*SNIP* warns of future attacks if Muhammad is mocked

IamNotNumber

How did that gob****e get on the television?

punisher5112

Ireland has opened itself up to all these radical nuts along with most other EU member states and its something I see getting worse as the years will pass.

They are coming here to study get educated then a Irish or other EU passport and they can then freely move around which is something that I see will create huge problems.

R.I.P to all that lost their lives and I really hope these farcical people stop as they are absolutely out of their minds.

Brain washed nuts.

AllGunsBlazing

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Where is the government on this ?

Keeping their heads down.

punisher5112

IamNotNumber wrote: »

How did that gob****e get on the television?

I see what ya did there...

Yamanoto

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

So what did Dr. Selim have to say on the Six-One then?

He's suing Smokie apparently.

Misconstrued the lyrics as 'Living next door to Allah'.

Paz-CCFC

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

So what did Dr. Selim have to say on the Six-One then?

He said that it's important that Muslims should make it very clear Islam has nothing to do with this, that it is an atrocity, that it should not believed the perpetrators are not representing Islam, that no religion can justify religion and Irish Muslim organisations have condemned this act of violence. He said that if Muslims are offended by the depiction of Mohammed, they should write to complain and make the point peacefully. We should all be sticking together to tackle such acts of terrorism. He said that the blasphemy law was there and blasphemous acts are therefore illegal. He also said he'd have to take legal advice before commenting on whether he'd be pushing for any prosecutions.

Reception is a bit dodgy, but I think that was pretty much all he said.

sjb25

He's an idiot worse to be having him on tv

smash

He has zero grounds for legal action as has been discussed on newstalk this evening. He could try, fail miserably.

Piliger

Selim back on SkyNews now ... given the run of the debate ... shouting down people ... claiming muslims are being treated like animals ... he is so sickening.

ballsymchugh

AllGunsBlazing wrote: »

Keeping their heads down.

not really keeping heads down when a senior minister calls for the law to be changed.

http://www.newstalk.com/Ireland-needs-to-drop--blasphemy-law-defence-minister

sjb25

smash wrote: »

He has zero grounds for legal action as has been discussed on today fm this evening. He could try, fail miserably.

Let him on I say see what a judge has to say

ballsymchugh

Piliger wrote: »

Selim back on SkyNews now ... given the run of the debate ... shouting down people ... claiming muslims are being treated like animals ... he is so sickening.

i don't think that's the same guy.

brummytom

I've got absolutely no knowledge of this bloke at all, but he seems like a fcuking idiot judging by the comments I've seen made by him.

I'm watching out local news at the moment, a Muslim community leader said 'We're fed up of people committing these acts in the name of Islam. These completely oppose everything Islam stands for.' I'm sure this is the opinion of the vast majority of Muslims.

People like this dick just stoke the fire and help to further alienate Muslims as a whole.

Piliger

ballsymchugh wrote: »

i don't think that's the same guy.

You are right ... I am wrong.

Who is this appalling racist that SkyNews keeps giving control of the studio debate to ?

mister gullible

The guy is entitled to take legal advice. The law then allows his complaint or not. As long as we have 'anti-blasphemy' laws (whatever that means), and we allow all sorts of superstitions (religions) to influence our society we can't really complain.

AllGunsBlazing

ballsymchugh wrote: »

not really keeping heads down when a senior minister calls for the law to be changed.

http://www.newstalk.com/Ireland-needs-to-drop--blasphemy-law-defence-minister

Pleasantly suprised by this.

Donkey Oaty

brummytom wrote: »

I've got absolutely no knowledge of this bloke at all, but he seems like a fcuking idiot judging by the comments I've seen made by him.

You are wise beyond your years, my son, for this interpretation is indeed the correct one.

ballsymchugh

Piliger wrote: »

You are right ... I am wrong.

Who is this appalling racist that SkyNews keeps giving control of the studio debate to ?

some spokesman for a muslim committee in the UK. his argument was ridiculous though.

SILVAMAN

wonder what would haappen to the Irish cleric who dared to utter such a threat to anyone in a conservative muslim country with respect to insulting Christianity?

Dont call me Shirley

I'm gonna throw caution to the wind here and say I can kind of see his point. Not sure if I agree though.

AFAIK there are laws in many parts of Europe limiting what can be said about the holocaust. Also, you do hear cases coming from the UK now and then about people being brought up for the online mocking of victims of atrocities (I think there was one recently after the Sydney seige) and I'd imagine these are brought under some form of public decency legislation.

I think it's a fair point to say that if some sections of society get legal protection to not have issues they hold dear to them mocked (respect for victims of atrocities) then why can't another section of society have a comparable protection for something they hold dear to them.

Personally, in the internet age i think criminalizing anything published online is pointless because really your only punishing people stupid enough to not do it anonymously.

While I'm at it I've only seen some of the cartoons and I do think they were in bad taste. It's plain bad manners, if not bullying to mock something people are sensitive about, be it the holocaust, or their religious beliefs but I really don't think it should be punished, least of all violently.

For the record, I'm not Muslim or religious.

K4t

Dont call me Shirley wrote: »

I'm gonna throw caution to the wind here and say I can kind of see his point. Not sure if I agree though.

AFAIK there are laws in many parts of Europe limiting what can be said about the holocaust. Also, you do hear cases coming from the UK now and then about people being brought up for the online mocking of victims of atrocities (I think there was one recently after the Sydney seige) and I'd imagine these are brought under some form of public decency legislation.

I think it's a fair point to say that if some sections of society get legal protection to not have issues they hold dear to them mocked (respect for victims of atrocities) then why can't another section of society have a comparable protection for something they hold dear to them.

Personally, in the internet age i think criminalizing anything published online is pointless because really your only punishing people stupid enough to not do it anonymously.

While I'm at it I've only seen some of the cartoons and I do think they were in bad taste. It's plain bad manners, if not bullying to mock something people are sensitive about, be it the holocaust, or their religious beliefs but I really don't think it should be punished, least of all violently.

For the record, I'm not Muslim or religious.

Yes, you're much worse.


Speech or Freedom of Speech has never nor will ever harm anyone.

shruikan2553

K4t wrote: »

Yes, you're much worse.


Speech or Freedom of Speech has never nor will ever harm anyone.

Unless you yell something like fire at the cinema.

Dont call me Shirley

K4t wrote: »

Yes, you're much worse.


Freedom of Speech has never nor will ever harm anyone.

There's a good few Muslim people where I work. If I started wearing these cartoons on a t-shirt to work do you think it would be ok if my company disciplined me?

How about this, statistically there's likely to be a certain amount of victims of sexual abuse in my workplace. Should I be allowed wear a t-shirt mocking rape victims in work, or even on the street?

That's freedom of speech right?

The way I see it, in a mature society we have to treat each other with respect.

K4t

shruikan2553 wrote: »

Unless you yell something like fire at the cinema.

Yelling fire in a crowded cinema should never be an offence.

Iranoutofideas

Someone should hold up the cartoons on live tv. Like an outside broadcast by RTE, could you imagine the face on Dobbo if he was talking live to Charlie Bird and someone did that.

DoYouEvenLift

Strongly hoping for a south park episode dedicated to all of this bullsh!t, and if they do do one I hope it's the most offensive episode to date and calls out all the stupid sh!t the extremists believe and do


"Don't make fun of my made up God or I will kill real, existing people" - who the fuk was logic?

K4t

Dont call me Shirley wrote: »

There's a good few Muslim people where I work. If I started wearing these cartoons on a t-shirt to work do you think it would be ok if my company disciplined me?

Of course not.

How about this, statistically there's likely to be a certain amount of victims of sexual abuse in my workplace. Should I be allowed wear a t-shirt mocking rape victims in work, or even on the street?

Of course.

That's freedom of speech right?

Freedom of expression yes.

The way I see it, in a mature society we have to treat each other with respect.

I agree. And there is no clearer sign of respect for one's fellow human being than allowing absolute freedom of expression.

Rightwing

Dont call me Shirley wrote: »

There's a good few Muslim people where I work. If I started wearing these cartoons on a t-shirt to work do you think it would be ok if my company disciplined me?

How about this, statistically there's likely to be a certain amount of victims of sexual abuse in my workplace. Should I be allowed wear a t-shirt mocking rape victims in work, or even on the street?

That's freedom of speech right?

The way I see it, in a mature society we have to treat each other with respect.

I agree with this. A little bit of cop on wouldn't go astray.

Dont call me Shirley

K4t wrote: »

Of course not.

Of course.

Freedom of expression yes.

I agree. And there is no clearer sign of respect for one's fellow human being than allowing absolute freedom of expression.

I hope the good people of my locality see it the same way when I wear my satirical "Rape victims are sluts" t-shirt around the town tomorrow in solidarity.

There's no clearer sign of respect for my fellow human beings if i don't get my ass kicked right?

Cyclingtourist

"The publication or utterance of blasphemous, seditious, or indecent matter is an offence which shall be punishable in accordance with law."

^^Article 40.6.i of the Irish Constitution.

The Constitutional Convention recommended its removal but as yet there has been no announcement of a date for a referendum on the issue.

K4t

Dont call me Shirley wrote: »

I hope the good people of my locality see it the same way when I wear my satirical "Rape victims are sluts" t-shirt around the town tomorrow in solidarity.

There's no clearer sign of respect for my fellow human beings if i don't get my ass kicked right?

If somebody physically assaults you I would advise you to alert the guards.

[QUOTE
Dr Ali Selim, spokesman at the Islamic Cultural Centre of Ireland, has warning Irish publications against posting comics mocking the Prophet Muhammad [/QUOTE]


A belt of the muslim crozier.

plus ca change.

Connemara Farmer

A Trinity legal guy on George Hook this evening reckoned it's safe to tweet or retweet the cartoons about whats his face. Loads of hoops to jump through to get prosecuted, nigh on impossible basically. A publication based in Trinity actually published the cartoons.

Dont call me Shirley

K4t wrote: »

If somebody physically assaults you I would advise you to alert the guards.

Do you think the guards should be protecting me? At taxpayers expense?

Even putting their lives on the line as was the case in France?

seanaway

Publish and be damned I say. Time that law was put to the test.

People who cannot respect the right of free speech have no place in a free society. There are plenty of places where this guy would get a round of applause for just opening his restrictive gob- that isn't Ireland.

I've always wondered why people who are so against the freedoms of democratic societies choose to live in them instead of some dust ridden despotic religious dictatorship led state. Oh, wait. Could it be they have a better life in a FREE society.

K4t

Dont call me Shirley wrote: »

Do you think the guards should be protecting me? At taxpayers expense?

Even putting their lives on the line as was the case in France?

Of course. Why wouldn't they protect you? It's the law, that is their job.

Dont call me Shirley

K4t wrote: »

Of course. Why wouldn't they protect you? It's the law, that is their job.

Actually from another post it seems that under the law in Ireland they'd have to arrest me for indecency.

I'm not sure if that's how it should be but imho it's certainly far less wrong than protecting some asshole who'd wear a t-shirt like that.

The_Captain

In fairness to Ali Selim, the first thing he did was condemn the attack and said the terrorists don't represent Islam or Muslims.
Then pretty much asked for the pictures not to be replicated for the sake of not causing pointless offence to Muslims

There's a bit of hysteria here whipping up around his comments and taking a lot of stuff out of context.

He's a conservative old fool in the same vein as John Waters or Dana, but I don't think he's a terrorist supporting monster

K4t

Dont call me Shirley wrote: »

Actually from another post it seems that under the law in Ireland they'd have to arrest me for indecency.

Which would be wrong.

I'm not sure if that's how it should be but imho it's certainly far less wrong than protecting some asshole who'd wear a t-shirt like that.

You are protecting him more by not allowing him to wear the shirt.

Dont call me Shirley

K4t wrote: »

Which would be wrong.

You are protecting him more by not allowing him to wear the shirt.

:rolleyes: you've just defeated your own argument here. By acknowledging that he would be punished shows we intuitively know it's wrong to be that offensive.

It's really just common sense, and speaking of which I should have the good sense to remove myself from this pointless argument.

K4t

The_Captain wrote: »

In fairness to Ali Selim, the first thing he did was condemn the attack and said the terrorists don't represent Islam or Muslims.
Then pretty much asked for the pictures not to be replicated for the sake of not causing pointless offence to Muslims

There's a bit of hysteria here whipping up around his comments and taking a lot of stuff out of context.

He's a conservative old fool in the same vein as John Waters or Dana, but I don't think he's a terrorist supporting monster

He is a conservative old fool while we are simply fools.

K4t

Dont call me Shirley wrote: »

:rolleyes: you've just defeated your own argument here. By acknowledging that he would be punished shows we intuitively know it's wrong to be that offensive.

Lines like that scare me more than anything someone might say to offend me or anything else I have seen or read today.


If I walk up to a black man and call him a "******" resulting in him punching me, that doesn't mean what I did was wrong. He is the one who has committed a criminal offence. He is in the wrong if he physically assaults me.

nullzero

Standman wrote: »

This guy is spitting on everything those dead cartoonists stood for with his thinly veiled threats. He may condemn violence, but on this issue it's plain to see he agrees with those murderers while merely using a different kind of threat. Disgusting.

Is this what moderate Islam looks like?

Moderate Islam seems to equate to a passive aggressive mask thinly veiling the utter disregard that Islam seems to have for every idiom on planet earth that in anyway disagrees with Islamic teaching.

phater phagan

If ayatollah you once I ayatollah you a hundred times - don't draw that picture of that child's husband. Sue me Ahern!

SILVAMAN

Miriam O'Callaghan just put it to Selim that he wants to live in this country but not under certain laws.
He hasn't a goddamned clue of what he's talking about. She's ripping him to shreds...he's like a rabbit in the headlights.
The other contributor has said that you cannot legislate for opinions and O'Callaghan asked why Islam should take precedence over other religions.
He seems quite uncomfortable with 2 women running rings around him...wonder why?
Ali---religion is a personal thing-for me it's in the same realm as Grimm's Fairytales.

bjork

phater phagan wrote: »

If ayatollah you once I ayatollah you a hundred times - don't draw that picture of that child's husband. Sue me Ahern!

SWAT Team are on their way. Tick tock...

dirkmeister

And there he goes getting in the dig about French military being to blame...

phater phagan

bjork wrote: »

SWAT Team are on their way. Tick tock...

Glad to hear it - place is full of flies;)

fuerte1976

In fairness, Saleim has been spewing Outta his hoop all day. The 2 women on prime time made him look like a bigger Muppet than ever..

seanaway

Ah jeez. Yer man in London had a full speech ready for this. These guys are totally off their nuts.