Re: Should they be published in the UK?
 

There seems to be only one political party that can re-dress the rights of the sensible thinking Brits. Unfortunately the mainstream parties have made it look like it's an offense to even express opinions. As Rolf said "can y' giss what it is yit"

I must add (before i get shot and banned) i have never voted for the BNP.

But if things carry on the way they are doing then i'll sign up.

Re: Should they be published in the UK?
 

I have been taken to task about this posting because apparently I didn't provide an opinion.Wish they had PM'd me about it though.:rolleyes:

As I've already posted my opinions in this thread and they haven't changed I saw no reason not to.Plus I provided the above as a means of perhaps allowing people to maybe re-evaluate what they think they know.I know it helped me.

Re: Should they be published in the UK?
 

The thing about the UK protests is that all the Muslims are coming out, saying: "Its good the police didn't get involved because it would have escalated the situation/turned it violent". That isn't good in my mind... its blackmail. Had the police enforced the rule of law, the protesters would have turned violent, so the police were forced to let it go. I don't accept blackmail, if it was me i'd have sent in the army. The rule of law must be enforced at all costs regardless of who is threatening/blackmailing it.

This situation has been threatening to kick off for years, it just needed someone to draw the battle lines. It originally started off (that the BBC article never mentioned) because an author was unabled to find someone to draw a picture a picture of Mohammed for a children's book he wrote. Everyone was too afraid of confronting Muslims. Nevermind that Christians and Jews have tolerated this for years. The Danish newspaper commission the drawings to make a point that sooner or later Muslims will have to come in line with the rest of the civilised world. Its never been about breaking the law with religious tolerance, its never even got that far. Noone wants to back down. If the newspaper backs down, they know that noone would be able to comment on Islam without fear of backlash. If Muslims back down, they know Islam will not hold its currently untouchable position of reverence, and be classed equal to other religions like Christianity.

Some of the cartoons can be called offensive, but they would have been just as offensive had they been regular portraits of Mohammed. Muslims know this which is why many are confronting free speech (i.e. "Free speech: go to hell"), with lots of irony laid on top.

Re: Should they be published in the UK?
 

Thats not true......to be fair, a few muslim groups here have condemned the protests.

Re: Should they be published in the UK?
 

Well this is a fine pickle !! :dozey:

This Government must hardly know which butt cheek to offer up next. :rolleyes:

What with the race hate legislation and now the religious hate legislation, they must really think we hate those suckers !! ;)

Anyway ... I have the solution .... we all convert to Islam, send the women off to "Burka at M&S" and then we can all concentrate on the "Let's hate the Jews" 'fest. :disturbd:

Lets face it those guys really know how to win friends and influence people ! :rolleyes:

Re: Should they be published in the UK?
 

Yeah, but it got me thinking.

I was reviewing this thread to see what had been added over the w/e. (For some reason best known to myself I usually start at the end and work backwards. lol)

So, by the time I got to it, I'd have read any comment on it - yours seems to have been the first and only one.

I was even more surprised to see the cartoon still in the thread - did the MODs miss this one? (BTW - That's NOT a complaint, and NO, I do NOT want to see it removed!)

Because, tell me, what is the difference between the cartoon in this thread and the ones we've been discussing?

This cartoon shows a picture of a human-like figure, and it even has a helpful tag to point out who the figure is supposed to be. So we have a caricature of Mr. M, and the suggestion that the child who drew it should be slain for having done so. So we've satirised the Islamic opinion AND also caricatured Mr. M.
Yet, not a single complaint, from anyone.

Anyway, that's fine by me.

---------- Post added at 08:51 ---------- Previous post was at 08:50 ----------

One of the papers even mentioned imams going out to try and quell the violence.

Seems they don't get listened to when they're promoting peace, then.

Re: Should they be published in the UK?
 

Drawing pictures/cartoons of someone who has never had a photograph taken of themselves throughtout their livelyhood will stir up emotions from people, especially their followers. To make matters even worse he was made to look like a terrorist. Yes Islam does say not to fight start wars etc but then again you will always get the sour apples in every religion.

How would people of reacted if that same picture had been made by a muslim/asian person showing Jesus, Guru Nanak, Rama-Sita etc instaed??


PHILIPPE DOUSTE-BLAZY, French Foreign Minister

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2006/02/10.gif The principle of freedom should be exercised in a spirit of tolerance, respect of beliefs, respect of religions, which is the very basis of secularism of our country. https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2006/02/11.gif


How can the French say that when they banned all religeous symbols from schools!! Now thats double standards in itself.

I also do not condone the violence regarding this matter and hate to kill signs should be removed asap from anyone and the person removed from the protest.

Just my 2 pence worth.... from a british muslim

regards
wakar

Re: Should they be published in the UK?
 

Possible anger, outrage, disappointment, but highly unlikely to be waving signs saying "Behead all those who mock Jesus".

I doubt you'd find a nun wearing a mocked-up suicide vest.

Unfortunately we live in a society were people find it acceptable (and sometimes even funny) to make fun of people's beliefs. The best advice I can give any muslims offended by the cartoon is to catch up with Christians, Jews etc who are a little more thick-skinned or so it would appear.

Re: Should they be published in the UK?
 

Well in the case of the two Jordanian editors who did print the cartoons in Muslim papers in Jordan who were arrested I think we might have the reason why some moderate Muslim voices are not being heard across the world.

However I note that

Quote:

Lebanon's interior minister has quit after protesters sacked Beirut's Danish embassy in more ructions over cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/4684250.stm

So some moderates are being counted..

I also thought that this article might make the confusion about WHY there is such confusion as to how the cartoons are offensive, a little clearer
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/4678220.stm

At least in this country the numbers involved in protesting have been low and non violent(apart from the placard carriers and flag burners).I think the moderates on both sides are holding firm and not getting involved too much beyond condemning the violence and not insisting that we MUST see these cartoons.

Re: Should they be published in the UK?
 

Everyone condemned the protests, but most have said its good the police didn't get involved and enflame the situation. That Bungawunga bloke from the MCB said that on Al-Jazeera UK (Channel 4 news) last night.

Re: Should they be published in the UK?
 

as far as I'm concerned the 'protestors' and the printing of the cartoons are seperate issues and should not be connected.

there was a muslim 'spokesman' on the radio news this morning condeming the protestors but saying that printing the cartoons had given extremists an 'opportunity' and that the situation should be defused by the media appolgising for offending the religion. I say get stuffed, if you'd been holding signs saying 'your 9/11 will come' 'behead traitors' and all that crap they you need to be locked up. pitty they didnt 'protest' in late july of last year - then they would have had their backsides kicked.

Re: Should they be published in the UK?
 

That's an over-generalisation that apparently ONLY applies to Islam. Furthermore, I don't think photography had been invented in Mr M's time, so that point is moot too.

Personally, I think that the dogmatic leap to go from considering any image of God/Prophet as not matching their glory, to making is a capital offence is rather a big one.

I don't accept the notion that the faith of Islam is in any way damaged by these images, unlike the ones in the media over recent days, which have damaged Islam greatly, possibly irrevocably.
This is where Muslims are failing to understand the meaning of satire. The terrorism being referred to IS clearly inspired by the terrorists' idea of what Islam is about. The terrorism is perpetrated with direct reference to the religion of Islam, by the terrorists - it is THEY who made the connection in the first place, so why is it so terrible when other do?
As there are in many religions, yet the 'few' extremists that people say are doing all the protesting seem to number quite highly in some places.

And I also think there is a big difference between a few 'sour apples', and large crowds of madmen baying for death and attacking and burning buildings.
Nothing like anything we've seen recently, if any response had been made at all. You'd have to cross the boundaries of decency a LONG way before we'd get anything like as worked up about it.
Nonsense. The ban on religious symbols extends to all faiths, and isn't an attack on any faith. Again, it's mostly the Muslims that had to go make a big issue out of it, including more of the 'sour apples' being rather extreme.

The picture I get is that if Muslims/Islam chooses to be offended by anything, then the standard response is to burn the offending object, if possible, or else burn an effigy of the offending person (I'm sure they'd burn the actual person, given a chance), and usually accompanied by violence from people who more often than not hide their faces, since they KNOW that what they are doing is nothing but wanton violence and criminal in almost every country they do it.

Now we're seeing attacks on persons and property in no way directly responsible for the alledged offence caused. That is religious/racial hatred - something the Muslims complain about plenty. I believe this demonstrates that Islam is fundamentally NOT tolerant of other faiths - at least not the Islam than men have stolen from God. If there is anything left of Islam as God would have it, then please tell me where it exists.

Re: Should they be published in the UK?
 

Re: Should they be published in the UK?
 

Thanx for your post Wakar. Its good to hear the thoughts of a British Muslim on this. :tu:

But people are entitled to their opinions of symbolism. For example if the see are Christian and see God as an old bloke with a white beard, or if they are feminist and see God as a woman. That's incitement or hatred.

Muslims complain (as your are) that they are being stereotyped as terrorists (which is wrong), but Muslims should look at themselves and see why is this image so strong in non-Muslim minds? Why is the association between Islam and violence so clear? And then we see on the news embassies burned down, people threatened, and even the ferry company's offices have been burnt down, even before any liability has been established (not that that excuses arson). Muslims brought this on themselves, and I think it is they who need to work and prove Islam, and Muslims are about peace and not violence, and not non-Muslims.

In Christianity, its exactly the same, its illegal to represent God, or heaven in any way. Yet constantly we are directed at representation of God in movies or TV shows. Never once have Christians even attempted violence in retribution for it. Any complaints from Christians regarding blasphemy are very few and far between, and usually consist of peaceful protests with dozens rather than thousands of people. Most, like myself, accept people have the right to believe, as do I, and represent who they like, how they like. If I commit blasphemy, it does not affect your position in your God's eyes so why should it affect you? I suspect I know the answer, but i'll keep it to myself for the time being.

Re: Should they be published in the UK?
 

So that'll be a 'yes we are extremists' then......:D