Imams Back Call for Danish Boycott

This incident and the subsequent reaction highlights number of points:

  • Muslims sensitivity towards their icons which includes anything that is considered to be of divine nature such as the holy books, which should be respected.
  • Reflects the current Muslims feelings towards the west in light of Afghanistan, Iraq and potentially Iran.
  • Modern Western understanding of freedom of speech and its value.
  • Current Muslim solidarity shown across the globe, which should be a worry to any Roman general.
  • The confusion in understanding the difference between a politically provoked reaction and a religious one and how to diffuse them.
  • Such a reaction could benefit the west from the threat of terrorism in the long run if they were figure heads who can channel the view of masses towards the right direction.
  • The failure of some to recognise basic human courtesy to what would others regard highly.
I think terrorist groups are born due to the dormant state of the Muslim masses from both political and religious perspectives. I hope that the learned back there teaches the young how to use non violent methods to express their discontent, whether through literature or economics. However this could prove to be difficult should the West continue forcing others of accepting its values whilst disregarding others.
 
Sultan said:
hem1a-1.1.jpg
Click to expand...


He was a cnut of the highest order. Right Honourable Elijah Muhammad indeed. Ali converted to Orthodox Islam in the late 70's I think. A class doc was on ITV about Ali, a few days ago.
 
Spoony said:
He was a cnut of the highest order. Right Honourable Elijah Muhammad indeed. Ali converted to Orthodox Islam in the late 70's I think. A class doc was on ITV about Ali, a few days ago.
Click to expand...
Watched that, it was great
 
Mozza said:
Watched that, it was great
Click to expand...

Thrilla in Manila started it all off. . . 15 rounds of Hell. He fought his last few fights with Parkinson Syndrome.
 
Abbsta said:
This incident and the subsequent reaction highlights number of points:

  • Muslims sensitivity towards their icons which includes anything that is considered to be of divine nature such as the holy books, which should be respected.
  • Reflects the current Muslims feelings towards the west in light of Afghanistan, Iraq and potentially Iran.
  • Modern Western understanding of freedom of speech and its value.
  • Current Muslim solidarity shown across the globe, which should be a worry to any Roman general.
  • The confusion in understanding the difference between a politically provoked reaction and a religious one and how to diffuse them.
  • Such a reaction could benefit the west from the threat of terrorism in the long run if they were figure heads who can channel the view of masses towards the right direction.
  • The failure of some to recognise basic human courtesy to what would others regard highly.
I think terrorist groups are born due to the dormant state of the Muslim masses from both political and religious perspectives. I hope that the learned back there teaches the young how to use non violent methods to express their discontent, whether through literature or economics. However this could prove to be difficult should the West continue forcing others of accepting its values whilst disregarding others.
Click to expand...

awful post. just fecking awful.
 
Plechazunga said:
:lol:



:lol:



:lol: :lol:

Fecking hell...civilisation's gonna go up in smoke, basically because human beings can't help being such spastics
Click to expand...

perhaps they are just being ironic - protesting the caricatures by acting them out? very clever.
 
Spoony said:
He was a cnut of the highest order. Right Honourable Elijah Muhammad indeed. Ali converted to Orthodox Islam in the late 70's I think. A class doc was on ITV about Ali, a few days ago.
Click to expand...

Indeed :lol:

Nice to hear Muhammed Ali distanced himself from the supreme highness...
 
Kevrockcity said:
nope, still awful.
Click to expand...

I think what's not come across on here more clearly is why the Muslims are so angry - it has nothing to do with Islam not agreeing with freedom of speech its just that it disagrees with cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammed (pbuh) as a terrorist.
 
what makes muslims angry is that the governments of the west allow newspapers to print things that offend their delicate sensibilities. it has everything to do with freedom of speech and the press - don't be absurd.

not sure how you can be offended at something you haven't seen.
 
Kev, Fox News had some bloke on yesterday speaking to the outrage caused by a cartoon in the Washington Post depicting a maimed soldier.

Yanks invented this sort of fake outrage. Admittedly they don't react in the same extreme manner as worldwide Muslims.
 
Sultan said:
I think what's not come across on here more clearly is why the Muslims are so angry - it has nothing to do with Islam not agreeing with freedom of speech its just that it disagrees with cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammed (pbuh) as a terrorist.
Click to expand...


Sullie--from my vantage point this isn't about freedom of speech or religious indignation, it's more like evidence that the rank and file of Islam are being minipulated by certain cynical, anti-Western, anti-modern clerics who are using the incident to solidify their political power base. Playing on the old lie that any time a European doesn't practice Islam he's anti-Muslim is getting old.

Those cartoons were ignored for over 4 months before the storm broke--who do you think brought them into the forefront this far down the road? I tend to think it was the clerics who are now whipping the faithful into a frenzy. The ultimate issue is not a showdown or even "apology" from Norway, Denmark, or any other western nation. It is the desire and ability of these clerics to use this incident as "proof" of the decadence and "anti-Muslim" nature of the West so that they can attack western institutitions such as democracy, freedom of the press and speech, and tolerance of diverse cultures in the continuing struggle for control of Islam. Frankly, those cartoons will have more affect on the government of Iraq than any European nation.
 
grinner, they're wrong as well (i have zero problems with that cartoon). but no one advocated a boycott of an entire country or is advocating to ban speech - thus it has nothing to do with this.
 
Grinner said:
Kev, Fox News had some bloke on yesterday speaking to the outrage caused by a cartoon in the Washington Post depicting a maimed soldier.

Yanks invented this sort of fake outrage. Admittedly they don't react in the same extreme manner as worldwide Muslims.
Click to expand...

Good point

Much like in motion pictures and computing, there's very little in the field of utter idiocy that yanks haven't pioneered
 
Kevrockcity said:
they're wrong as well (i have zero problems with the cartoon). but no one advocated a boycott of an entire country or is advocating to ban speech - thus it has nothing to do with this.
Click to expand...


If we didn't have law and order in this country, I'd bet that a Right Wing hate mob would have descended on the Post offices burning papers and the like.

There have also been plenty of attacks on free speech by the right in this country. Just look at the whole furor after Janet Jackson's tit popped out.
 
yanks have nothing to do with islamic fundies trying to restrict the freedom of speech and press in europe and they certainly did not originate boycotting, the word itself derived from a brit if i'm not mistaken.
 
Kevrockcity said:
yanks have nothing to do with islamic fundies trying to restrict the freedom of speech and press in europe and they certainly did not originate boycotting, the word itself derived from a brit if i'm not mistaken.
Click to expand...


So you think freedom of speech issues in America are different from those anywhere else in the world?
 
I'm still getting the giggles about that poor Jordanian editor who got sacked for printing the picture. I really identify with him, as someone who's had to write a lot of letters of apology in his time.

"Oh I ask God to forgive me," Jihad Momani wrote in a public
letter of apology."

The "Oh" is particularly heartbraking...it's so plaintive.

He just had to be called "Jihad", didn't he.
 
Kevrockcity said:
boycotting, the word itself derived from a brit if i'm not mistaken.
Click to expand...

yup, named for a guy named Boycott, who was busy evicting poor people in Ireland back in the 1800s. so you can blame the Irish for the origins of the word, but not the cartoons.


Plech, cue the sad ballad, the drinking and the teary eyes...

"oh, mavurneen, he broke our hearts.. diddley idle doh"
 
Grinner said:
So you think freedom of speech issues in America are different from those anywhere else in the world?
Click to expand...

i think yanks have nothing to do the issue at hand. once again, the issue of the joint chiefs and the cartoon only serve to illustrate how insane these protesting, rioting muslims are by comparison. they wrote a letter to the newspaper that published the cartoon, voicing their issues - and that, as far as i can see, is the end of it. no one i seeking to ban speech. no one is boycotting entire nations. no one is sending death threats. no one is throwing grenades into public spaces. no one is throwing rotted fruit. no one is burning effigies.

this is how a free society is supposed to work. if only these muslims had acted so reasonably...
 
Kevrockcity said:
i think yanks have nothing to do the issue at hand. once again, the issue of the joint chiefs and the cartoon only serve to illustrate how insane these protesting, rioting muslims are by comparison. they wrote a letter to the newspaper that published the cartoon, voicing their issues - and that, as far as i can see, is the end of it. no one i seeking to ban speech. no one is boycotting entire nations. no one is sending death threats. no one is throwing grenades into public spaces. no one is throwing rotted fruit. no one is burning effigies.

this is how a free society is supposed to work. if only these muslims had acted so reasonably...
Click to expand...

But the sentiment is the same, even if the expression of it is not.

So you are just angry that they behaved in such an extreme fashion? You think they are justified to be outraged over the cartoons?
 
utdalltheway said:
Plech, cue the sad ballad, the drinking and the teary eyes...

"oh, mavurneen, he broke our hearts.. diddley idle doh"
Click to expand...

:lol: class

Kevrockcity said:
i think yanks have nothing to do the issue at hand. once again, the issue of the joint chiefs and the cartoon only serve to illustrate how insane these protesting, rioting muslims are by comparison. they wrote a letter to the newspaper that published the cartoon, voicing their issues - and that, as far as i can see, is the end of it. no one i seeking to ban speech. no one is boycotting entire nations. no one is sending death threats. no one is throwing grenades into public spaces. no one is throwing rotted fruit. no one is burning effigies.

this is how a free society is supposed to work. if only these muslims had acted so reasonably...
Click to expand...

What about the burning of Beatles Albums and thousands of death-wish letters after Lennon's "We're bigger than Jesus" comment?

Mad fecking yanks
 
My problem with all of this is, what really was the purpose of publishing this cartoons? Was it simply to offend? If so, they have certainly managed to do so-it certainly appears to be malicious from my perspective, which is not in the "spirit" of freedom of speech. Generally in the West there is a lot of uproar when anyone's sensibilities are offended.

To give an example (no offence intended), when Prince Harry dressed up in a Nazi outfit, the debate was not about freedom of speech but what is considered offensive. Rightly so in my opinion...to me It's the very same in this debate.

As a Muslim I like to see myself as open-minded and I believe in freedom of speech, but it should be used responsibly. I do sympathise with others who have taken this to heart.

At this present time there is wave of prejudice against Muslims sweeping the West and this was below the belt. Although misconceptions are understandable in the wake of terrorist atrocities, but it's a small group of extremists doing this.

There has been an overreaction on both sides of the argument. The Danes are not responsible for this, just are not all Muslims are responsible for the Worlds ills directed at us.

Debates, boycotts are well within the norm, people making bomb threats, is going too far.
 
Abbsta said:
This incident and the subsequent reaction highlights number of points:

  • Muslims sensitivity towards their icons which includes anything that is considered to be of divine nature such as the holy books, which should be respected.
  • Reflects the current Muslims feelings towards the west in light of Afghanistan, Iraq and potentially Iran.
  • Modern Western understanding of freedom of speech and its value.
  • Current Muslim solidarity shown across the globe, which should be a worry to any Roman general.
  • The confusion in understanding the difference between a politically provoked reaction and a religious one and how to diffuse them.
  • Such a reaction could benefit the west from the threat of terrorism in the long run if they were figure heads who can channel the view of masses towards the right direction.
  • The failure of some to recognise basic human courtesy to what would others regard highly.
I think terrorist groups are born due to the dormant state of the Muslim masses from both political and religious perspectives. I hope that the learned back there teaches the young how to use non violent methods to express their discontent, whether through literature or economics. However this could prove to be difficult should the West continue forcing others of accepting its values whilst disregarding others.
Click to expand...

It's an interesting set of views, but my "They're all being spastics" argument explains the same data much more economically.
 
Grinner said:
But the sentiment is the same, even if the expression of it is not.

So you are just angry that they behaved in such an extreme fashion? You think they are justified to be outraged over the cartoons?
Click to expand...

i am angry that they are asking that islam insulated from criticism and it's symbols be off limits to satire. i am angry that they show contempt for such trivial cartoons when they have been publishing their own anti-semitic ones for decades - that the supposed sensitivity they want for themselves they continually deny to others. i am angry that plurality is such an alien concept. i am angry that they express their outrage over these caricatures by acting like the caricatures.

i think their outrage is misplaced, yes, particularly since many of those "outraged" haven't even seen the cartoons in question.
 
Sultan said:
My problem with all of this is, what really was the purpose of publishing this cartoons? Was it simply to offend? If so, they have certainly managed to do so-it certainly appears to be malicious from my perspective, which is not in the "spirit" of freedom of speech. Generally in the West there is a lot of uproar when anyone's sensibilities are offended.

To give an example (no offence intended), when Prince Harry dressed up in a Nazi outfit, the debate was not about freedom of speech but what is considered offensive. Rightly so in my opinion...to me It's the very same in this debate.

As a Muslim I like to see myself as open-minded and I believe in freedom of speech, but it should be used responsibly. I do sympathise with others who have taken this to heart.

At this present time there is wave of prejudice against Muslims sweeping the West and this was below the belt. Although misconceptions are understandable in the wake of terrorist atrocities, but it's a small group of extremists doing this.

There has been an overreaction on both sides of the argument. The Danes are not responsible for this, just are not all Muslims are responsible for the Worlds ills directed at us.

Debates, boycotts are well within the norm, people making bomb threats, is going too far.
Click to expand...

It's about the reaction. We all find stuff offensive all the time (well I don't, but I have a boundaries problem). But it's how you respond. Haven't they got fecking lives to get on with, families to support, internet stes to discuss Jon Obi Mikel on?

In my view, anyone who does so much as write a letter to the national press to register their disgust at anything, is clinically insane, a danger to the public and should be banged up for life, and have their balls chopped off.

And speaking of reactions, when Harry dressed up as Hitler, their was no organised attempt by large numbers of Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, Poles or whatever to boycott British goods etc. There may have been the odd old survivor getting overexcited about it, but no riots.

Which isn't to say it's anything intrinsic about Muslims...it's just there happen to be a lot of people claiming to represent Muslims, and acting irresponsibly. It's like every time a bomb goes off or the yanks invade someone, you get some fella called Abdul in Bradford on the radio saying, "These acts don't represent the views of The Moozlim Community. But The Moozlim Community, is very angry, you see, and y'know, people 'ave to listen to the views of the The Moozlim Community..." and you think, Well who the feck are you? You're not the Muslim Community any more than Bin laden is.

Too many nutters claiming to speak for the large majority of people who don't give that much of a feck.

Except about Israel/Palestine, which as far as I can tell the vast majority of Muslims do feel passionate about. Which is odd.

Right, shutting-up time for Plech.
 
Plechazunga said:
:lol: class



What about the burning of Beatles Albums and thousands of death-wish letters after Lennon's "We're bigger than Jesus" comment?

Mad fecking yanks
Click to expand...

this was 40 years ago. kanye west appears on this month's rolling stone as jesus. i don't see too many bonfires.
 
Kevrockcity said:
this was 40 years ago. kanye west appears on this month's rolling stone as jesus. i don't see too many bonfires.
Click to expand...

Bible Belt don't know who Kanye West is. If anyone as big as The Beatles were then pulled that stunt today, I bet you'd get the same reaction. They may be 40 years older, but they're still fecking morons.
 
I read somewhere earlier about a demonstration (don't know where) that some guy was holding a placard which read "down with freedom of speech".:wenger:

for some reason I'm reminded of this part from The Life of Brian where Brian tells the crowd "we're all individuals" and the crowd responds in unison "we're all individuals".
- except one guy in the back of the crowd says "I'm not".
 
:lol: it's a great line, and a very good analogy

A placard saying "Down with freedom of speech"...that's classic

Although, it cuts to the heart of the paradox at the centre of Liberalism doesn't it. "We're liberals, so down with the intolerant, uncivilised, and illiberal. Have them silenced...and publicly stoned."
 
Plechazunga said:
It's about the reaction. We all find stuff offensive all the time (well I don't, but I have a boundaries problem). But it's how you respond. Haven't they got fecking lives to get on with, families to support, internet stes to discuss Jon Obi Mikel on?

In my view, anyone who does so much as write a letter to the national press to register their disgust at anything, is clinically insane, a danger to the public and should be banged up for life, and have their balls chopped off.

And speaking of reactions, when Harry dressed up as Hitler, their was no organised attempt by large numbers of Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, Poles or whatever to boycott British goods etc. There may have been the odd old survivor getting overexcited about it, but no riots.

Which isn't to say it's anything intrinsic about Muslims...it's just there happen to be a lot of people claiming to represent Muslims, and acting irresponsibly. It's like every time a bomb goes off or the yanks invade someone, you get some fella called Abdul in Bradford on the radio saying, "These acts don't represent the views of The Moozlim Community. But The Moozlim Community, is very angry, you see, and y'know, people 'ave to listen to the views of the The Moozlim Community..." and you think, Well who the feck are you? You're not the Muslim Community any more than Bin laden is.

Too many nutters claiming to speak for the large majority of people who don't give that much of a feck.

Except about Israel/Palestine, which as far as I can tell the vast majority of Muslims do feel passionate about. Which is odd.

Right, shutting-up time for Plech.
Click to expand...

Fair enough...but one must understand the intense feelings Muslims have for the Prophets, and that feeling it is not up for discussion or compromise even in life or death, never mind some cheap shot at winding up with cartoons, hence from the liberals eye it seems overreaction.

Don't shut up pleeeese...you are probably amongst a dozen posters who make sense to me, most of the time...;) so much so that I have rarely seen your post challenged by any Muslim on here...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.