Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Bin Laden issues out warning to Europe
Options
Comments
-
Manic Moran wrote: »You're kidding, right?
You're saying it's Europe's fault that the extremists can't take a joke? That we should not exercise, within our own borders, one of our most fundamental rights? That we should restrict this right for fear of the threat of violence? Is that not the goal of terrorism?
Frankly, Europe is an enemy to the extremists anyway regardless of what we print. That's why they're extremists with respect to us.
NTM
I'm saying why give them a reason to cite hatred. In any case, it's not fair to poke fun at someone elses religion reguardless.. never mind the extremists, just normal practising Muslims who aren't involved in it.0 -
WoollyRedHat wrote: »I'm saying why give them a reason to cite hatred. In any case, it's not fair to poke fun at someone elses religion reguardless.. never mind the extremists, just normal practising Muslims who aren't involved in it.
Let's put it another way.......if an Arab newspaper showed a cartoon making some sort of joke of 9/11, would that be offensive or in bad taste, and would Manic Moran and others complain ?0 -
I would reckon it would be in bad taste, considering the attrocity of the attack that day and the lives that were lost.0
-
Given your posts, WoollyRedHat, you seem to understand that neither "side" should do bad taste, so I'd expect that; the question was posted more towards the people who think it's OK to make fun of issues of importance to "the other side".0
-
You must be confused. All of the things you've cited are instances whereby a subset of people stood up for their civil rights, they weren't out "offending" anybody!
Someone standing up for their civil rights as you put it requires them to actually explain what it is they are being denied. I'm black and I want to sit at the front of the bus. At one point in time a lot of people found that offensive. I'm gay and I want to marry my gay partner. A lot of people find this offensive. Freedom of speech ensures they get to stand up for their civil rights without being persecuted.
Of course newspapers standing up for their civil right to freedom of speech and the civil rights of all Western people is just plain wrong. Totally different even! What was I thinking? Freedom of Speech should just be renamed the freedom to say anything as long as some thin skinned philistine doesn't get offended. Maybe we should start making a list of what people are allowed to think as well as say? If we start making a list of things people find offensive then we can ensure no one ever gets offended in life. Especially religious people as we know how thin skinned they are!
But I'm guessing it might be a very long list and people might find it hard to remember everything they are not supposed to say. Maybe at some point in the future we can implant high level processors in peoples brains with enhanced electronic storage. Before people speak the computer chip can filter what they are going to say against it's installed 100gigabyte database of things they are not supposed to say in case someone gets offended.0 -
Advertisement
-
Liam Byrne wrote: »But "sitting on a bus" or "marching to highlight your entitlement to your rights" do not involve setting out to offend or poke fun at someone.
Yeah I guess black people in 50's and gays never knew some people would be offended. If they had they would surely have called off the whole civil rights thing! Can't have people being offended!!0 -
TheUnicorn wrote: »What I don't understand is : What are you talking about people getting divorced while being muslim when there is no such a thing like divorce in their religion.
Divorce is allowed is Islam.0 -
irishconvert wrote: »Divorce is allowed is Islam.
Just say Talaaq 3 times while clicking your heels together and hey presto instant divorce if you're a man
0 -
irishconvert wrote: »Divorce is allowed is Islam.
Divorce is allowed, that's fine - though I don't think it happens too often, but killing family members happens quite frequently inspite of the fact it's forbidden. Proofs based on press articles:
Denmark - 9 muslim family members put to prison - 8 years to life sentence for killing 19 years old girl named Ghazala. Reason: her father Ghulum Abbas decided it's time to hunt for her because she dated with another muslim but he didn't ask her father for permission.
Sweden - muslim killed his 26 years old daugther for dating with non-muslim boyfriend.
Turkey - 22 years old Guldunya Toren was murdered by her 3 brothers because her family discovered she gave a birth to a child being single.
UK - police have files of over 100 cases qualified as "honourable family executions" they have been investigating since 1993.
Germany - Hatun Surucu, 23 years old girl was shot by her three brothers on the street. They said she failed and insulted her family because she got divorced with a man who she married while she was 15 and she found that she doesn't want to continue that relation anymore. She was 6th victim of "honourable family execution" since may 2007. 40 murders of that nature have been investigated since 1996 by German Police.
Statistics say clearly - muslim families murder members who bring shame to the family. Definition of shame is very subtle - it can be wrong boyfriend, pregnancy that girl was trying to hide, getting married with person that family didn't "approve" or... getting divorced.
Please don't misunderstand me, no offence - but ... do they really need to have their own divorce law written? What's the point if it's so much easier to just pull the trigger. I have read plenty of articles about that and it's proven that this kind of executions is accepted by whole community. People say "I can't imagine I would have to kill my sister -but I don't think I would be able to let her waste our honour". Even more cruel thing is the fact they usually choose the youngest member of their family to execute the victim. Pure logic - if boy is 12 years old he won't be imprisoned like an adult, so sentence is shorter. I'm not saying any other religion is better, all are dirty and based on power and politics, all religions have something in the closet. Anyway I don't think that forcing majorities to accept laws of minorities because minorities DO NOT WANT to be a part of majority is a good idea. It leads to progressing separation, social and class ghettos - leads to conflicts. In that case I think that people who put religion over humanity and general social rules are like... looking for conflicts. Peace irishconvert.
TheUnicorn0 -
Sesshoumaru wrote: »Yeah I guess black people in 50's and gays never knew some people would be offended. If they had they would surely have called off the whole civil rights thing! Can't have people being offended!!
That wasn't my point. What I said was that their OBJECTIVE was not to offend, any offence taken was a side issue caused by others' prejudices.
Like I said already, if you DELIBERATELY set out to provoke or offend, you deserve all you get; if it's an accidental or unavoidable aside, it deserves understanding and forgiveness.
No sign of anyone arguing the "pro-cartoon" side replying to my query re 9/11, then ? Hmm.....odd.
Considering they're apparently so in favour of free speech, I'd love to hear their opinion....0 -
Advertisement
-
Yep, free speech is a near absolute, so yes, if someone decided to make a 9/11 mocking cartoon, they should be entitled to do so. Then everyone can plainly see that the cartoonist and anyone associated with him/her are human slime, and their career in the Western media would be finished, but they might have a lucrative career in Saudi Arabia, the Gaza Strip, parts of Afghanistan, Northern Nigeria etc. That's how it works, in a civilised society - you say what you like then everyone else gets the chance to judge you based on it.
Regarding the 1950s bus protests, the laws of the time were as nonsensical as they were racist. Blacks were limited to the back of any bus they used, if there were white people standing, they could order a black to vacate their seat, but if the bus had only a few white people and a lot of black people, the blacks who didn't get one of "black" seats would have to stand - even if there were "white only" seats vacant.
I'm sure some white racists would have been offended by the question "why do I have to stand over these empty seats?"
It's no different today - Islamofascists are using terrorism to tell us how to live, to subject us to their laws, and to be treated like a special needs case at every opportunity.
If you're in the UK, and you fall ill due to alcahol abuse or an STD, you'd better hope the doctor treating you isn't a muslim. Likewise if you needed "morning after" contraception, better hope the pharmacist has some non-muslim staff or you might be in a real bind.
In Scotland, the NHS has banned its doctors and some staff from eating lunch at their desks during Ramadan, in case it caused difficulties for any fasting Muslims. Hard to believe the NHS Lothian actually pissed away Scottish taxpayers money on a consultancy report to come up with this nonsense.
And BTW Sharia Law is already recognised in Italy. And I'm sure some people are happy. This stuff would make a great comedy if only it weren't real.
Getting back to the main point, the 17 newspapers in Denmark reprinted the cartoon in a direct response to the attempt to murder the original cartoonist. That's a key point, these editors didn't just wake up one morning and say "Gee, who can we offend today." The newspapers were directly defending their rights to free speech, in a non-violent way. Resisting political Islamofascism is the right of everyone who treasures our Western civilisation, freedom and secular culture.
We don't want Sharia law. We don't want to be told what we can say, do or even think by either the Political Correctness police or a bunch of bigots and misogynists. At least I don't anyway.0 -
Yep, free speech is a near absolute, so yes, if someone decided to make a 9/11 mocking cartoon, they should be entitled to do so. Then everyone can plainly see that the cartoonist and anyone associated with him/her are human slime, and their career in the Western media would be finished, but they might have a lucrative career in Saudi Arabia, the Gaza Strip, parts of Afghanistan, Northern Nigeria etc. That's how it works, in a civilised society - you say what you like then everyone else gets the chance to judge you based on it.
Regarding the 1950s bus protests, the laws of the time were as nonsensical as they were racist. Blacks were limited to the back of any bus they used, if there were white people standing, they could order a black to vacate their seat, but if the bus had only a few white people and a lot of black people, the blacks who didn't get one of "black" seats would have to stand - even if there were "white only" seats vacant.
I'm sure some white racists would have been offended by the question "why do I have to stand over these empty seats?"
It's no different today - Islamofascists are using terrorism to tell us how to live, to subject us to their laws, and to be treated like a special needs case at every opportunity.
If you're in the UK, and you fall ill due to alcahol abuse or an STD, you'd better hope the doctor treating you isn't a muslim. Likewise if you needed "morning after" contraception, better hope the pharmacist has some non-muslim staff or you might be in a real bind.
In Scotland, the NHS has banned its doctors and some staff from eating lunch at their desks during Ramadan, in case it caused difficulties for any fasting Muslims. Hard to believe the NHS Lothian actually pissed away Scottish taxpayers money on a consultancy report to come up with this nonsense.
And BTW Sharia Law is already recognised in Italy. And I'm sure some people are happy. This stuff would make a great comedy if only it weren't real.
Getting back to the main point, the 17 newspapers in Denmark reprinted the cartoon in a direct response to the attempt to murder the original cartoonist. That's a key point, these editors didn't just wake up one morning and say "Gee, who can we offend today." The newspapers were directly defending their rights to free speech, in a non-violent way. Resisting political Islamofascism is the right of everyone who treasures our Western civilisation, freedom and secular culture.
We don't want Sharia law. We don't want to be told what we can say, do or even think by either the Political Correctness police or a bunch of bigots and misogynists. At least I don't anyway.
buy this man a beer
no , buy him 20 -
I think Osama is long since dead and they just rollout the "boogey-man" every year or two to justify these crazy wars in Afganistan and Iraq.
I agree with this statement.
Last time we heard a few years ago, he had end stage kidney failure and while hiding in caves of Bora-Bora, I cannot see how someone could organise the logistics of dialysis there. Zarquawi is much more dangerous and more clever than OBL was ever.0 -
aye, but the same people who told us he was near death and on the run are the same people who told us there were Wmd and hookers in Baghdad.0
-
Y'see, this is the issue I have....people talking about those nasty Muslims who want to and threated to kill people.....
That's downright racist, for the simple reason that Bush & Co are also being nasty and killing people. So leave out the "Muslim" - there are nasty extremists in the world - of all types - who want to kill people. Fact.
Of course, Bush is civilised; he doesn't issue threats based on cartoons - in fact, he doesn't even need a cartoon to be insulted by....he just pretends that the people he wants to target have WMDs and stuff like that.
So who's worse ? Someone who's offended and issues threats as a result, or someone who just goes ahead and does stuff when there's no threat ? Both are bad, but I've got to say that at least the first has some sort of "reason".
So let's judge people on their actions, not on their background or religion.
Of course, Bin Laden wouldn't have been in a position to issue any warnings if the U.S. had actually gone after him post 9/11......imagine if it had been Bin Laden that they "dug out of a hole" instead of the unrelated Saddam Hussein ????
In that sense (and in case anyone gets me wrong, I am IN NO WAY condoning either 9/11 or the current threat - some people seem to think that if you point out the lies and wrong-doings on one side that you are somehow "in favour of" the other, which is completely untrue and unfair) but if the warning serves as a reminder that Bush DIDN'T go after him, then it's not just "an ill wind"....it's a reinforcement and reminder of the fact that The [supposed] War On Terror hasn't gone after the one guy that EVERYONE would have agreed deserved it because (if ??) he was behind 9/11.
And re standing on the middle ground where you can see the wrongs (and resultant killings on both sides) I can't explain how SeanW's post caused me to stop for a second and think.....there is a valid point in there, and I want to acknowledge that, BUT....Then everyone can plainly see that the cartoonist and anyone associated with him/her are human slime, and their career in the Western media would be finished
Why is this the case ? Remember that the Dutch paper RE-PUBLISHED the cartoon because of the threats; THEY HAD ALREADY PUBLISHED IT THE FIRST TIME. And it offended. So should the career of the Dutch cartoonist and everyone involved be finished, because this was in bad taste and was extreme enough to cause a death threat ? Why do you view it as OK to print it A SECOND TIME, even though you're saying that someone's career should be finished THE FIRST TIME if it were the other way around ????
I'll agree that if you go to a country, you should abide by their laws....there's no point driving after drinking a pint in a zero-tolerance country and then saying "we do this back home" and no point in someone becoming a doctor if you won't hand out morning-after pills......but this probably isn't that different to Ireland 10 or 15 years ago, so it isn't even a Mulsim issue, let alone having anything to do with Bin Laden [the subject of the thread]
Islamofascists are scum - that's true.
But as I said above, leave out the "Islamo" from that sentence and it's also true. So why put it in there in the first place ?
This is not - and should not become - a purely racial issue. Yes, there are areas and extreme intolerant beliefs that cause it to overlap, but this "us and them" attitude - on both sides, and fuelled by the American Administration's [note that I did not say "America"] hatred of anything Arabic [except oil] is getting worse.0 -
Those cartoons were designed to incense and enrage. The artists knew full well how offensive they would be to Muslims. They are part of the same crowd of right-wingers trying to drive a wedge between east and west. And of course, the cameras were just waiting to snap those pictures of nutballs with extremist signs. Hate breeds hate, and the more a certain (minority) group feels singled-out, the more extremist mentalities will come to the fore. I for one don't really mind NOT drawing a picture of Mohammed... it's not like I have to do it. Does that mean I'm 'appeasing Islam'? No, I want secular law. I just like getting along with other people, that's all.
As for Bin Laden - since when to terrorists get a voice on mainstream media???0 -
Yes. I have issues with Islamofascism. I don't want to live under an extremist Sharia jackboot. Full stop.
So you think Ireland is going to become ruled by Sharia Law and Islamofacists unless you undertake a personal crusade against Islam?You misquoted me. I said Muslims in the West who feel that their religion is in direct conflict with the native laws and norms of the Western country they occupy, should - instead of introducing Sharia law to the United Kingdon which is what some were trying to do - go piss off to some place like Saudi Arabia which does have Islamic law and is already in the Dark Ages. I didn't tell anyone to feck off back to the Dark Ages, I merely pointed out that some places are still there and anyone who wants that should go to those places.
You told people they can "f*** off back to whatver dark ages hole they or their ancestores came from".
Unfortunately for you we live in a democracy and people are allowed to have opinions on the way our society is run. So whether you like it or not muslims who want to live under Sharia law as long as they are citizens of Ireland, The UK or the EU, have a right to vote for and want whatever political or legal system they like. It doesnt and shouldnt matter where my, yours or their ancestors came from. Your comments imo are verging on racism.Freedom of speech includes the right to insult or offend as you see fit. It means you have the right to ask a legitimate question (like asking whether Islam is violent and then being murdered for your trouble) but you also have the right to be a complete asshole if that's what floats your boat. "I may disagree with what you say but I defend your right to say it." You can say whatever you like about my religion, I'm not going to wait in dark alley to stick a knife in your throat. Perhaps it's because I don't choose to be gravely offended by absolutely nothing.
Really you make me laugh. Yes it is your right to be an asshole if you see fir and to offend whoever you want and no government is going to stop you. That is freedom of speech. But if you expect noone to react badly or violently to you if you behave like an asshole and you insult people then you are living in a fantasy. You insult people then you are going to have to deal with the consequences. If I printed a racist cartoon aimed at the black, asian or jewish populations of europe then I would expect to have to watch my back for a while. There are going to be some crazy/extreme black/asian/jewish people out there who might be willing to kill me. That is the f**king reality of the world we live in.
Now the vast majority of blacks, asians, muslims wont threaten you or try to kill you but you can be sure some will try. Now if some do try and kill you .. what do you do?? Reprint the cartoons again thus offending even more of the moderates who will start asking themselves what the f**k is this guys/papers problem. Maybe these black/asian/jewish people might start feeling like this society has something against them because the media and the population seem to condoning this offensive behaviour. Maybe .. just maybe .. you might start creating a division within your society. And for what??? Because you feel the need to exercise your right to be a f**kling asshole?
Is that simple enough for you?Enough that they want to kill you?
Yes Im afraid so .. there are crazy f**kin people in the world. Do you think you can insult whoever you like and not expect any consequences? Why dont you drive to your nearest halting site and start insulting the Itenerants .. that is your right!! Lets see how long you would survive.True. You can't yell FIRE in a crowded building (unless there actually is one). Everything else is, or should be, fair game.
lol .. they are fair game .. your mother is fair game .. so are your kids and your wife and your race and your religion. But to be honest mate if I start inulting your kids, mother and wife then I would expect a slap for my trouble. If I didnt then I would be an idiot would i not?They're telling these cavemen that we will not be bullied by threats, intimidation, murder, terrorism and so on.
eh no. What they are doing is provoking a situation and calling themselves victims.No? Perhaps you haven't watched Pat Condell's videos as referenced in another thread (he backs up everything he says with sources in his description) German judges quoting Sharia law, UK taxpayers paying extra-spouse benefits to immigrants with multiple wives. It just goes on and on.
No I havent watched this guys videos. How many muslim people do you know? How much do you know about Sharia? I asked you in another thread to read about Sharia .. did you or do you just know the sensationalist crap you see in the media? How is Sharia affecting your day to day life? I live in a city with a an enormous Muslim population and it doesnt affect my life .. I would be really interested how it affects your life in Longford that you feel the need to go on a personal crusade against it. Like I said earlier .. there is another agenda at work here.Some may well be, but many more or not. They're the ones we need to teach a lesson.
Teach a lesson. How are you going to teach a citizen of a country a lesson for having a different opinion to the one you have. I really dont know how more explicit your language can get but it seems very obvious to me what kind of a person you are.A bully will only "just go away" when he is faced down. Appeasing them only reenforces their behaviour.
And you have to aks yourself the question .. Who is the fckin bully in this situation? The person who keeps picking on the kid till the kid hits back?0 -
OK, let me make one thing absolutely clear. I have nothing against any Muslim who just gets on with their own life and doesn't bother anyone else about their religion. I have no problem with anyone who minds their own business, follows our laws and customs without demanding special treatment, and I have no "agenda."
I ONLY have a problem when someone takes the piss. That includes trying to kill people for their opinions or the things they say, like Kurt Westergraad, Salman Rushdie, Theo Van Gogh, Geert Wilders etc. Or people who expect to become doctors not even knowing about common Western ailments and emergencies, dentists who won't treat women not wearing headscarves, demanding food-free zones during Ramadan, beats up Jews, calls for Jihad and that sort of thing.
I most certainly do not see a need to "Crusade" against Islam in general, if a Muslim regards their faith a personal issue I regard it as none of my business. The same applies to Christians (I oppose Christian extremism and Christian-led law too BTW). Just thought I'd clear that up as I admit the tone of my previous posts might have had the wrong emphasis.
Then do. Then read the desciptions. Everything he says is referenced and backed by sources.No I havent watched this guys videos.
I can assure you that if anyone printed a cartoon mocking 9/11 victims, the (Western) public would have a very low opinion of the those involved with the publication. Hence my "human slime" comment. They would be free to make and print the cartoon, and the public would be free to judge the publishers based on that. That's how it works.Why is this the case ?
I agree 100%! The war in Iraq will probably be judged by history as one of the greatest blunders (at best) of our time. Not only was it morally reprehensible, but it created Al Queada in Iraq and stretched the U.S. Army so thin that it will likely lose in both Iraq and Afghanistan and Bush and his neo-con buddies should hang their heads in shame.Of course, Bin Laden wouldn't have been in a position to issue any warnings if the U.S. had actually gone after him post 9/11......imagine if it had been Bin Laden that they "dug out of a hole" instead of the unrelated Saddam Hussein ????0 -
Why do I need to to watch some guys vidoes? Why dont you respond to my comments? Why do you SeanW living in Longford have such a problem with Islam and Sharia in general that you feel you have to sort out the problem?
I feel the need to reply because I have many muslim friends .. I work with some Muslims and I live in a city witha large muslim population. I feel the scaremongering and racism in our media is abhorrent and I cant believe that people such as yourself are so scared of Islam and Sharia even though it doesnt affect any aspect of your day to day life and more than likely never will.0 -
Why do I need to to watch some guys vidoes? Why dont you respond to my comments? Why do you SeanW living in Longford have such a problem with Islam and Sharia in general that you feel you have to sort out the problem?
I feel the need to reply because I have many muslim friends .. I work with some Muslims and I live in a city witha large muslim population. I feel the scaremongering and racism in our media is abhorrent and I cant believe that people such as yourself are so scared of Islam and Sharia even though it doesnt affect any aspect of your day to day life and more than likely never will.
Islam = Submission
Not everyone wants to safeguard their life by submitting to Islam and sacrificing their freedom.
I don't get your problem with some newspapers mocking mo? I mean why don't you just come out and say what you want?? Would you ban the newspapers from printing a satirical picture of mo? Should we establish an agency for the protection of peoples feelings? This agency could be responsible for censoring the media. To make sure people don't say offensive stuff at home we could encourage children in state schools to rat on their parents? What do you think Playboy? Utopia?0 -
Advertisement
-
Because it explains why some people are concerned.Why do I need to to watch some guys vidoes?
Ok, how about this.Why dont you respond to my comments?
Jerry Springer is, by many definitions, an asshole. And he wrote an opera. Jerry Springer: The Opera. It was extremely disrespectful to Judeo-Christian values. But noone was killed over it and no embassies were burned down. Perchance you can tell me why this was the case.But if you expect noone to react badly or violently to you if you behave like an asshole and you insult people then you are living in a fantasy.
And if your friends just get on with their lives and practice their religion without taking the piss or trying to impose their values on others, I have no quarrel with them.I feel the need to reply because I have many muslim friends .. I work with some Muslims and I live in a city witha large muslim population.
Because I see some of the abhorrations that are justified by Islamic law, or at least more strict interpretations of it, and I think we need to be clear that that sort of thing is "not on" in the West.I cant believe that people such as yourself are so scared of Islam and Sharia even though it doesnt affect any aspect of your day to day life and more than likely never will.0 -
I've seen Pat Condell's videos. He's a right wing reactionary who regurgitates tabloid filth.0
-
And if your friends just get on with their lives and practice their religion without taking the piss or trying to impose their values on others, I have no quarrel with them.
It's funny that you should use the phrase "taking the piss", because you're saying that if the Muslims in question do that, then you don't see any reason for a quarrel with them.
Would the same not apply to the newspaper ? That if they didn't "take the piss" with a cartoon, that the Muslims would have no problem with them ?
Not only did the newspaper "take the piss" originally, but they then reprinted it to further inflame the situation.
Same coin, two sides, but you seem to be unable to flip sides.....strange.0 -
SeanW wrote:And if your friends just get on with their lives and practice their religion without taking the piss or trying to impose their values on others, I have no quarrel with them.
This reminds me of the phrase from Animal Farm, "All Animals are equal, but some Animals are more equal than others.".
Clearly, only Muslims should be insulted according to you. They shouldn't dare take the piss, when it comes to you and your values. Its telling that someone who claims the right to taking the liberty to insult others, seems to have issue with others doing the same right back.
Also, btw the Anglo-American Axis, go around the world imposing there values, where ever they see fit. The war of aggression against Iraq is a excellent example of this, when there lies about WMDs were revealed, they decided to impose democracy and radical free market capitialism as an excuse for there crimes.
While democracy is a great idea, radical free market capitalism, is not such a good idea, as can be seen from the death and destruction in Iraq. Sadly, both the radical Islamists and the Anglo-American axis seem intent on imposing there values on others and causing death and destruction on unimaginable scales.
I wonder if there right wing nuts and there video's decry the imposition of values, by there governments on others. Another double standard I guess.0 -
Can I just point out that even in the first line of the link you gave re the jerry springer opera, it says correctly that It was written by stewart lee and richard thomas..Jerry Springer did not write it..And Stewart Lee actually made a documentary about the reaction he got from christians(55,000 complaints), titled 'Whats wrong with blasphemy'..
I would say that free speech comes with responsibility..Hence the concept of political correctness..The muslim faithful take their religion very seriously, They strictly forbid imags of mohammed..
And having read 5 pages of this, my thoughts are with playboy, Id have given up by now, no point arguing with idiots..0 -
Didn't mean to offend, just excercising my free speech..0
-
Nope. The right to say nasty things is universal.Clearly, only Muslims should be insulted according to you.
By "taking the piss" I refer to Islamic students who refuse to even learn about STD/alcohol related illnesses and emergencies which are common ailments in Europe, yet expect to be given licenses to practice medicine in the West, banning workers from eating lunch at their desks during Ramadan. Pharmacists who will only dispense some kinds of medication and not others and expect not be handed their P45. Etc. "Taking the piss" is the only appropriate term for this kind of nonsense.They shouldn't dare take the piss
That is simply not true, and I think I've been quite clear about that.when it comes to you and your values. Its telling that someone who claims the right to taking the liberty to insult others, seems to have issue with others doing the same right back.
And yes, I also find this repugnant.Also, btw the Anglo-American Axis, go around the world imposing there values, where ever they see fit. The war of aggression against Iraq is a excellent example of this, when there lies about WMDs were revealed, they decided to impose democracy and radical free market capitialism as an excuse for there crimes.
Well, now that you mention it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uG8ZGHHvuYkI wonder if there right wing nuts and there video's decry the imposition of values, by there governments on others. Another double standard I guess.
look from 3:00 on where Pat rips into the Bush Administration.0 -
Does anyone know of a Catholic pharmacist who refuse to give out the morning-after pill ?
If so, please post here so that we can definitively say once-and-for all that while there are valid points in this thread they are NOT specifically Muslim-related.
There will ALWAYS be idiots who impose their views on others; there will ALWAYS be people who think insulting other people is funny, even when there isn't an ounce of actual humour involved; and there will ALWAYS be whingers who go OTT on how others impose on them.
Their religiion or race doesn't mean they are any of the above, and neither does it preclude them from being any of the above.
Those with extreme views who want to impose their views on others - be they extreme Muslims or extreme Catholics, middle-eastern terrorists or dictators, IRA terrorists, warmongering American presidents, or even the drunken anti-social twits hanging around on street corners, should not be tolerated, regardless of who they are.
Live and let live.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »I would say that free speech comes with responsibility..Hence the concept of political correctness..The muslim faithful take their religion very seriously, They strictly forbid imags of mohammed..
And having read 5 pages of this, my thoughts are with playboy, Id have given up by now, no point arguing with idiots..
You are with Playboy? in what way? besides moaning about the papers causing an extremist reaction neither of you have said how you would handle it? Should the government have stepped in and censored the paper? because if you don't think they should be censored what the hell point are you trying to make?0 -
Advertisement
-
Nope. The right to say nasty things is universal.
By "taking the piss" I refer to Islamic students who refuse to even learn about STD/alcohol related illnesses and emergencies which are common ailments in Europe, yet expect to be given licenses to practice medicine in the West, banning workers from eating lunch at their desks during Ramadan. Pharmacists who will only dispense some kinds of medication and not others and expect not be handed their P45. Etc. "Taking the piss" is the only appropriate term for this kind of nonsense.
This is hardly unique to Muslims. Other religious people do the same:
Pharmacists' Rights at Front Of New Debate
Cardinal Steps Into Hybrid Embryo Row
So this kinds of thing is hardly unique to Muslims. So why not call the religious crazies on this sort of crap? Why concentrate on the one group?
It seems to me that Muslims, at least in these kind of cases, aren't acting any different than other religious groups. So at least when it comes to this sort of things, Muslims don't seem to be much different than other groups.That is simply not true, and I think I've been quite clear about that.
And yes, I also find this repugnant.
Fair enough.Well, now that you mention it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uG8ZGHHvuYk
look from 3:00 on where Pat rips into the Bush Administration.
Thats a first I have to say.0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement