mert would you have punched someone selling the satanic verses or showing the film submission ....muslims dont like them either and they have been ready to kill people over them ...you seem to me to be a fascist attacking people who make cartoons you dont like. if you punched me for giving out cartoons you would end up not breathing as I dont like fascists ...I can see that your 21 you would think that you would have had more sense at that age . the cartoons were about mohammed and in my view they were very mild compared to the sort of cartoons that could be made about a man that married a 6 years old child and had sex with her before she had reached puberty . there is the one with mohammed with a bomb in his turban , again mild the historical record says that mohammed used to torture people and make people into slaves that he beheaded hundreds of prisioners .... if the bomb in the turban implys that muslims are prone to violence, well I think the thousand people killed and seriously wounded over these cartoons have proved the point of the original cartoon.
The National Secular Society Free Muslims Coalition Freedom Association so far seem to be supporting a march for free expression in london on 25th of march
I'm no fascist but I tire of reading your paraniod anti-muslim ranting on these forums, and let's remember that Christians have done a lot of grisly things in the past too. Point taken re. fascism nonetheless, and apologies because that isn't something I would normally say or do...all this hate just gets my hackles up is all. I live in an area with a large Muslim population, in fact it's the area that the London Bombers came from...I even bumped into one of them a month or two before the event, in a bar of all places, and another used to work in one of the local chippies. Despite this I don't share your distrust of Muslims and generally consider them to be nice people. I certainly don't live in fear of them. "...you would end up not breathing..." Now who is giving out the death threats? However I have the sense to know that when someone makes a statement such as this...THEY DON'T OFTEN MEAN IT. Same with "behead those who etc., etc." The point of the Mohammed/bomb-turban pic was not to say that Muslims are prone to violence per sé, but rather that violence and Islam go hand-in-hand and that Islam cannot exist without violence. I suppose we shoud be grateful that, although we are not allowed to criticise Islam, the law says that they cannot glorify terrorism, which being such an important part of their culture must be a tremendous blow to them (sarcasm for those who don't spot it straight away). Perhaps the crux of this matter is that the War on Terror has eroded freedom of speech of all kinds by building tension and mistrust between the Muslim world and the West. Were this mistrust not around, the cartoons would never have been publihed in the first place, and likewise 'the glorification of terrorism' would not be an offence. If I were to draw your attention to the Muslim response to the 'Mustafa Shag' sex toy by the way, you'll notice that it was rather civilised. A few angy words were thrown about, but generally I think this illustrates that Muslims are fully capable of diplomatically making a polite complaint without threatening to behead anyone. "The Muslim response has been to burn down embassies (with innocent people still inside) and place a bounty on the head of the Danish cartoonist." Touché. Didn't know that. Still my opinion is unchanged. And I stand by my statement that we will never have Sharia law in Europe, whatever some Imam somewhere says. Just because a few people want it doesn't mean it will happen. I'm currently on a crappy university PC (my internet is down at home) with the worst keyboard I have ever used and can be bothered to type no longer. Rest assured I will return with more to say.
i have two points about this. I believe the whole uproar is because you aren't allowed to show any images of mohammed. To do so is sacrilege. This is just what i've gleaned from various sources at the pub. So i could be wrong. I can see why people are offended by the cartoon. It's mainly because christianity is basically a joke across the world. It's been taken apart and pissed on by comedians, artists and "cultural commentators" so much so that people don't even see the religion anymore. They see the people who are the spokespeople and laugh at them. Christianity does not have the same footing in any "christian" countries as islam has in muslim countries. 500 years ago, any jokes against christianity were met with firey deaths. Nowadays there is no real religion in christian countries. You are basically free to believe whatever you wish. The majority of muslim countries it seems do not have this freedom. The spokespeople for christianity by and large are also a joke. How many muslim clerics have been found guilty of child molestation, embezzlement from charities or sleeping with prostitutes (and worse)? Secondly, if you were to show a cartoon of the christian god embezzling money, sleeping with a prostitute or jacking off to child pornography i am sure there would be an equal amount of furore about it. But because christianity is so widespread, thousands of people could protest and it wouldn't even make a 4th page column in the metro. Mainly because the primarily christian countries also happen to be the primarily white countries and the primarily rich countries. This is what happens when you send people out to "savage lands" to convert the heathens to the way of the lord. You never see muslims going door to door trying to get people to go to mosques do you? Secondly
