Jordanian court has begun blasphemy proceedings against Danish artist Kurt Westergaard

[Gharib]

What makes you say he changed his story?

What story (cited, please) do you think he gave before?

he did say that he made the drawing in order to see what reaction he would get and point out how freedom of speech is being limited, they are his words from the article you posted.

I think the thing you're not getting is that the cartoon wasn't aimed at all Muslims. It was intended to see, given that people's rights had already been infringed in the name of Islam, what rights were still in force.

how can you say that his cartoons were aimed at all muslims when he drew our prophet? come on now be sensible.

like i said if he didn't want a reaction from all muslims around then he and his newspaper should have done something that was a reply to the actions done by those muslims.

I'm not blaming anyone for anything; I'm just asking for a position from you that's free from hipocrisy.

my opinion is free from hipocrisy. you just don't like the answer.

If a cartoon justifies murder, then why doesn't a kidnapping and beating justify a cartoon?

where have i ever said that muslims are and would be justified in killing him over a cartoon?

 

[Meow Mix]

first you must understand that most of the muslim world believes that the the 9/11 attack was done by the US governemnt itself, as many experts from the US itself including those who built those towers have sated that it was impossible for the towers to collaps like that by a singe explosion of a plane without there being demolition bombs placed throughout the towers. this of course is for another thread. but my point is americans would not be justified in doing that because muslims do not hold alqaeda responsible for what happened, and there are many non-muslims who also share the same view.

further more, if we had a picture of our prophet and we knew what he looked like and people who were victimised by what some muslims did, then they would be justified in their reaction to the actions of those muslims. and it would be those muslims who are to be punished.

but first of all we do not have a picture of our prophet, so if anyone makes a cartoon about our prophet then that is not acceptable. muslims do not go offending people about what their God might look like or what their prophets might look like or deliberately offend them about something that crosses the limits. just like in a war that we are not allowed to cross the limits then outside of war the same law applies.

and about the donkey thing, if other jews are offended by what muslims are doing, then it is their people who attacked muslims that they should be angry at, not the muslims.

does that answer your questions?

No, I'm sorry. I think you don't understand, but that's okay. I'll drop it. See you elsewhere on the boards :rainbow1:

 

[Flankerl]

then why did you say what you did about the age of islam?

Because reality is a *****. And your religion is 1400 years old. Give or take a few years.

Otherwise i could claim that judaism has been there FOREVER. As we all know HaShem has always existed. Since time is of no concern to him he already knew "back then" that he would create judaism. So judaism is at least 13 billion years old.
Awesome.

thats right i would offend only the two christians that beat me up, so then why are you offended by muslims who offended the jews that blew up the mosques?

I think you offend me. So i use a quran as toiletpaper. But dont worry its only directed at you.


And now we will see that THIS is obviously different from defiling jewish symbols.


The german intro music of Pippi Longstocking would fit this thread perfectly....

 

[Gharib]

No, I'm sorry. I think you don't understand, but that's okay. I'll drop it. See you elsewhere on the boards :rainbow1:

what thats it?

 

[no-body]

y

his drawing had nothing to do with the actions of muslims, he just wanted to test the level of freedom os speech that he had in insulting religions and that why he did it. they are his own words, read the link 9-10ths Penguin provided.

why was it such an attack? he states himself that he wanted to know what would happen or how much freedom of expression he had so thats why he drew the prophet, again he states clearly why he drew the prophet and what he expected from muslims. so rather than keep blaming muslims for his provocation you are better of to blame him for making us react.

What a ridiculous and disgusting position "but your honor I couldn't help raping her, look at what she was wearing!"

You can hide behind culture for only so long. This is the problem with worshiping a piece of text written by a bunch of desert Sheppards over a thousand years ago as the apotheosis of civilization.

 

[Gharib]

Because reality is a *****. And your religion is 1400 years old. Give or take a few years.

Otherwise i could claim that judaism has been there FOREVER. As we all know HaShem has always existed. Since time is of no concern to him he already knew "back then" that he would create judaism. So judaism is at least 13 billion years old.
Awesome.

in islamic belief, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhamed were all preaching the same thing as Adam. so how could anyone of them other than Adam be the first prophet of the religion of God?

 

[Gharib]

What a ridiculous and disgusting position "but your honor I couldn't help raping her, look at what she was wearing!"

You can hide behind culture for only so long. This is the problem with worshiping a piece of text written by a bunch of desert Sheppards over a thousand years ago as the apotheosis of civilization.

and you were there to see those desert sheppard when they soposedly wrote what you claim they wrote, you were there right.

 

[Meow Mix]

what thats it?

Yeah, no offense but it honestly seem to me that no matter what I say on this subject you will never agree. So, I'll just talk to you on whatever other subjects and maybe we'll have more luck, friend.

 

[Badran]

Please reply to this eselam:

yes.

What do you mean yes?

Did all Jews participate in the actions you referred to? No.

Did Muslims insult a Jewish symbol in general? Yes.

Did they at least apologize and say they weren't aiming that at Jews in general?

his drawing had nothing to do with the actions of muslims, he just wanted to test the level of freedom os speech that he had in insulting religions and that why he did it. they are his own words, read the link 9-10ths Penguin provided.

I'm hearing too many conflicting things about what was his aim and intentions, so i will refrain from making any judgments. However forget about him then, what if its another person who drew the prophet and was directing that at radical Muslims, will you be okay with that?

 

[Gharib]

Yeah, no offense but it honestly seem to me that no matter what I say on this subject you will never agree. So, I'll just talk to you on whatever other subjects and maybe we'll have more luck, friend.

actually it was my agreeing to what you said that you don't like. if i had disagreed then you would have continued to post here in order to show something that ain't going to work now. i mean no offence, i'm just stating how i see things based on your actions.

 

[no-body]

and you were there to see those desert sheppard when they soposedly wrote what you claim they wrote, you were there right.

And you where there when the angel Gabriel dictated the Koran to Mohammed ?

 

[Flankerl]

in islamic belief, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhamed were all preaching the same thing as Adam. so how could anyone of them other than Adam be the first prophet of the religion of God?

Offtopic much?


Why wont you adress this?

I think you offend me. So i use a quran as toiletpaper. But dont worry its only directed at you.


And now we will see that THIS is obviously different from defiling jewish symbols.

You have to remember i have to go to the synagogue of satan soon, i dont have all day.

 

[Gharib]

What do you mean yes?

Did all Jews participate in the actions you referred to? No.

Did Muslims insult a Jewish symbol in general? Yes.

Did they at least apologize and say they weren't aiming that at Jews in general?

well did the jews express their feelings against what those other jews did?
if not, then why should the muslims apologise to this other half?

I'm hearing too many conflicting things about what was his aim and intentions, so i will refrain from making any judgments. However forget about him then, what if its another person who drew the prophet and was directing that at radical Muslims, will you be okay with that?

if other muslims are against those 'radical' muslims then that other person has no right to draw a cartoon of the prophet as as it offends the other muslim group. but if no muslims are against that 'radical' group then any non-muslims who believes he has been offended by muslims has a right to offend muslims and we would have no right over them for their offending us.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

he did say that he made the drawing in order to see what reaction he would get and point out how freedom of speech is being limited, they are his words from the article you posted.

Yes... that's his position. You said that he changed his position; how is this a change?

how can you say that his cartoons were aimed at all muslims when he drew our prophet? come on now be sensible.

like i said if he didn't want a reaction from all muslims around then he and his newspaper should have done something that was a reply to the actions done by those muslims.

Like maybe paint the Shahadah on the side of a donkey, dress it in a hijab and parade it around town? That would be reasonable, right?

my opinion is free from hipocrisy. you just don't like the answer.

AFAICT, your position so far has been "Islam should get to do whatever it wants, and everyone else will just have to deal with it." That by itself isn't hypocritical (offensive and unreasonable, yes, but not necessarily hypocritical). The hipocrisy comes in the fact that the principles you use to justify your position apply equally to other cases, but you refuse to accept this.

where have i ever said that muslims are and would be justified in killing him over a cartoon?

For starters, you said that the two men who were conspiring to kill Westergaard should've been allowed to go through with their plot in the name of "freedom of religion".

 

[Gharib]

Offtopic much?

right, you didn't like my reply. no worries.

Why wont you adress this?

i don't understand what you are saying. if you don't mind explaining then i will answer it, is it something worth replying to?

You have to remember i have to go to the synagogue of satan soon, i dont have all day.

whats with this statement? didn't i say before that muslims must respect jews and christians? why are you degrading yourself and your faith? whats your point?

 

[Meow Mix]

actually it was my agreeing to what you said that you don't like. if i had disagreed then you would have continued to post here in order to show something that ain't going to work now. i mean no offence, i'm just stating how i see things based on your actions.

Well, I disagree with your assessment. The reason I'm disengaging is because I don't think you've thought everything through all the way and don't appear to be willing to. You continue to defend the defaming of the star of david on a donkey as being justified even though that mocks ALL of Judaism, but you cry unfair if someone mocks an Islamic symbol on a donkey because "it would be unfair to uninvolved Muslims."

And you don't see the hypocrisy in this? It's literally unbelievable to me. That's why I'm withdrawing; but again, we can have pleasant conversation elsewhere, friend.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

well did the jews express their feelings against what those other jews did?
if not, then why should the muslims apologise to this other half?

if other muslims are against those 'radical' muslims then that other person has no right to draw a cartoon of the prophet as as it offends the other muslim group. but if no muslims are against that 'radical' group then any non-muslims who believes he has been offended by muslims has a right to offend muslims and we would have no right over them for their offending us.

Great - can you please tell us where and when you condemned the men who, in the name of Islam, kidnapped and beat up that lecturer at Copenhagen University for reading from the Quran?

If not, by your reasoning above, I assume that you'll agree that you have no right to be offended by the cartoon.

 

[Gharib]

Yes... that's his position. You said that he changed his position; how is this a change?

then why did you say his position was due to what muslims had done?

Like maybe paint the Shahadah on the side of a donkey, dress it in a hijab and parade it around town? That would be reasonable, right?

i disagree.

AFAICT, your position so far has been "Islam should get to do whatever it wants, and everyone else will just have to deal with it." That by itself isn't hypocritical (offensive and unreasonable, yes, but not necessarily hypocritical). The hipocrisy comes in the fact that the principles you use to justify your position apply equally to other cases, but you refuse to accept this.

incorrect, please read my posts. i have said that if non-muslims offend muslims based on the actions of some muslims then they have a right to that since the Qur'an condemns muslims to mock other faiths so that they do not do the same to us, but if they do it to us as a result of what we did, we have no right to punish them as it is our falt to begin with.

For starters, you said that the two men who were conspiring to kill Westergaard should've been allowed to go through with their plot in the name of "freedom of religion".

that was a different point. you were saying that he should not be punished because of his freedom of speech, so i said why weren't they allowed to kill him because of their freedom of religion. i was arguing to point out that freedom of religion is advertised yet at the same time one cannot hold any ground under it's name.

 

[Badran]

well did the jews express their feelings against what those other jews did?
if not, then why should the muslims apologise to this other half?

if other muslims are against those 'radical' muslims then that other person has no right to draw a cartoon of the prophet as as it offends the other muslim group. but if no muslims are against that 'radical' group then any non-muslims who believes he has been offended by muslims has a right to offend muslims and we would have no right over them for their offending us.

I didn't mean all Muslims. I meant those specific Muslims who did the act.

If they didn't apologize or clarify that they weren't addressing all Jews, they were wrong right?

They generalized their insult against all Jews for something that not all Jews participated in, by disrespecting one of their symbols.

 

[Gharib]

Great - can you please tell us where and when you condemned the men who, in the name of Islam, kidnapped and beat up that lecturer at Copenhagen University for reading from the Quran?

If not, by your reasoning above, I assume that you'll agree that you have no right to be offended by the cartoon.

under what name of islam did they beat up that lecturer?