead is revived to be judged, and you dont rember anything. Also you are saying that you would rather just live an ugly life, then find peace and happiness, where we dont got to talk about issues like this. Quite stubborn.

And if the people buring the embassies channeled their outrage through more appropraite channels, such as writing a letter to the newspaper saying the cartoons were offensive, and demanded an apology, this would have all been over. Why should a western newspaper be extorted into not printing something because muslims will react violently? The problem lies with the reaction, not the cartoons.

Well if they knew the consequences that they would have to face to print out the cartoons, why would they?

[lil_chan]

Hi everyone

of course it is a big fault from Denmark

There must be limits for free speech especially for holy issues

That isn't free of speech but a dismoral attitude

Suppose muslims did the same for Jesus , they won't coz they respect all their prophets , what will u feel? will it be also free speech ?!!!

When the World Trade Center is attacked, Bush made a war on Afghanistan

What about attacking Muhammad ( pbuh ) muslims' prophet ?

i wonder abt the cause of publishing such cartoons ?
Why they published those cartoons for Muhammad (Pbuh) especially ?!

I think the only cause is disliking muslims !!!!!

thnx, & sorry for my poor english

[Kamui4356]

Originally Posted by Mr.Hawq

Also you are saying that you would rather just live an ugly life, then find peace and happiness, where we dont got to talk about issues like this. Quite stubborn.

What's the point of peace and happiness if it's just handed to you? I probably shouldn't have responed to that though. We're just dragging the thread off topic, but I didn't think of that until after I posted. If you wish to discuss this further, feel free to pm me or start a thread about beliefs in afterlife.

Well if they knew the consequences that they would have to face to print out the cartoons, why would they?

Why should they have to worry about getting killed for it? Europe went through that kind of crap hundreds of years ago. It's a chapter of history that should not be revived. You keep trying to pass the blame on the the newspapers that printed the cartoons. Things broke down when muslim radicals decided the best way to protest this was to burn things and threaten people with death.

I'm sure you can agree the proper response would have been to write a polite, but firm letter to the editor saying the cartoons were offensive, and an apology was due.

[Chronissz]

Originally Posted by lil_chan

[COLOR="black"]Hi everyone

There must be limits for free speech especially for holy issues

This is when you start treading on thin ice. There are far reaching implications on limiting free speech, not to mention it ceasing to "be" free speech.

About the cartoons though. This stems from a misunderstanding of the emphasis placed on religion in an Islamic world in comparison to the creator of the drawing and the newspapers that ran in, and most of western society. I think it was okay to make such a cartoon, as I cannot believe that the intent was to incite violence and hatred.

However, the thing that gets me is the number of times the cartoon was reprinted, it ceasing to gain attention until now. I would defend it up until that point, because it seems that the reprints were an attempt at getting a response from Muslims, "we will keep printing this cartoon until it sparks something". I dont know the whole story behind the reprints but I dont see the need to do such a thing. As such I would definitly say the newspapers were in the wrong here as well. It seems they abused their freedom of speech to purposefully gain negative attention and incite something. I doubt they could have expected this, but you had to have known you were playing with fire.

[Mr.Hawq]

I'm sure you can agree the proper response would have been to write a polite, but firm letter to the editor saying the cartoons were offensive, and an apology was due.

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.d...602080315/1090

Representatives of the Islamic community in Denmark demanded an apology for the cartoons last fall. When they didn't get it, they spread the word - and the offending images - to Muslims elsewhere.

Well you can see that they wanted an apology, but they were ignored.

[Green²]

Originally Posted by Mr.Hawq

Really if you guys were Muslims you guys would really understand how serious of a matter the cartoons are.

Which is a very, very, bad thing, in my opinion. An general observation then tells me that just about anyone can use such cartoons to manipulate the Muslim populace.

I can see it all now. An U-2 spy plane with fake UN colors on it, flying over Iran. Trailing the spy plane, an triple-long ad banner. -An banner showing that of the anti-Mohammad cartoons.

/Show of hands, all those that have crapped their pants right about now.? Related

Worst of all, if the above were an editorial comic, I'd probably add in some rock throwing at the spy plane ... only for the rocks to fall back down to the Earth at the rock throwers.

Want to start world war three? Just add spy plane pilot caption: "I should fire Karl Rove for not coming up with this idea earlier." And with that, even worse, have the pilot don an pope hat to bring the Christian-right into this mess.

Enter Pat Robertson, who doesn't know how to keep his big dumb mouth shut, and the only safe place for us all would be somewhere where it's very friggin cold.

[Kamui4356]

Originally Posted by Mr.Hawq

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.d...602080315/1090



Well you can see that they wanted an apology, but they were ignored.

I think the paper should have apologized for offending anyone, but not for printing the cartoons in the first place. However, if they refuse to apologize, too bad. That in no way justifies violence and death threats.

[Mr.Hawq]

Originally Posted by Kamui4356

I think the paper should have apologized for offending anyone, but not for printing the cartoons in the first place. However, if they refuse to apologize, too bad. That in no way justifies violence and death threats.

Yes that is when they felt ignored, and still offended by it, where temper started to erupt.

[Jinto]

Originally Posted by lil_chan

Hi everyone

of course it is a big fault from Denmark

One need to differ here. A newspaper in a western society is not controlled by the state. So ultimately saying a whole country is at fault, would be as wrong as saying all muslims are terrorists.

There must be limits for free speech especially for holy issues

If I create my own religion, and say nobody is allowed to give god a name (and be it allah), otherwise I'ld be pretty annoyed because this is absolutely unacceptable in my religion. What would you do?

That isn't free of speech but a dismoral attitude

Well, but which part is a dismoral attitude? I'ld say not the mere printing of a prophet, but the way it was done (with racist elements, that will insult any muslim regardless whether they are or not are extremists).

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Many Muslims believe that any pictorial, or sculptural, representation of religious figures, or sometimes human figures, or even any living creatures, is wrong. However, the Qur'an, the Islamic holy book, does not directly prohibit the depiction of human figures; it merely condemns idolatry. Direct prohibitions of pictorial art, or any depiction of sacred figures, are found only in the hadith, recorded oral traditions. There are many thousands of hadith, many of which are regarded as "weak", and possibly permissible to disregard. Hence any view advanced as "demanded" by hadith ultimately rests upon personal choice: to accept or reject certain hadith, or to follow a certain scholar's interpretation of the hadith.

Now if this quote is true, than all this argumentation is build on quicksand anyway.
Also this rule of an absolute prohibition of any pictorial art, or any depiction of sacred figures cannot be hold if one includes the whole timespan of islam, because there are several islamic paintings and miniatures showing the prophet in full:

(anyway, if you don't want to break any hadith you should not visit that link)

http://www.retecool.com/mirrordir/Mo...%20Archive.htm

Suppose muslims did the same for Jesus , they won't coz they respect all their prophets , what will u feel? will it be also free speech ?!!!

Thats the point, "we" would not be as offended as "you" would be. That'ld mean you were actually more offended by your own cartoon.
But you could trigger the same anthipathy with certain holocaust cartoons (which did happen already years ago). Well, that should not mean danish or europe press has to behave as bad as some islamic press (which sadly is the case).

When the World Trade Center is attacked, Bush made a war on Afghanistan

So how does US President Bush directly connect with europe? And as far as I understood, Afghanistan was attacked because they were hiding terrorists (and they wanted to free afghanistan from the extremist taliban). So, I don't get this point.

What about attacking Muhammad ( pbuh ) muslims' prophet ?

So how many people directly died, when the Prophet was "attacked" (which wasn't a physical attack btw.)?

i wonder abt the cause of publishing such cartoons ?
Why they published those cartoons for Muhammad (Pbuh) especially ?!

Its the same reason that applies for the holocaust cartoons in the islamic press... they want to polarize and heat up a controversial debate.

I think the only cause is disliking muslims !!!!!

I'ld say some of the cartoons were showing that it is not necessarily disliking but ignorance. Only 12 of 42 cartoonists send a cartoon in (of which one made a cartoon not showing the prophet but a blackboard and schoolkid -named Mohammed Valbskole- who points to the persian writing in arabic letters (on the blackboard), which translates to: "Jyllands-Posten's journalists are a bunch of reactionary provocateurs"). So the majority of the danish caricaturists applied to the self-restriction of freedom of speech (and this majority is often forgotten in this debate).

thnx, & sorry for my poor english

I hope you will understand my poor english

[TrueKnight]

Originally Posted by Mr.Hawg

Yes that is when they felt ignored, and still offended by it, where temper started to erupt

And then they started to burn embasies and demanded that those who're responsible to be beheaded. Not to mention the threat to Europe about the upcoming new 9/11. I stand corrected, those ways are barbaric, and it happens frequently in the muslim world, although maybe countries like Turkey and Bosnia are an exception. If Muslims wants to be accepted they had better live by the way of Freedom of Speech.

Seriously al-jazeera publishes cartoons insulting jews and christians alike. Muslims just have to fuck off and live with it. Or you're asking for an another World War?

"ZOMG ALL OF THEM ARE INFIDELS!! ENEMIES OF ALLAH, BEHEAD IS THE ONLY WAY!!"

[TrueKnight]

btw, a comparison,

Spoiler:

We are all Danes now
By Jeff Jacoby, Globe Columnist | February 5, 2006

HINDUS CONSIDER it sacrilegious to eat meat from cows, so when a Danish supermarket ran a sale on beef and veal last fall, Hindus everywhere reacted with outrage. India recalled its ambassador to Copenhagen, and Danish flags were burned in Calcutta, Bombay, and Delhi. A Hindu mob in Sri Lanka severely beat two employees of a Danish-owned firm, and demonstrators in Nepal chanted: ''War on Denmark! Death to Denmark!"In many places, shops selling Dansk china or Lego toys were attacked by rioters, and two Danish embassies were firebombed.

Article Tools
Printer friendly
E-mail to a friend
Op-ed RSS feed
Available RSS feeds
Most e-mailed
Reprints/permissions
More:
Globe Editorials / Op-Ed |
Globe front page |
Boston.com
Sign up for: Globe Headlines e-mail | Breaking News Alerts It didn't happen, of course. Hindus may consider it odious to use cows as food, but they do not resort to boycotts, threats, and violence when non-Hindus eat hamburger or steak. They do not demand that everyone abide by the strictures of Hinduism and avoid words and deeds that Hindus might find upsetting. The same is true of Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Mormons: They don't lash out in violence when their religious sensibilities are offended. They certainly don't expect their beliefs to be immune from criticism, mockery, or dissent.

But radical Muslims do.

The current uproar over cartoons of the Muslim prophet Mohammed published in a Danish newspaper illustrates yet again the fascist intolerance that is at the heart of radical Islam. Jyllands-Posten, Denmark's largest daily, commissioned the cartoons to make a point about freedom of speech. It was protesting the climate of intimidation that had made it impossible for a Danish author to find an illustrator for his children's book about Mohammed. No artist would agree to illustrate the book for fear of being harmed by Muslim extremists. Appalled by this self-censorship, Jyllands-Posten invited Danish artists to submit drawings of Mohammed, and published the 12 it received.

Most of the pictures are tame to the point of dullness, especially compared to the biting editorial cartoons that routinely appear in US and European newspapers. A few of them link Mohammed to Islamist terrorism -- one depicts him with a bomb in his turban, while a second shows him in Heaven, pleading with newly arrived suicide terrorists: ''Stop, stop! We have run out of virgins!" Others focus on the threat to free speech: In one, a sweating artist sits at his drawing board, nervously sketching Mohammed, while glancing over his shoulder to make sure he's not being watched.

That anything so mild could trigger a reaction so crazed -- riots, death threats, kidnappings, flag-burnings -- speaks volumes about the chasm that separates the values of the civilized world from those in too much of the Islamic world. Freedom of the press, the marketplace of ideas, the right to skewer sacred cows: Militant Islam knows none of this. And if the jihadis get their way, it will be swept aside everywhere by the censorship and intolerance of sharia.

Here and there, some brave Muslim voices have cried out against the book-burners. The Jordanian newspaper Shihan published three of the cartoons. ''Muslims of the world, be reasonable," implored Shihan's editor, Jihad al-Momani, in an editorial. ''What brings more prejudice against Islam -- these caricatures or pictures of a hostage-taker slashing the throat of his victim in front of the cameras?" But within hours Momani was out of a job, fired by the paper's owners after the Jordanian government threatened legal action.

He wasn't the only editor sacked last week. In Paris, Jacques LeFranc of the daily France Soir was also fired after running the Mohammed cartoons. The paper's owner, an Egyptian Copt named Raymond Lakah, issued a craven and Orwellian statement offering LeFranc's head as a gesture of ''respect for the intimate beliefs and convictions of every individual." But the France Soir staff defended their decision to publish the drawings in a stalwart editorial. ''The best way to fight against censorship is to prevent censorship from happening," they wrote. ''A fundamental principle guaranteeing democracy and secular society is under threat. To say nothing is to retreat."

Across the continent, nearly two dozen other newspapers have joined in defending that principle. While Islamist clerics proclaim an ''international day of anger" or declare that ''the war has begun," leading publications in Norway, France, Italy, Spain, Holland, Germany, Switzerland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic have reprinted the Danish cartoons. But there has been no comparable show of backbone in America, where (as of Friday) only the New York Sun has had the fortitude to the run some of the drawings.

Make no mistake: This story is not going away, and neither is the Islamofascist threat. The freedom of speech we take for granted is under attack, and it will vanish if it is not bravely defended. Today the censors may be coming for some unfunny Mohammed cartoons, but tomorrow it is your words and ideas they will silence. Like it or not, we are all Danes now.

Source : http://www.boston.com/news/globe/edi...all_danes_now/

See the difference

[lil_chan]

One need to differ here. A newspaper in a western society is not controlled by the state. So ultimately saying a whole country is at fault, would be as wrong as saying all muslims are terrorists.

No it's a different case ,
Becuse Denmark "the whole country" refused to apologize and accepted publishing the cartoons

:

Unfortunately ,ur other comments i didn't understand well because of my poor english so i left the reply to other muslims here

im really sorry

[Shay]

Originally Posted by lil_chan

[COLOR="black"]

No it's a different case ,
Becuse Denmark "the whole country" refused to apologize and accepted publishing the cartoons

*Sigh* Retarded, anyone? Or did you just join up to protest? Typical…

[Mr.Hawq]

Now if this quote is true, than all this argumentation is build on quicksand anyway.
Also this rule of an absolute prohibition of any pictorial art, or any depiction of sacred figures cannot be hold if one includes the whole timespan of islam, because there are several islamic paintings and miniatures showing the prophet in full:

That is not it, they Put a picture of the prophet with a turban on his head, and then a bomb that is about to blow up on top, where that Bomb had a islamic symbol on it saying "Allah Hu" where it pretty much means that there is only one God and that God is Allah. This is the specific cartoon that made all the Muslims go into rage. As you can see a bomb about to explode and saying Only one Allah, you can see what that means.

Seriously al-jazeera publishes cartoons insulting jews and christians alike. Muslims just have to fuck off and live with it. Or you're asking for an another World War?

Well are these Cartoons insulting anyone very holy to these religions? You should also know that only a stupid Muslim would make cartoons on Jesus,Abraham, or Moses, cause all of them are very important and holy people to the Muslims. As stated before, no Muslim would give a crap if a Cartoon was made on another muslim, or someone like Saddam, or Bin laden, or anyone else but the person himself that is being made a negative cartoon out of.

[lil_chan]

*Sigh* Retarded, anyone?

may be u !

[Kupo!]

Originally Posted by Shay

*Sigh* Retarded, anyone? Or did you just join up to protest? Typical…

She probably just has a limited understanding of English.

[lil_chan]

Or you're asking for an another World War?

Yes .. because it has already started by you
Did you forget Palastine, Iraq , Afghanistan , Bosnia..etc..???
when our prophet and relegion is insulted , our children are killed , our countries are occupied and stolen by u also
It's our right to begin another world war
but before all , remeber that u who begin

[Shay]

Originally Posted by lil_chan

Yes .. because it has already started by you
Did you forget Palastine, Iraq , Afghanistan , Bosnia..etc..???
when our prophet and relegion is insulted , our children are killed , our countries are occupied and stolen by u also
It's our right to begin another world war
but before all , remeber that u who begin

If I were a mod, I would ban your ass, for sheer fucking stupidity!

I'm out of here, this thread is starting to make me feel sick. Good Night.

[Catgirls]

I think we're done here. I free a great welling up approaching like a violent thunderstorm stalking a lost fluffy kitten. I think everyone should take a deep breast and relax. Maybe rate a signature or avatar (or two).

Life is short. Duck.



/Edit: Someone left me this anonymous negative Rep. for this post and I'd like to expand upon what was written:

i agree it's a worthless thread, but it's an issue worth talking about.

I too think the issue is worth talking about. I really do. I still do.

That's why I let this thread bloom into nearly 100 posts. I had hopes, but I could see that it was fast becoming an emotion issue that would have snowballed into a pure unadulterated flame festival. Religion, Faith, Politics, Sexuality, War, or Goats .... all those subjects are flammable once someone lights a match (gas source).

As a matter of fact, I'd love to see more "adult", "intellectual" or "socially topical" related threads like this in the General Chat forum, but I'd also like to see people show some maturity, humor and responsibility when posting in potentially inflammatory topics.

A thread or discussion is worthless if it becomes the hate you seek to change.

Maybe we can re-open the thread if the issue is still relevant in a few days.