Mohammed Descendents Sue

[Hiro Protagonist]

NEARLY 95,000 descendants of Mohammed are going to sue ten newspapers for publishing "blasphemous" cartoons of the Prophet.

http://www.news.com.au/world/descendants-o...i-1225843489852

 

Gotta love the pic in the link. Notice the spelling mistake?

 

Unless it's established in the courts that the religious figure:

 

1) Actually existed, AND

2) Is in some way directly related to or contacted by God

 

Then it should be dismissed. I mean otherwise it's like suing for someone bagging out Batman!

 

Many historians suggest that maybe there was no Muhammad as we know him today - but rather a figure erected at the behest of his "Companions" who needed a Christ-like figure for their own emerging religion. This would go a long way into explaining that absence of historical record and imagery of the Prophet.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/3...pg2.html?cat=49

 

Also, "Muhammad Sven Kalisch, a Muslim convert and Germany

Edited March 22, 2010 by Hiro Protagonist

[Humodour]

Hahahahahahah.

[Asol]

NEARLY 95,000 descendants of Mohammed are going to sue ten newspapers for publishing "blasphemous" cartoons of the Prophet.

http://www.news.com.au/world/descendants-o...i-1225843489852

 

Gotta love the pic in the link. Notice the spelling mistake?

 

Image is old, of questionable value and definitely used irresponsibly to hate monger here.

 

http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/muslimprotest.asp

 

http://newsblaze.com/story/20060827211403n...b/topstory.html

[Hiro Protagonist]

Image is old, of questionable value and definitely used irresponsibly to hate monger here.

 

http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/muslimprotest.asp

 

http://newsblaze.com/story/20060827211403n...b/topstory.html

 

All your links do is confirm the pictures are true and used in context. The story from News.com.au is about the Danish cartoons and Lawyer to sue Danish newspapers for libel. The pictures are from demonstrations "taken in February, in London, during a demonstration against the Danish cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammad."

Edited March 22, 2010 by Hiro Protagonist

[GreasyDogMeat]

Image is old, of questionable value and definitely used irresponsibly to hate monger here.

The only hate mongering I see are those in the image.

[Humodour]

NEARLY 95,000 descendants of Mohammed are going to sue ten newspapers for publishing "blasphemous" cartoons of the Prophet.

http://www.news.com.au/world/descendants-o...i-1225843489852

 

Gotta love the pic in the link. Notice the spelling mistake?

 

Image is old, of questionable value and definitely used irresponsibly to hate monger here.

 

http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/muslimprotest.asp

 

http://newsblaze.com/story/20060827211403n...b/topstory.html

 

Oh, mirror images are hate-mongering now are they?

[Walsingham]

I should have thought that it was highly unwise to lay claim to direct descendence. Look at all the unpleasantness the Shia have to put up with.

[HoonDing]

Can't they just issue some fatwas and leave us alone?

[Rosbjerg]

Let them embarrass themselves, I have no doubt the real Muslims will see how idiotic these guys are.

[Moose]

Just another case of stupid people doing something stupid.

[Walsingham]

There is a growing trend of extremists using court cases to cripple their critics. Keep your eyes peeled.

[Humodour]

There is a growing trend of extremists using court cases to cripple their critics.

 

Hahaha I can guarantee you this **** won't pass Australia's legal system (even if it does have to go to the High Court).

 

Eh, disregard that; they're suing in Britain, they might win. I'm concerned for the Motherland. Maybe a good dose of right-wing government would help.

Edited March 22, 2010 by Krezack

[Walsingham]

What we need is a good dose of what we've always done best. Simple common sense, rather than grand bull**** theories about government.

[Enoch]

What we need is a good dose of what we've always done best. Simple common sense, rather than grand bull**** theories about government.

What we need is you Brits to reform your defamation laws. If the British courts can punish the publisher of anything controversial that happens to wash up on their shores, speech rights around the world are chilled.

Edited March 22, 2010 by Enoch

[Asol]

Oh, mirror images are hate-mongering now are they?

 

The only hate mongering I see are those in the image.

 

The only connection between the 95k Mohammed decended muslims claiming libel and the 300-400 london danish embassy protesters is taking religious exception to the periodicals inquestion, the use of the image in relation to the 95k world muslims bringing suit borders on libelous itself.

 

Its an event 4 years ago where 4 individuals were probably rightfully jailed for attempting to incite violence and criminal behavior, there are a dozen odd signs of vulgarisms wrote in the same hand and distributed. Here an english speaker leads a crowd of likely mixed level english speakers in some hate speech at the 3 and 5 minute marks, they clearly have variable ability to comprehend or care what they are repeating.

This is just people being sheep and some ugly mob leadership and a case of what makes the best copy now this image is married to anything pertaining to muslims and free speech, its rather unfortunate and probably unacceptable if the shoe was on the other foot no? I don't consider it fairly representative of muslims, british muslims or even the bulk of the people who bothered to show up to that particular event. Why does an extremist few get stretched so far to represent the many? That kind of disproportional weight gives us attitudes like the post yesterday that was deleted, an otherwise nice person's first response was something he or a mod felt needed retraction. This is the same element of people reacting to something that is incendiary to them and a lot of media amplification...

 

At what point will it be fair to say its a far reaching misrepresentation? The lack of any positive representations of anything islamic in the media makes perenial blackeyes like this more damaging when the worst ill advised extremists are persistently used to front the entire religion in the media.

Edited March 22, 2010 by Asol

[Humodour]

OK Asol, I grant you that paper/site is a load of sensationalistic crap (but hey, what else do you expect from Mr. Murdoch?)

[Killian Kalthorne]

OK Asol, I grant you that paper/site is a load of sensationalistic crap (but hey, what else do you expect from Mr. Murdoch?)

 

I expect that crazy foo' to crash that damn 'copter on my ass!

 

Oh, wait. Wrong Murdoch.

 

[I want teh kotor 3]

That's just plain damn stupid.

[The Illuminator]

Not believing his existence cannot be an excuse in my opinion. If you don't believe Hz.Muhammed existed, then don't draw his cartoon and choose to be respectful to Islamic tradition. Drawing is nothing but a dance and cry to attract Muslim's hate especially when you already know that what they don't like.

 

I think noone has a right to critisize a Muslim just because he does hate cartoons of his Prophet especially when freedom of speech is the subject. If you defend such a picture in the name of freedom of speech and then get angry when Muslims get rage, then this is nothing but hypocricy.

 

Also this subject is overall full of controversies and only laughable double standards. Firstly Europe, herself is not an authority to talk about freedom of speech. To defend freedom of speech or opinions, you must ''apply'' freedom of speech or opinions first. If you don't apply those and moreover without feeling a shame, continue this hatred pump with madly organized political mitings pumping Islam hate and racism especially against Muslims, then your claim of 'those cartoons are freedom of speech and must be allowed' comment can only be a non-laughable tease with Muslim world.

 

In my former posts I have already made links to Western madness including following subjects:

 

-banning a child from a French tv show because of his name being Islam(pure fascism; to talk about freedom of speech you must apply 'democracy' first

-forbidding to build minarehs to the mosques with some parano-schzophrenic reasoning and pumping racism in political meetings(another example of pure fascism from Switzerland)

-forbidding wearing turban and taking them off by force when worn by Muslim women(another example of fascism from european countries including France)

-supporting Swiss fascism with political meetings and forming racist slogans against Muslims living in Europe(fascism ruling ,n France, Holland, Germany, etc.)

-imprisoning anyone who says 'armenian genocide was a badly organised lie'(Switzerland, France, etc. This is completely agaşnst freedom of speech or opinions)

 

There are more strong proofs of European countries having 'no' apply of freedom of speech except for those cartoons and in such a case I believe Muslims are right to feel anger when such a cartoon is supported so one sidedly.

 

My belief is that this cartoon issue was an organized campaign to produce rage in the Muslim world and is consciously produced. Because the publishers knew what would happen when they are published. Salman Rushdi example was so fresh in the memories. A focus 'not willing' to produce anger amongst Muslims could never draw such a thing. If the overall aim of such people is polarizing the earth I believe such efforts shall not go in vain, but it is a pity for humanity. Nobody is insulting to Buddha with such cartoons maybe because of lack of courage but only choose to cry via saying Myanmar and China are ruling with fascism but honestly I can say that the western countries I mentioned are at least as fascist as China, Myanmar or North Korea.

 

Finally I just feel pityness to those who try to form chaos in the world with such primitive methods full of hypocricy.

[Walsingham]

What we need is a good dose of what we've always done best. Simple common sense, rather than grand bull**** theories about government.

What we need is you Brits to reform your defamation laws. If the British courts can punish the publisher of anything controversial that happens to wash up on their shores, speech rights around the world are chilled.

 

I agree wholeheartedly.

[Gorth]

My belief is that this cartoon issue was an organized campaign to produce rage in the Muslim world and is consciously produced.

It was.

 

However, it wasn't the publishers who organised the campaign to produce rage in the Muslim world, that was local Imams living in Denmark who were feeling their power slipping away from them. Unhappy with the increasing secularity of their fellow "Muslims", they started a campaign to create the rage you describe. Like, half a year after the fact they were printed mind you. Unfortunately, the Danish Muslims couldn't care less about a bunch of wackos frothing at the mouth. So, the Imamns picked up the pictures from the newspaper and started touring the middle east, showing off not only pictures from the newspapers, but their own falsified pictures (which were even more offensive), to stir up violence and dissent, all in attempt to consolidate their own personal power. Yes, the very Imams who claimed it to be an outrage were caught doing the very thing themselves, fabricating images of the prophet. Thats the kind of hypocrisy and selfish, powermongering behaviour that makes them (the Danish Imams) very hard to take seriously.

[The Illuminator]

My belief is that this cartoon issue was an organized campaign to produce rage in the Muslim world and is consciously produced.

It was.

 

However, it wasn't the publishers who organised the campaign to produce rage in the Muslim world, that was local Imams living in Denmark who were feeling their power slipping away from them. Unhappy with the increasing secularity of their fellow "Muslims", they started a campaign to create the rage you describe. Like, half a year after the fact they were printed mind you. Unfortunately, the Danish Muslims couldn't care less about a bunch of wackos frothing at the mouth. So, the Imamns picked up the pictures from the newspaper and started touring the middle east, showing off not only pictures from the newspapers, but their own falsified pictures (which were even more offensive), to stir up violence and dissent, all in attempt to consolidate their own personal power. Yes, the very Imams who claimed it to be an outrage were caught doing the very thing themselves, fabricating images of the prophet. Thats the kind of hypocrisy and selfish, powermongering behaviour that makes them (the Danish Imams) very hard to take seriously.

I think you have missed the point I have mentioned in my post. I said while Salman Rushdi example fresh in the memories, the publishers of the newspaper were aware of what was going on after the cartoon. Their aim was forming a polarized atmosphere between Muslims and Christians via attracting Muslim hatred via such attempts. According to Islamic religion not only cartoons, but also none of the pictures of Prophet Hz.Muhammed can be drawn. It is forbidden by Hz.Muhammed himself and according to hadiths, angel Jabrail has told this to him as such pictures were used for being worshipped in Pagan religions and Christianity(Jesus pictures and statues are being worshipped as God) Allah is unimaginable and none of his slaves are to be worshipped but He is only. Myabe the aim of the publishers were to exile the Muslims from all over Europe via using the results of this publishment.

 

The reason why 6 months have passed without any protests is maybe because noone was aware of the cartoons. Also after protests, 'republishment' of those cartoons by various newspapers was a bigger provokation and worked.

 

I'm not saying those Imams in Denmark are innocent, but the publishers are more guilty and according to Islamic rules Imams are right to react to this insult. Only the method they have chosen is wrong. Making worse cartoons to achieve greater protest is same with drawing a cartton in my opinion and I think those Imams are not so intelligent to guess the trap the publishers set for the Muslims in the Europe otherwise, they would not change the cartoon pictures, but all in all I don't believe their effort has worsened the issue for Muslims even if they didn't do anything related with this cartoon, Europeans would show the same reaction to Muslim protests as it was an organized action to publish this cartoon.

 

Also I want to remind you that the Priests in the Churches of Greece, Bulgaria and Armenia are brainwashing the religious citizens of those countries with hatred and rage against Turks, so religious authorities of such countries are not so innocent as well.

[Gfted1]

What does the "Hz" before Muhammed mean? Tried looking on Google but that only brought me to his Facebook page.

[The Illuminator]

What does the "Hz" before Muhammed mean? Tried looking on Google but that only brought me to his Facebook page.

It is the shortened form of the word 'Hazret' which is a kind of praise used for the beloved slaves of Allah when to mention them, as a way of showing respect to their personality. It's complete meaning is here.

 

I think in hrist religion, 'St.'(Saint) word has a similar usage like 'St.Joseph', however in Islamic tradition Saint means 'veli' or 'evliya' and is not used in the same way, again 'Hz.' used instead. Like Hz.Osman or Hz.Omer.

[Meshugger]

It pretty much boggles down to what kind of society you want to live in: one that forbids opinion, art and music that can be considered as disrespecting, or one that permits all of it.

 

The muslims can protest as much as they want, but no laws should be made in favour for anyone, or any group, in which they think that can be protected from opinion that doesn't suit them. Many countries fail at this, but that is the path humanity must take. Everything else leads to thought control in the end.