Cartoons agian?

[Fishman]

In my opinion the cartoons are certainly offensive, but what the Saudis do is way worse. There are plans to demolish the house of the beloved Prophet (peace be upon him), and many ancient relics are already gone. There are almost no old buildings left in Makkah and Medina, the Saudis have paved over it all with their flashy new concrete and marble.
The Saudis are worse because they are Muslims, they should know not to do this...

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

This is wrong! No religion should be attacked or insulted in anyway! - Be it Jesus, Mohammed, Krishna or Guru Nanak Mahraaj Ji! - They should not be allowed to do this. It's a provovation nothing else!

Hindu cult leader dared to insult the Guru Granth Sahib, he met his death with a bullet in his head! Nobody has a right to belittle another faith!

IT WLL NOT BE TOLERATED!!!

 

[truemuslim]

In my opinion the cartoons are certainly offensive, but what the Saudis do is way worse. There are plans to demolish the house of the beloved Prophet (peace be upon him), and many ancient relics are already gone. There are almost no old buildings left in Makkah and Medina, the Saudis have paved over it all with their flashy new concrete and marble.
The Saudis are worse because they are Muslims, they should know not to do this...

man they is just messed up..

u kno one of the signs of judgement day is wen the ppl try to take kaaba down and it actually works this time... ITS HERE!

 

[BlackMamba]

Its funny how when Muslims are made fun of its all of a sudden "freedom of speech" Check out the link to the cartoon.
http://www.truthdig.com/images/avboothuploads/denmark_650.gif

 

[Malaikah]

In my opinion the cartoons are certainly offensive, but what the Saudis do is way worse. There are plans to demolish the house of the beloved Prophet (peace be upon him), and many ancient relics are already gone. There are almost no old buildings left in Makkah and Medina, the Saudis have paved over it all with their flashy new concrete and marble.
The Saudis are worse because they are Muslims, they should know not to do this...

Okay, I don't see what this has to do with the topic... I won't dwell too long for the sake of not derailing the thread, but I really have to say...

Maybe if people didn't worship those objects and commit shirk the Saudis wouldn't have to remove them from the public eye or demolish them.

Also, are you sure they are demolishing his house? Wasn't he buried in this house? :?

 

[FatimaAsSideqah]

As Salaam Alaykum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuhu

Best to do is let stop to talking about this, because this would be making it to worse!

Allah Hafiz
Sister Fatima

 

[snakelegs]

Salam 3alekum.

I have just read that Denmark is putting the cartoons about Muhammad(pbuh) in the newspapers! I am starting to get really annoyed by this!
What are they trying to get out of this? Do they want to test how patient muslims are before they start getting all violent? Surely they are asking for trouble!

There is no need for this though! I really deeply upset me!, whats ur opinion bout it guys?

Wa 3alekum alsalaam

hopefully some muslims will over-react and make good tv and give a boost to the right wing xenophobic political parties all across europe.

 

[ZarathustraDK]

Heya, danish non-muslim here.

I see a lot of anger when perusing threads like these, I guess muslims are entitled to those emotions after all these cartoons. I'd still like to try and sort out some minor misconceptions though :

1. "Boykotting Denmark is the best way to show resistance" - Well, yes and no, it's true economic sanctions would be a good way to show discontent. Rather than burning flags and threatening to kill people, economic sanctions is a levelheaded way to show a united disapproval of what has transspired. Luck/bad luck (depending on the perspective) would have it though that the prime-export of Denmark is pork and alcohol which I guess muslims are not so interested in.

2. I saw a lot of posts in other threads which were basically "Why did they decide to reprint those cartoons?" - Some of you theorized it was just to sell newspapers or similar economic reasons, or just to piss someone off, it really wasn't. The cartoons were reprinted as a reaction to three muslims (one danish, two tunesians) plotting to kill one of the original cartoonists. The day after the arrest of those people 11-12 newspapers decided reprint the cartoons in solidarity with the writer, and all of them had a sober introduction explaining this. It wasn't meant as a repetition of the first incident, but as sign of the newspapers unshaking support of free speech and the writer who has to endure these death-threats on a daily basis.

3. Denmark is not a fascist regime - our political spectrum spans from "light" socialism to liberal over the different parties, all represented in our Folketing (congress I guess a fitting translation would be). Racism is frowned upon, and your political career is pretty much over here if you get caught saying derogative words in regard to race. A lot of muslims called on danish politicians to publicly apologize for their countrys actions, but they wouldn't, or rather, they couldn't. The reason for this is simple, we have a free press, and if politicians could moderate newspapers it would no longer be a free press. So to us it seems, not wrong as in "we don't want to", but simply an absurd notion in lieu of muslims apologizing for being muslims. It's not about avoiding to look impotent or silly, it's simply an otherworldly notion to us.

That is the underlying problem here, free speech is our prophet just as Mohammed is yours.
The situation can be likened to a chessgame where the impossible happens : the two opposing kings are standing on adjacent squares, and what is happening now is the two sides squabbling about who gets to move first and take the other's king. The one who lets the opponent take his king looses, hence the only sensible thing to do, in order to resolve the situation, is aggree to move away from each other simultaneously and hope black and white in time turns grey enough to co-exist peacefully. Anyone rooting for either king to capture the other fuels the fire in this particular instance.

Words are silver, but silence is gold. This goes for both sides in this maddening conflict.

 

[guyabano]

:salamext:

@ root: It would be. But we wanna see the *censored* suffer in this life as well.

you start to show your real face. Go on !

So why believing in Allah and his right punishment for this man , when still you seem to be blood thirsty and harm physically people ?

And besides, you can drop the 'we wanna', as thankfully not all muslims think like you

Peace

 

[guyabano]

Its funny how when Muslims are made fun of its all of a sudden "freedom of speech" Check out the link to the cartoon.
http://www.truthdig.com/images/avboothuploads/denmark_650.gif

ooooh shocking ! Blashpemy !!!! Insulting christian religion. Christian cross...uuhhhh. I think, christians should now also go on the streets, burn flags, commit terroist attacks...

Are they ? No, they mostly take it with humor.

Learn something

Peace

 

[IslamiCompare]

Well explained ZarathustraDK. A lot of good points made. However, in the UK, and this is also a response to 'root', wouldn't reprinting the articles be marked as 'inciting racial hatred'?? Tell me, please, how it works in bonding different people?

Freedom of speech is OK, but it should be used tactfully by those that are in a position to do so, and I see no tact in this. Why should hundreds of Danish muslims have to suffer humiliation (again) for the acts of 3 individuals. Freedom of speech? pff!

 

[ZarathustraDK]

Well explained ZarathustraDK. A lot of good points made. However, in the UK, and this is also a response to 'root', wouldn't reprinting the articles be marked as 'inciting racial hatred'?? Tell me, please, how it works in bonding different people?

Well, the law against inciting racial hatred/hatespeech is defined more or less (I think at least, IANAL) as the willful act of doing something with the purpose and intention of inciting racial hatred, which is not the reason why the cartoons were printed in the first place (although perceived as such by the offended party); the reason for reprinting was the attempted murder of the cartoonist. They tried kill him in effigy, as a consequence the papers republished the cartoons in effigy to let the world know that free speech will not be silenced by such terror-tactics. I know it may seem like overkill, but I can't really think of any other less severe counter-reaction that wouldn't look like a lame duck, given the attention the attempted murder got. On the bonding-part, well, it wasn't really an action catering to that purpose. However, although muslims probably got more pissed at danes ironically the republishing probably lowered some of the islamophobia : lot's of people realize that although what was done was necessary (in their mind), they still stepped on someones toes and feel sorry for having to do so.
Also, race and religion are two different things, people don't choose the color of their skin but they choose what they wish to believe in. That people choose something out of their own free will makes it fair game for debate in Denmark and thus subject to free speech. I believe that's how it goes at least.

Freedom of speech is OK, but it should be used tactfully by those that are in a position to do so, and I see no tact in this. Why should hundreds of Danish muslims have to suffer humiliation (again) for the acts of 3 individuals. Freedom of speech? pff!

I agree it wasn't tactful, but acting untactful is not a crime (although when one is the victim of it one could wish it was). Conversely I could ask "Why should non-muslims suffer the censorship of a religion to which they do not pray?". Just like you hold your prophet dear as one of the absolutes in your life, non-muslim danes treasure freedom of speech over anything else. You may think it's ridiculous in this particular instance, but freedom of speech is the alpha and omega to our society. We abhor censorship simply because it means objective and constructive debate can get sidetracked and manipulated by avoiding possibly important topics, which in turn could influence what would be accepted as the truth by society. It is THAT big a deal to us, no exceptions even if we get burned in the process, because once we start hamstringing free speech it's a slippery slope which will end in censorship.

Besides, not printing the cartoons would accomplish nothing in our mind (which you no doubt will find a preposterous statement). Yes, muslims wouldn't have been angered at that time, but the possibility would still be there lying on the ground like an unexploded stick of dynamite, waiting for some poor schmuck to pick it up. I'm not saying you should be grateful that Denmark brought this thing up, you are entitled to be offended; but what I can say is that IF I were a muslim, and I knew this was unavoidingly going to happen, AND I could choose which country to bring it, then I'd choose Denmark for sole sake of securing a debate in which all parties can speak unhindered. It was a disaster waiting to happen, and I can picture far worse countries to use it as a genuine excuse for, purposefully and intentionally, inciting hatred.

What would I have done if I could do it all over? I don't know, I'd be between a stone and hard place to be honest. I see the harm, but I also see the necessity in trying to defuse the worst possible scenario instead of just talking about it. In a perfect society the cartoons would probably not have been printed (nobody would even had thought about it in the first place), not because it was illegal but because people would realize the harm it would cause and simply not do it out of respect for our fellow humans. But alas, there'll always be dingbats on either side trying to stir up a commotion.

 

[MinAhlilHadeeth]

Okay, I don't see what this has to do with the topic... I won't dwell too long for the sake of not derailing the thread, but I really have to say...

Maybe if people didn't worship those objects and commit shirk the Saudis wouldn't have to remove them from the public eye or demolish them.

Also, are you sure they are demolishing his house? Wasn't he buried in this house? :?

:wasalamex

Exactly. It's not meant to offend anyone. Sometimes building have to be removed in order to expand, for example, the Haram.

And the point about shirk is a good one. I know some of the houses of the classical 'Ulamaa were ordered to be demolished for the same reason. I don't think this is disrespectful at all. Also, tawheed is the most important individual obligation, so this has precedence in being preseverved. Al-Hamdulillaah, Saudi pay a great deal of attention to this.

 

[Moon*Light]

German Minister in Cartoon Crisis

IslamOnline.net & News Agencies, Wed. Feb. 27, 2008

BERLIN — German's interior minister embroiled himself on Wednesday, February 27, in a growing international controversy triggered by the reprinting of a satirical cartoon of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him).
"I have respect for the fact that Danish newspapers have now all printed the Muhammad caricatures, on the basis (that) we will not let ourselves be divided," Wolfgang Schaeuble said in an interview with the Die Zeit weekly.

"In fact, all European newspapers should print these cartoons," he suggested.

Seventeen Danish newspapers reprinted on Wednesday, February 13, a drawing of a man described as Prophet Muhammad with a ticking bomb in his turban.

The move came following the arrest of two Tunisians and a Dane of Moroccan origin for allegedly plotting to kill the cartoonist who drew the caricature.

The re-printed cartoon was one of 12 commissioned and published by Denmark's mass-circulation Jyllands-Posten daily in 2005.

Schaeuble said Europe's newspapers should print the cartoon "with the caveat: 'We too find them pathetic, but the exercise of press freedom is no reason to resort to violence.'"

His spokesman did not contest the quote but he told a news conference the minister had made the comments in a long conversation, and was not urging papers to reprint the cartoons.

"I see no reason to interpret this as Schaeuble calling for the cartoons to be printed across Europe. He rather said that we have the principle of press freedom and that under the threat of violence, we must not move away from…press freedom."

More Protests

Schaeuble's controversial remarks coincided with boiling anger in some Muslim countries over the reprinting of the cartoon.

Hundreds of thousands of Sudanese marched through the capital Khartoum Wednesday, carrying banners and shouting slogans against Denmark.

The crowd, walking or riding pick-up trucks through the city center, demanded a rapture in diplomatic ties with Denmark.

"Any Dane will be prevented from setting foot on Sudanese territory," President Omar al-Bashir told the angry crow.

He called on Muslims around the world to follow Sudan's example in boycotting Danish products, companies, personalities and institutions.

Sudan has declared a national boycott of Danish products after a presidential degree.

Muslims worldwide boycotted Danish products during the 2005 crisis, causing Danish companies nearly $1.5 million in losses a day.

Denmark's leading dairy company Arla Foods, one of the hardest hit, issued at the time a strong condemnation of the cartoon and appealed to Muslims not to boycott its products.

Protests have raged in a number of Muslim countries since the cartoon was reprinted two weeks ago.

Demonstrators took to the streets in Pakistan, Indonesia, Jordan, Sudan, Egypt, and the Gaza Strip to condemn the move.

The Vatican joined Al-Azhar, the highest seat of learning in the Sunni world, Tuesday, February 26, in condemning the reprinting of the cartoon.

"Freedom of expression should not become a pretext to insult religions and defaming religious sanctities," they said in a joint statement.

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/...57492274&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout

 

[Whatsthepoint]

Why should religions be allowed to say anything about any group of people they have problems with, and at the same time be protected from insult?

This is a cartoon thread so I think a cartoon is in place:

 

[MinAhlilHadeeth]

Greetings,

I don't know how that cartoon is even relevant.

 

[IbnAbdulHakim]

Greetings,

I don't know how that cartoon is even relevant.

its actually quite a good point sis,

his showing how cartoons are not only used to insult islaam, but also used as propaganda to make the true culprits look innocent and the victims look evil.


:thumbs_up thanks for bringing in here whats not appreciated whatsthepoint

 

[Suomipoika]

Greetings,

I don't know how that cartoon is even relevant.

I think the point is that some religious people say pretty hurtful things about others, like example gay people (my favorite pet peeve on this forum still is the negative stereotypia of west), yet complain and demand for respect when they are criticized.

 

[IbnAbdulHakim]

I think the point is that some religious people say pretty hurtful things about others, like example gay people (my favorite pet peeve on this forum still is the negative stereotypia of west), yet complain and demand for respect when they are criticized.

give an example of muslims as a whole complaining and demanding respect when criticised and we'll get back to you.

 

[Suomipoika]

give an example of muslims as a whole complaining and demanding respect when criticised and we'll get back to you.

You must have missed alot of posts in various danish cartoon threads.