"Omrow" wrote:

Salam

I can't see what the fuss is about.

Its only cartoons printed by a bunch of jokers.

Omrow

at first thats what i thought but then i got my reality head on and read Yashmaki's post and agreed that such mockery is terrible.

and to 100man i would say that Yashmaki is entitled to her opinion and please dont name call

plus that if certain people do not mind their religions being laughed at does not mean that others have to follow

But i do agree all matters should be dealt with by law and with modest determination.

i think it is sufficient that the governments of all countries know that it is their responsibility to protect the dignity of their inhabitants this includes discouraging such activity and placing penalities for it.

[b]Freedom of speech becomes an oppressing force when it ridicules and disrespects the beliefs of any portion of society [/b]

"seema*" wrote:

and to 100man i would say that Yashmaki is entitled to her opinion and please dont name call

plus that if certain people do not mind their religions being laughed at does not mean that others have to follow

But i do agree all matters should be dealt with by law and with modest determination.

i think it is sufficient that the governments of all countries know that it is their responsibility to protect the dignity of their inhabitants this includes discouraging such activity and placing penalities for it.

[b]Freedom of speech becomes an oppressing force when it ridicules and disrespects the beliefs of any portion of society [/b]

seema, I didn't name-call except for the line about 'poor victim', which I think is a strong point and not an ad hominem. And I absolutely don't need to be told Yashmaki's entitled to her opinion. You'll notice I didn't pass a fatwa, threaten a boycott or even try and sue. Now, is it really, really your view, that everyone is entitled to express an opinion? I'm sorry but I still have you down as a jingo, otherwise I can't see the point in how you berated me. That just means I thought it was one of those mostly disingenuous comments based on lending a sister a hand.

thank you for defending me, but seriously he didn't offend me. Maybe he winds me up easily but that's my problem So he has no need to apologise.

Heard today there's gona be some demonstration in the uk concerning these cartoons? To tell the truth i'm beginning to think the hysteria is serving no purpose except furthering the aims of those who hate muslims, Islam and generally any organised religion. Am i going soft?

Btw my anger isn't over the fact that animate images aren't permitted in Islam, it's more so the mockery element. It's the journalists, who have been harking over the view that images are forbidden in Islam. I don't think any prophet (as) should be mocked. Of course i don't agree with the depiction of any prophets whether it be in jest or all seriousness but that's not where i took offense, and i'm sure that's the sentiment of most muslims. Anyways I don't wana talk about this anymore.

DO GO SOFT. You'll notice that's how most of the faithful of other religions are. There are literally countless similar images and opinions expressed daily about other religions, and they know the distraction has nothing to do with true faith.

yeah but dont u get offended if ppl mock your faith and prophets? Surely it's a natural reaction?

I don't. It's important to be philosophical about ethereal and spiritual matters. Maybe if an Imam you respected began taking radically progressive views on life and people and religious freedoms you wouldn't be offended. It would be clear that his faith had not changed, but that the world had changed, and required an intelligent scrutiny of faith. Other religions have experienced that. I wonder if this seems like bastardisation, but it is not, it is practical application of religion as a genuine way of life for the world, and not as personal goods to be valiantly protected, or merely a path to some reward. Us stupid humans, we don't get the incentive-to-do-good thing, we're just waiting for payday, right? The reality is there is nothing we know that was not either observed or communicated by man, even books we believe were given by God, and we have to be responsible for that fact. We cannot claim to be more sacred than the next man. We cannot threaten violence over non-violence. I find it so simple, it must be common knowledge.

OK, I am very bad at dragging myself away but I will be late. For now Shabbat Shalom.

Salaam

Obviously only Muslims would feel offended and outraged at such images.

Just like only Hindu’s became outraged when their God were depicted on shoes/cakes and underwear.

It’s unrealistic to expect other faiths to empathise.

Some faiths are used to having their faith ridiculed and blasphemed...such as Christianity.

Therefore some Christians are more tolerant of such images/portrayals.

This is not the case of Islam.

In this case I totally understand the sentiments but condemn their actions of those who lead violent protests.

How would the Holy Prophet have responded to the cartoons?

And whilst I’m not saying we should be inactive, of course we should stand up to those who slander or defame our beloved Prophet (saw)…but I don’t think wild protests do us any favours.

Wasalaam

i agree wild protests won't serve any purpose

"100man" wrote:

"vigilanteshmaki" wrote:

They are actually protecting his right to preach hatred of the islamic faith.

sorry 100man if i offended you but i think vigilanteshmaki is name calling i thought you made it up. or if not then i really dont understand at all

plus you just called me a jingo - now thats name calling and i really dont have any personal grudge against you so i wont call you anything but respectfully the name you choose for yourself 100man - at least you didnt call me a dingo now that would be insulting

wow i'm a vigilante, and veiled vigilante has a nice ring to it don't ya think loooool

You got me.

Sorry for saying I wasn't name-calling, and sorry to Yashmaki. I appreciate that you weren't offended and hope it remains in the context of my point, but that was a naughty one.

Jingo has meaning and context, let's not do that one.

Shabbat Shalom. Er, for the penultimate time?

loool tis ok. i thght ur late u're not supposed to be here!

My brother was picking me up at 2, then 2.30 etc, so I've been doing my washing.

SHABBAT SHALOM!

never mind shabbat shalom what about calling me a jingo!

I already did, a few times.

My bro is here.

"100man" wrote:

I already did, a few times.

My bro is here.

lol ok you got me bye!

Whats a jingo :?:

"[url=http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?s=jingo&gwp=13 wrote:

answers.com[/url]"]One who vociferously supports one's country, especially one who supports a belligerent foreign policy; a chauvinistic patriot.

I did not know either until I looked it up.

basically it is the type of nationalism that has been forbidden by the Prophat (saw).

It is a serious term IMO.

100 Please do not use it, as it implies Seema has not really thought about this subject herself, and is just supporting a mood because it is held by muslims.

"MuslimSister" wrote:

Salaam

Obviously only Muslims would feel offended and outraged at such images.

Just like only Hindu’s became outraged when their God were depicted on shoes/cakes and underwear.

It’s unrealistic to expect other faiths to empathise.

Some faiths are used to having their faith ridiculed and blasphemed...such as Christianity.

Therefore some Christians are more tolerant of such images/portrayals.

This is not the case of Islam.

In this case I totally understand the sentiments but condemn their actions of those who lead violent protests.

How would the Holy Prophet have responded to the cartoons?

And whilst I’m not saying we should be inactive, of course we should stand up to those who slander or defame our beloved Prophet (saw)…but I don’t think wild protests do us any favours.

Wasalaam

I'd go along with that.

By all means protest but those who run around issuing death threats are acting in exactly the same way that the stereotype in the cartoon suggests is natural for the Muslims.

We have to put up with it and maintain some decorum despite provocation like this.

Check out [url=http://www.alghurabaa.co.uk/index.html]Al Gurabaa[/url].

I may have to nick a few ideas for the site... but they are going about things the wrong way. And the views seem to be those of a well know group...

"Admin" wrote:

[quote="[url=http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?s=jingo&gwp=13]answers.com[/url]"]One who vociferously supports one's country, especially one who supports a belligerent foreign policy; a chauvinistic patriot.

I did not know either until I looked it up.

basically it is the type of nationalism that has been forbidden by the Prophat (saw).

It is a serious term IMO.

100 Please do not use it, as it implies Seema has not really thought about this subject herself, and is just supporting a mood because it is held by muslims.[/quote]

thank you Admin i really didnt know what the word meant i took it to mean silly or something otherwise i wouldnt have taken it so lightly.

especially as i always state my own opinion.

Salam

[url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4676776.stm]BBC[/url]: [b]Pakistan President Musharraf condemns cartoons[/b]

I don't know what has been watching, but I don't think he has seen Tom and Jerry.

He just doesn't know what he is missing.

Omrow

Well, this has definately managed to turn into another Rushdie. This is probably even more explosive.

Just as the Danes started apologising - and regretting the fact that they ignored the issue back when they could have defused it - several newspapers in Europe started printing the cartoons. No doubt the people behind the republishing are the ones who want to ban the hijab etc.

It's a shame 'al-Muhajiroon' had to hijack the demo in London today.

[size=18]The freedom that hurts us[/size]

[size=15]Printing cartoons of Muhammad creates fear and insecurity in Muslims across Europe[/size]

[b]Sarah Joseph[/b]
Friday February 3, 2006
[url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1701041,00.html]The Guardian[/url]

The battle is set, of religious extremism versus freedom of speech. These are the lines drawn, or so we are told, in the escalating tensions worldwide surrounding the printing of images of Muhammad in Denmark and elsewhere in Europe.

Although the media is only now picking up on this story, my inbox has been receiving messages about these cartoons for weeks. The messages range from high-pitched to very thoughtful, but not one of them says, "Yeah, whatever ... "

Article continues
There's no apathy surrounding this issue. This is because of the love felt for the prophet and religious norms in Islam. But also because it feeds into profound feelings of disempowerment, fear and insecurity among Muslims that Europe would do well to understand. In Britain, we should realise that Muslims here will be angry if the pictures are gratuitously published in British papers - not just because of the insults to Muhammad, but because it makes them feel disempowered. Protesting is the only way to regain some self-respect.

First, the easy part. Any depiction of Muhammad, however temperate, is not allowed. There are but a few images of him in Muslim history, and even these are shown with his face veiled. This applies not only to images of Muhammad: no prophet is to be depicted. There are no images of God in Islam either.

So there is hurt and anger, and the messages I receive reflect that. In response, they suggest different approaches. One is through lobbying: distributing the phone numbers of the newspaper Jyllands-Posten, the Danish ambassador, Denmark's parliament and everything else Danish, and urging Muslims to make their feelings known. We also have the boycott approach - "the only language the west understands" - listing every Danish product that one can buy. I also get messages from the great optimists, suggesting we use the controversy to explain the real nature of Muhammad, who returned insults with kindness. Indeed, Muslims would do well to remember that.

I have also been receiving other messages. These are the most worrying, and the ones of which Europe must take note. These are the messages of resignation. The messages that discuss exit strategies. The messages that question the very future of Muslims in Europe.

Why such hand-wringing over a few cartoons? The key is in the images themselves: Muhammad with turbaned bomb, Muhammad declaring that paradise had run out of virgins for suicide bombers, Muhammad with sword and veiled women. Muhammad in every Orientalist caricature. Muhammad as a symbol for Islam and Muslims. These are the stereotypes that, as Muslims, we face daily. The looks on the tube, the suspicion, the eyes on the bags we carry. There is no denying the feeling of being pushed against a wall, of drowning in the stereotypes that abound. This is no way to live, and it is certainly no springboard for making a major contribution to the society you live in.

The messages to my inbox of resignation, of fear, come with good reason. Some countries that have reprinted the images - Spain, France, Italy and Germany - have a nasty history of fascism. Just last week we had Holocaust memorial day. The Holocaust did not occur overnight. It took time to establish a people as subhuman, and cartoons played their part. Does Europe not remember its past and the Nazi propaganda of Der Stürmer?

Now the great shape-shifter of fascism seems to have taken on the clothes of "freedom of speech". If these cartoons were designed to provoke Muslim fundamentalists, maybe they have done more to reveal the prejudices of Europe. Europe has a history of turning on its minorities. Will that be its future too?

[b]· Sarah Joseph is editor of emel magazine [/b]
info@emelmagazine.com

Salam

My message to the people of the whole world:

[b]Either you are with cartoons, or you are with the real men.[/b]

Omrow

That doesn't make sense. Nor is it funny.

salaam

i think on a personal level that the way muslims have behaved and reacted is not clever at all. yes , another satanic verses ....

yes, the cartoons were offensive and insulting so does that mean as practising muslims and those who love the prophet should:
- burn danish and european flags
- hijack embassies
- masked men with guns fire bullets in the air
- go crazy, get sooooo angry, shout out hatred against 'the west'...
:?:

what has all this achieved....

more hatred against islam and muslims
clarified again that muslims are intolerant
clarified muslims get angry too quickly
means muslims are so sensitive that people are scared of them
the media of europe has united against islam and muslims...
ordinary non muslims feel muslims want special treatment, that muslims want to end their freedom of expression

if a cartoon has created all this.... then future relations between islam and the rest of the world looks bleak....

muslims should have simply :
- ignored the cartoon, no one would have seen or heard about it, locals should have made proper complaints to the newspaper

proper action required was:
- phone, write, email to the newspaper (this was sufficient)
the danish paper apologised...that was enough... but no muslims got soo emotional they wante dto make this an international issue an dgive the islamophobics, the extremists, the confused, the so-called academics to muslimbash again....

boycotting danish products was a joke to me!
a few people from a newspaper have done this and we blame a whole country!!!!!! crazy...
so i, as editor, upset christians for example, u expect the whole christian world to boycott all british products...does that make sense to anyone!!!!

the bad reaction, the over reaction and the usual emotional behaviour of the muslims has got us more opponents than supporters....

sulamn rushdie got international fame, books sold like hotcake, he became a celebrity.... if we ignored him and lobbied professionally, there would have been a world of a difference..
in the same way the newspapers have got what they want, islamophobes got what they want, extremists got what they want............... because again muslims dont use their heads, they use their emotions....

i know some of you might not like my comments...but thats how i feel. im upset about the cartoons, they have hurt me. .... but is our imaan so weak that we have to make a song and dance about it....

the prophet was insulted and attacked on many times by non muslims- did he react like we do today, did the sahabah act like we do.... no...

anyway...

wasalaam

salaam

how do we react today and how did the prophet reacted when he was attacked or insulted:
(this is an extract of the Q & A from issue 4 of the revival magazine)

[b]
HOW DID PROPHET MUHAMMAD(PBUH) TREAT NON MUSLIMS?[/b]
The Prophet of Allah (May Allah bless him and grant him peace) was not only a mercy to believers but a mercy to all mankind. (As stated in the Quran 21:107). He acted with mercy and compassion even to those who came to attack him. Here are some examples:
[b]1. [/b]It is related that when the Prophet (May Allah bless him and grant him peace) had his tooth broken and his face cut on the day of the Battle of Uhud, it was practically unbearable for his companions. They said “if only you would invoke a curse against them.” [b]He replied “I was not sent to curse, but I was sent as a mercy. Oh Allah, guide my people for they do not know.” [/b](As Shifa, Qadi Ayad)
[b]
2. [/b]Once the Holy Prophet was seated in Madinah, along with his Companions. During this time a funeral procession passed by. On seeing this, the Holy Prophet stood up. One of his Companion remarked that the funeral was that of a Jew. The Holy Prophet replied, “Was he not a human being?”
This is a stark contrast to the behaviour many Muslims have today…there are some who perceive Jews as “the enemy” and in more extreme circumstances you get some who have the nerve to rejoice at the death of innocent non Muslims.

[b]3.[/b] One a Jewish lady gave the Holy Prophet some poisoned lamb. The Prophet’s companion was killed instantly. The woman was brought to the Holy Prophet who asked her about the poisoned food. The woman told him that she intended to kill him. [b]The companions naturally wanted to take their revenge. However, the Holy Prophet forbade them from seeking revenge and forgave her. [/b]

[b]4. [/b]Once a group of Christian priests were in Medina. They needed a place to stay so they went to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). He said you can stay at my house. He cooked them dinner and made them welcome. Soon it was the time for the Christians to pray, the Prophet (pbuh) took them to the Mosque of the Prophet and said you can do your worship here.
Do we see that happening today? WHY NOT?
[b]There are many other examples of the Prophet(pbuh) not only forgiving the non believers but those who came to cause him harm.[/b] This way many people became Muslims.
........

[b]WHEN THE PROPHET WAS ATTACKED OR INSULTED DID HE:
GO ON A PROTEST MARCH
CURSE NON MUSLIMS
BURN THE FLAGS OF HIS ENEMY
TRY TO ATTCK THE EMBASSIES OF THE NON MUSLIMS
TRY TO KIDNAP OR HIJACK THE NON MUSLIMS AS REVENGE

NO!!!

HE EITHER FORGAVE THEM, MADE DUAA FOR THEM OR TRIED TO MAKE THEM UNDERSTAND.[/b]

only if we tried to follow and understand the sunnah of our beloved prophet (saw)...

wasalaam

Muslims are far too emotional for their own good

The current protests are hardly a PR coup for Muslims. But it only got to this stage because other avenues of protest didn't seem to work (although this vandalism, hijacking, death threats etc won't work either).

When the cartoons were published in Denmark in September, Danish Muslims wrote to the newspaper and complained and demonstrated peacefully outside the newspaper's offices. But no dice.

October:
11 Muslim ambassadors asked to see the Danish PM. The PM refused to see them.

Danish Muslims tried bringing legal proceedings against the newspaper. The case got thrown out.

Danish Muslims travel across the Middle East to drum up more support. Apparently they tell people that the newspaper is owned by the Danish gov and they also say that the newspaper printed cartoons with pigs.

November:
In the meantime another paper prints more cartoons and a German paper reprints the origninal cartoons. They do so knowing full well that Muslims are offended by them.

December:
The UN launches an investigation. The Council of Europe condemns the cartoons and tells the Danish gov to take action.

January:
Danish PM defends 'freedom of speech'.

Norwegian paper prints cartoons. But their gov distances itself and speaks to Muslim ambassadors. Good show by the Norwegian gov.

Saudis boycott Danish products. Danish gov refuses to endorse their ambassador to Saudi when he tries to patch things up.

29 Jan:
Violent protests (flag burning etc) begin. Scandinavians in Palestine threatened.

30 Jan:
Danish gov and newspaper try to apologise.
EU backs Denmark against boycott.

31 Jan:
Danish PM apoligises again.

February:
[b]More European papers print the cartoons. [/b]

---------------------

Muslims used legitimate means of protest when the cartoons were first published. They managed to get the support of several Muslim govs. The UN took notice, the Council of Europe took notice. Muslims did good but the Danish gov ignored them.

The next step was economic action. This began to work.

But as the Danish gov dragged its feet the protests became violent. Only once the protests became violent and the boycott began to eat away at Danish economic interests in the Middle East did the Danish gov begin to apologise.

Now everything would have cooled down. But some European newspapers wanted to continue to stoke the fire. These newspapers are the bastards. Just when everything was cooling off they had to butt-in and make things worse.

These copy-cat newspapers are the ones who are the bad guys in this. And al-Muhajiroon (they really messed things up in London today).