ALL MUSLIMS BOYCOTT DANISH PRODUCTS!!

[NGONGE]

The Point,

 

Again, I humbly ask you to read my first post. It really is kids stuff and any teenager with an iota of comprehension (yes, that old excuse) can understand it.

 

I’m making a very clear and direct point. I don’t enjoy repeating myself when I’ve painstakingly moderated my words and ensured that they’re rabble-friendly. If you can’t comprehend what I’m saying, then we’re not on the same page and are never likely to be.

 

Xiin,

 

Same as the above, saaxib. When you’ve calmed down and are good and ready to discuss this, I’ll be here ready and able to lock horns.

 

Castro,

 

Are you really blaming the decision of the other European newspapers to print the cartoons on the Danes? The link and article you posted is only stating that newspapers reported NEWS! This news was started by a Danish paper in September and only became real news when our Muslim brothers decided that it should become a big deal. Naturally, news outlets from Copenhagen to Calcutta all went ahead with reporting it (non-Muslim outlets were not too shy or diplomatic when it came to printing the drawings too).

 

I can’t believe I’m even summarising such logical action! I am actually offended that you’ve been reduced to such a basic level of debating, saaxib. I realise that when one feels insulted or perceives some sort of a slur, one might express oneself with a little bit more venom than is usual or allow one’s emotions to add a bitter twinge to one’s words. However, I’d still expect the logic and rational to still remain.

 

Still, the argument is about the freedom of speech here. All these media outlets are backing up their Danish brothers because without their right to freedom of expression and speech they’ll be nothing. However, and to answer your question here, this does not mean that You or I can’t take them to court and prosecute them for it (we might win or we might lose. It depends on our argument). In a democracy (if that’s the yardstick you choose to use) we should at least be able to get our case heard in court.

 

I understand that many people are extremely angry/unhappy/offended by these cartoons. I think them distasteful and cringe worthy. However, I believe that the crime of those that drew these pictures has always been bigger than simple drawings. These people (mostly) don’t believe in God! It might sound silly, simplistic and naive of me but I can’t get offended by their words. It’s a bit like those daft people that upon hearing about the Saddam Hussein killings of innocent Iraqis would also pipe up angrily and shout “he also stole their moneyâ€! This you see might be true but it becomes very trivial and frivolous when put alongside the greater crime of murder. Likewise is getting upset about people insulting our prophet when we already know they don’t believe in that prophet’s creator and god! Tell me please, is it me that’s senseless or is that proverbial song reaching its crescendo in Eden?

 

 

Khayer

In the case of NGONGE V people with bad comprehension skills, the defence rests its case your honour.

 

[Socod_badne]

Originally posted by ThePoint:

I am at a loss to understand where you get 'every religion is treated equally'. If you mean in the courts, generally yes, but in the media - of course not.

 

 

Before the law of course. Why should what media does matter at all?

 

All people are allotted the right to practice their faith and the same rights are extened to them as enjoyed by the founding religions -- ie Christianity and Judaism. There are no discriminatory religious laws that grant certain favorable rights to one religion to the neglect of others.

 

The West is the only land where there is TRUE freedom of religion. It's not perfect, nothing humans do is ever perfect, but it's the best we have anywhere in the world.

 

 

If one has a problem, one has to move to another country? WHOA!!!!!!! That is the talk of bigots!!!!! ...In a democracy, everyone has the right to express themselves and protest/boycott etc. Why are Muslims supposed to take it? The newspaper has the 'freedom' of expression but Muslims don't????

 

No, I did not say one -- living in a democratic country -- should move if he/she feels chagrined. As I explained before NO religion is given special consideration. Not even Christianity, the largest in many parts of the West. Every revered religious figure has been subject to, under the protection of FREEDOM OF SPEECH (or screech :confused: ), satirical and parodical work. Islam is considered, in the West, like any other religon. With same rights and freedoms as exercised by christians.

 

Then these Danish derisory cartoons unfold, which I strenuously denounce and am chafed as much as next muslim, but my fellow muslims are asking that our prophet (scw) should be consider unique and be put in a special category of his own by a people who believe and shed blood to defend equality of religions. Who hold NO religious leader above another.

 

It is in this context, I suggested that if one has a problem with the West's insensitivity towards revered religious figures that they should leave. To a place where their views are the LAW! Not suggesting one shouldn't fight or protest when one feels wronged. Protest to your heart's content. Sometimes feeling righteously indignated is soul soothing. I'm told.

 

But there is no chance in hell that Western governments will write a new and specific law for muslims ONLY banishing any satirical and/or offensive depictions of their prophet (scw). Certainly not while every other revered religious leader is a fair game. That would be they hight of hypocracy and double standards. And if that were to happen, you can bet other religions will demand the same rights.

 

No one, including you, has yet made a defendable case for why the Danish paper that printed the cartoons should've been censored and reprimanded. Other then, the oft repeated , to ad nauseam, defense that Islam prohibits pictorial depictions and mocking of prophet Mohammed (scw). That is specious and doesn't fly.

 

The way I see it there is nothing we muslims possess to pressure Western governments to ban any depictions of our prophet short of asking for special consideration. Now, do we seriouly expect that demand to be granted?

[- Femme -]

Hardly anyone (except geo-nerds) could point denmark in the map; now its on everyone's lips. I guess they achieved their goal. And the whole controversy is probably making millions for that paper.

[Jacpher]

Originally posted by NGONGE:

I’m not arguing for argument’s sake, saaxib. If there is anything you don’t understand in what I wrote, be good enough to ask and I’ll be more than happy to explain.

This is much better. Xiin, you’re not told you COULD NOT READ. Who said you can’t teach an old dog new trick?

 

Sxb, do you seriously buy their argument that the cartoons were a work of experimenting freedom of speech. A bogus argument if you ask me. Let them enjoy their freedom while Millions of Muslims around the world continue to boycott (freedom of choice) their product. I don’t think a single Muslim will die as a result of the boycott.

[Socod_badne]

Originally posted by Kooleey:

Hardly anyone (except geo-nerds) could point denmark in the map; now its on everyone's lips.

I could only name and point to you ALL countries on the map. Is that mean I'm geo-nerd?

[Castro]

Originally posted by NGONGE:

Tell me please, is it me that’s senseless or is that proverbial song reaching its crescendo in Eden?

You're against the drawings, as a muslim, but support the newspapers "right" (under the freedom of expression) to publish them. You support the boycott as it is the right of muslims but you doubt its effectiveness as a tool of protest. Finally, you concede that the right to publish such content is questionable and that it may be (successfully) challenged in court.

 

Khalaas. There's really not much to debate here.

[- Femme -]

Yes Socod-Badne, I declare you SOL's offical Geo-Nerd. How does that make you feel? Are you thinking of a change of careers now?

 

P.S. If we look at the other side; a newspaper company published those insulting pictures---but why are we holding all of denmark accountable? I truly hate it when muslim countries apologize for the so called 'muslim' terrorists---why would we expect that from denmark? And forcing one to apologize is just stup!d. It has to be sincere. Besides because of the boycott---close to a hundred innocent people lost their jobs. What did they have to do with the pictures? And the retarded fools who are staging attacks against danish people...what are they on?

 

I realize this is a sensitive topic; but isn't there an alternative? Because if they'e so into boycotting; I could think of a couple of muslim countries I would boycott right about now. :mad: There should be a way to hurt the newspaper company without innocent people having to bear the burnt of it. You don't want to drive potential muslims from Islam!

[NGONGE]

Originally posted by Ducaqabe:

 

Sxb, do you seriously buy their argument that the cartoons were a work of experimenting freedom of speech. A bogus argument if you ask me. Let them enjoy their freedom while Millions of Muslims around the world continue to boycott (

freedom of choice

) their product. I don’t think a single Muslim will die as a result of the boycott.

Of course I do. It’s not a bogus argument at all. It’s an ingenious one in fact. They’ve chosen a topic that is the bedrock of any so called democracy and applied it to a contemporary problem.

 

Many people in the Western world HATE Islam and Muslims. Many laws in the Western world prohibit discrimination and racism (and Muslims fall under both categories). There is also that grey area of Political Correctness. Many writers and journalists experimented with these and tried to cross the line here and there. But, thanks mainly to those on the left wing, they were pushed back or pounced upon with such ferocity that they didn’t dare to try again. However, lately, the effort has been intensified. A few months back for example, an employee of the British Council wrote a collection of articles in the British Daily Telegraph. In these articles, he referred to Muslims as dogs and made a number of insults against Islam and Muslims. Many Muslim organisations complained and protested. The paper refused to apologise. But, someone somewhere found out who this secret writer was and reported him to his employers. Because these employers operate anti-discrimination and racism laws, they had no choice but to suspended this employee and investigate the allegations that he was the author of those articles. If my memory doesn’t let me down here, I think he got sacked for gross misconduct (I apologise for the sketchy narrative of course).

 

Journalists believe they have a privilege above and beyond that of everyday people. They fight and insist on their freedom of speech and expression. They do not believe that a democracy should impose barriers and laws that suppress this freedom of speech and think that it should be down to the various editors to toe the line. This of course does not include areas where it’s unlawful to enter into (such as Castro’s so called ‘breach). However, in the case of these Danish cartoons and judging by the reactions of the Danish president, the paper did not commit any crime (under Danish law).

 

It’s possible that the paper was worried about the legality of its actions and wanted to see what such a risk would bring it. Well, judging by the reactions! The paper got world, fame, extra revenue and the more important knowledge that if it decided to do this again the Danish government is not going to prosecute. This also set a precedent for newspapers and media outlets in all of the democracies of the world to follow and act upon. So, as you can clearly see, this experiment was far from bogus.

 

Xiin

Is it I who is not debating here, saaxib? Why have you not dealt with a single point I've made? Could you not read it, understand it or are you not in the mood?

 

Saaxib, twist, turn or write me a full Somali poem, my words are clear and they're there for you to tackle if you think you can dope with them. My arrogance and superiority, as I never tire from telling you, is the result of your weak arguments and inability to admit that you don’t want to understand.

 

I need not refer to your bad comprehension or ask you to read these exchanges again. I can see from your replies that you got my drift. Now let us hope that you’ll put your pride aside and be humble enough to pay me my deserved dues.

[Khayr]

Castro,

 

If someone writes 2pgs and in among those 2pgs, writes a line or two that you take offense two i.e. Castro talks too much but is a nice guy b/c once in a while he says something good.

Would ^ that patch things up and make my comment towards you less of an insult, does it make it-ALRIGHT!

 

Ngogne, a while ago I post an ayat about 'Xawa' that you took offense to. Well, now you have proven me that that ayat was befitting!!!

 

Nomads, xaadhalda yaareya o fikriga badhiyaa.

More reflection and thought and less

spewing garabage to say the popular phrase of

'muslims are to blame muslims' and other self defeatest garbage.

 

As for anyone drumming up the 'Freedom of speech' rhetoric-save your fingers!

 

Their are [DOUBLE STANDARDS in Pluralistic Liberal societies and they are against RELIGION.

But, creed/religion is still protected under most liberal democracies b/c they have to cater to their growing IMMIGRANT communities that are still largerly-CONSERVATIVE in thought and practice. So muslims, can use this to their own advantage.

 

What these papers in EUROPE showed today, was to incite a CONFLICT of RIGHTS btwn LIBERAL IDEALS

 

i.e. Freed of Expression v. Freedom of Religion

 

and you know what inshallah this will back fire on them because it brings more NEGATIVE ATTENTION and EXPOSES the FACADE of SECULARISM PLUARLITY.

 

The lines are drawing clearer and Alhamdulillah, no matter how many name changes a muslim undertakes,or how hard the beard is shaved or how far the hijab is throw, a MUSLIM is still a MUSLIM according to the rest of the world until u enter into interracial marriages and generations down the line, la qadra Allah, grandchildren don't look or have the remotes idea that their ancestory is MUSLIM.

 

Johnny boy,

 

You're still a Mohamed, a Abdul, a Farax etc.

at the Airport line or when you get called for an interview. Remember dat alwayssss!

[NGONGE]

^^ Heh. You amuse me, saaxib. Now Muslims can be racially profiled too?

Is it the name or the look?

 

You know something though, in spite of your nonsensical and very obtuse way of expressing yourself. Despite your liberal and very nonchalant use of Quranic verses. In spite of your very impulsive replies too, I really don’t think we’re that far apart in what we believe in or what our argument is about. The only difference we have (vomit bag at the ready) is that you, like many others here, can not READ. It’s an impulse thing, dear. If you ever manage to harness your emotions, you’ll soon look back at it all with shame. Nonetheless, lets not hurry your evolution and let things happen naturally, eh!

[Zafir]

Heh to you too Ngonge,

 

How can you praise him and at the same instant dismantle him? Oxymoron, Oxymoron, Oxymoron; Kind a like when your in-laws come for a visit, you look bored and anxious at the same time.

 

 

Mental Note: Never ever go against Ngonge.

[Cara.]

Originally posted by NGONGE:

It’s possible that the paper was worried about the legality of its actions and wanted to see what such a risk would bring it. Well, judging by the reactions! The paper got world, fame, extra revenue and the more important knowledge that if it decided to do this again the Danish government is not going to prosecute. This also set a precedent for newspapers and media outlets in all of the democracies of the world to follow and act upon. So, as you can clearly see, this experiment was far from bogus.

Like clockwork, some European papers have duplicated the cartoons to show solidarity. Some people never learn.

[Jacpher]

Ngonge:

 

You could be right, they were testing how far they could stretch their muscles but I doubt if they succeeded. Off course, their despicable work generated lots of fame and publicity but the price they paid is much higher. The reaction and involvement of the EU Commission with threats of WTO indicates the severity of the pain the Danes felt. Not every Muslim country boycotted them, only in Middle East and North Africa. Fame & publicity is gained each time one badmouths with religious figures, more with Israel and its allies. Look at the attention the Iranian president received about the holocaust.

 

I am all for freedom of speech so long it applies to everyone equally. I strongly believe journalists should have the privilege to exercise freedom of speech & press but a line needs to be drawn. Certain rules should not favor one group & leave out others. If the papers were to publish anti-semantic or pro Taliban imagery, they would find themselves out of business or in a much dire situation than now. In a way their claim of freedom of speech is bogus, in the sense that the work itself hosts hatred as it instigates adverse reaction of more than a billion Muslims. Freedom of speech has its own boundaries that one can’t step over. The prime minister could have chosen to not say anything or somewhat remain neutral. Freedom of speech is what got many prominent Muslim clerics in trouble in democratic countries.

 

If my memory isn’t bad, there has been a talk for a need of a new law that bans hate speeches, particularly the Friday sermons at the mosques. You see, a Muslim can’t openly pray for the destruction of Israel. That’s considered a hate speech, not freedom of speech or religion. Let’s be frank, it is double standard in the making. If journalists universally were allowed to have freedom of speech and press, Al-Jazeera’s headquarters would not have been bombed twice or kicked out of Iraq.

[Gabbal]

Dad baa cadowgooda isku jabsha.

[Legend of Zu]

Waxay ila tahay Dooda waa ka soo daahay. Mise cidkasta hurdo bay doonatay?

 

Tomorrow then! ....

 

Cheers