Arab FMs Blast Denmark Over Anti-Prophet Cartoons

This shoudl be the line in the sand for Europe, it is for me.

"Arab foreign ministers also criticized 'European human rights organizations who did not adopt a clear-cut stance on the issue.'"
-- from the article above

Yes, we should all critize 'European human rights organizations who did not adopt a clear-cut stance on the issue.'"

We're still waiting: where are those "European human-rights organizations" with that "clear-cut stance on the issue" that they should be adopting?

They have their head in the sand trying to hide from making a decision, they know that this is a watershed decision, go one way and they remove freedom of speach and unleash a huge reaction from secular Europeans who can't really miss this one (can they!!!), go the other and the Islamic world will throw their toys on the floor and go blue in the face.

The smartest thing the Danes could do --- and they won't --- is to plaster the nation with the images on billboards, TV ads, newspaper ads, and mass distributed leaflets. Make the drawings ubiquitous. And keep it up continuously for years.

DISLOYAL HARVARD DISLOYAL GEORGETOWN DISLOYAL USC DISLOYAL COLUMBIA

Be like dropping greasy vibrators behind a wall to agitate roach nests so as to flush the unhappy little critters out where they can be sprayed down real good.

Selective Muslim Silence.

http://hnn.us/articles/17589.html

The freaky Mullahs just can't let this one go. They try to get stupid liberals of Europe to do their dirty work. They seek to enlist the EU hacks to carry their water

Astounding! So EUrabian!

OT

The forces of Dhimmitude and Anti-Dhimmitude have clashed once again on the streets of Paris, as the Pierre Mutz, Prefect of Paris has ordered that feeding porc soup to the homeless cease forthwith.

The police in Montparnasse, last night (Thursday 29th dec), following the orders of the Commandatur, seized the consignment of illegal porc soup.

It may be noted that last night was one of the coldest so far in a winter which has killed 11 parisien homeless.

Despite the deaths, Paris authorities are satisfied that no muslims have been outraged by the police aktion.

In other less significant news, an unknown number of infidel households lost their vehicles to unspecified arson attacks last night.

Sources for this story here:

http://www.france-echos.com/actualite.php?cle=7814

http://www.association-sdf.com/index.html

I sure would like to get copies of all of those cartoon drawings. Anyone have a link?

Islam conditions all of its adherents to be bipolar. There are only two psychological states from which they operate: triumphalism and humiliation. They are either giving Mahathir a standing ovation when he calls for Muslim nations to unite to vanquish the Jews, or they are devastated and hysterical about an affront to their prophet. On an individual basis, Naseem is the perfect illustrative case; when she is not in tears about posters being mean to her, she is relishing the end of Western civilization.

My prayer for today: may this row and its repercussions grow and grow until Europe is forced to make its choice between freedom and Islamofascism.

The story of the pork soup being distributed to the homeless -- to be found at les4verites.com --posted above by Sebastian, may have been commented on here previously.

"... which was disappointing despite its political, economic and cultural ties with the Muslim world,"

There may be economic ties with Denmark buying Middle East oil and perhaps exporting diary products, but please tell me WHAT political and cultural ties?

"The Arab foreign ministers also criticized "European human rights organizations who did not adopt a clear-cut stance on the issue."

These Arab 'foreign ministers must be told in no uncertain terms where to go with their complaints: The thousands of human rights violations on a daily basis in their own countries need urgent attention and those organizations that are based on this concept have to get their heads out of the sand and take a stand is this regard!

But we should never forget for one moment that 'freedom and human rights' for a Mohammedan simply means "freedom to make Da'wa in the lands of the infidels" and anything that is done to prevent that makes the infidel ' an enemy of Islam' which impacts on the 'human rights' of the Islamist.

The battle can be won, but the coin hasn't dropped yet...

Note to muslims: Your prophet sucks. Those cartoons
were LAME.

How about a cartoon showing pedophile Mo nailing
nine year old Aisha in a bed fool of tot toys? Or
raping some of the war booty? Ordering
assasinations, or torture, or ...

Face it, you worship a sicko.

Oops, meant a bed "full" not "fool". I make those
kind of misteaks awe fin...

What about all of the thousands of cartoons the PLO prints constantly showing Jews as monkeys or pigs? Turn around is sure sweet. Anyone have a link to the cartoons for my private file?
Kat

This is the line in the sand;
do you hear even a word from your local newspaper or tv station ?

My astonishment is at the total lack of support that the brave Danes have received from our own main stream media; Just, absolutely, nothing.

OUR OWN MEDIA PEOPLE ARE CHICKEN SHIT, FRIGHTENED, HIDING IN THE CORNER HOPING THE STORM WILL BLOW OVER.

The E.U. and the U.N. are crumbling, both having expressed 'concern' about the cartoons; unless our media speaks up, the battle will be lost.

The cartoons.

http://www.newspaperindex.com/blog/2005/12/10/un-to-investigate-jyllands-posten-racism/#comments

The Arab foreign ministers also criticized "European human rights organizations who did not adopt a clear-cut stance on the issue."

Is a drawing of a cartoon a 'human rights' issue?
No one was beaten, beheaded, whipped or any rights denied or violated. This is non-issue in Europe.
In a free society (The Islamic nations have no idea what free is) any cartoon is just cartoon, whats the big deal?
In any case Mohamed was a nut case and evil, wicked villain who raped, pillaged and terrorized innocent people and took to bed a 9 year old girl as a wife.
To millions in this world Mohamed was a diabolical, fiendish, villainous individual whose very name should not be mentioned in civilized circles, a disgrace to humanity.

If those "anti-prophet" cartoons send the mindless Allah zombies into murderous paroxysms, I'm curious to know what they might think of these:

http://thestudyofrevenge.blogspot.com/

Charles Martel: "Islam conditions all of its adherents to be bipolar. There are only two psychological states from which they operate: triumphalism and humiliation."

Actually, Islam conditions all of its adherents to suffer from narcissistic personality disorder, which the DSM-IV defines as:

A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:

1. has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
2. is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
3. believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
4. requires excessive admiration
5. has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations
6. is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
7. lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others
8. is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her
9. shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes

The one thing that description leaves out, but which you will find if you read up on the subject a bit (also google "malignant narcissism"), is the way the narcissist will fly into a rage when he feels humiliated and the false, inflated ego he has constructed is jeapordized. No doubt a great many tyrants have suffered from NPD - that's why folks like Saddam put posters of themselves everywhere. Muhammad most likely suffered from it as well.

I also can't believe they won't just let it go. Demanding an APOLOGY from the GOVERNMENT of Denmark? Give me break.

What a bunch of crybabies.

As always:
We all have the right to free speech.
But nobody has the "right" to not be offended.

modern prometheus,
Nice! Now we're talking. I'd like to see
some "mohammad as pig/dog" caricatures, those
are great.

Of course, both pigs and dogs have some
right to be offended, as they are far better
than the pedophile for profit, but surely they'll
undertsnad the humor.

American,

In due time, my friend, in due time.

What rankles me the most about this ridiculous controversy is that the images published in the Danish paper--with the exception of one or two--can hardly be construed as offensive except by the most thin-skinned, thick-skulled troglodytes. What would the Muslim response be if one of these images ostensibly portrayed a Muslim in the role of a "terrorist" say, commiting some grisly deed? Of course, that question was rhetorical. We know what the response would be; which is odd because I read that the majority of Muslims are tolerant peace-faeries. Go fig.

Denmark wants to internationalize the issue?

Not quite - it is the Muslim community in Denmark that wishes to - which of course makes perfect sense from their perspective - allowing Denmark to experience the full force of an aggrieved umma.

All the lack of food, water, education, and technology in the Arab world, and their foreign ministers are wasting time on a cartoon.

Yeah, that's really looking out for the umma.

PRCS,

Thanks for the link to the cartoons as I've never seen them before.This continued uproar over a few cartoons is just the latest example of Muslim childishness.With all the problems in the world it's hard to believe Muslims are attempting to raise a few cartoons to the level of an international incident. Not unlike the Muslim rioting and murder over the allegation of Koran "abuse" at Gitmo.

What was even more interesting was reading the comments about the cartoons.Several Muslims showed up including a few pretending to not be Muslim to complain about the cartoons.Interesting how one supposed non-Muslim tried to make the case for restricting free speech in the interest of so-called minority rights.What was most gratifying was seeing the many posts exposing the ignorance and hypocrisy of Muslims.

modern prometheus, great well done, can I reprint them and post them on the streets Of New York,

We can win this propaganda war with Images.

They see the images and overreact and expose the Da'wa before the Jihad and Dihimmitude sets in.

We should be posting these images by the hundred of thousands, in every major city around the world and on huge billboards as well as in full page ads.
Don't forget to send copies to every Muslim organization and government embassy.

They will explode with rage and tip their hand showing the world what so-called moderate Muslims can do,

Great work, something for the average guy to understand, when not everyone has the intellectual interest to read Eurabia or Bat Ye'or.

El Cid,

Much appreciated. Post them on the streets of New York, you say? Not exactly looking to make any new friends are you? As someone who lives in New York--but would never consider myself a ‘New Yorker”--I imagine some open-minded-respective-of-all-view points-tolerance-apparatchik would have them torn down within seconds.

As far as your comment regarding “so-called moderate Muslims”, I’ve always been interested in seeing what their response would be to such imagery. Frankly, and in my intolerant and fascistic opinion, any Muslim taking umbrage to such would completely reveal their prejudices and loyalties to the jihadists. As I told someone recently: I would not be offended or become indignant over a discussion admonishing, say, the KKK (even though I am ‘white’); likewise, no honorable, peace-loving Muslim should be offended if a discussion turns to terrorism, or a film depicts Muslims as terrorists (shocker!), or Muslims are implicated in acts of terrorism in anyway.

You have to wonder though, considering the most vocal and visible Muslim advocacy groups were either founded by terrorists, have employees that have been, or are currently under indictment for sponsoring terrorism, that receive money from well-known terrorist group financiers, etc., why the so called moderates would allow such unsavory characters to act as their face and voice in the West.

This is hilarious

The muslim world whipped into a
frenzy over a few little cartoons.

Look at all the anti-west,
anti-"crusader," anti-everything-except-muslim cartoons in their
publications, but they can't handle 12 innocuous drawings of the prophet of
Islam?



I'm an artist; I've drawn alot of cartoons...I can *feel* the caution of the
artists in almost all of these drawings. These are very milquetoast images, not
meant to offend. We tiptoe, and they scream.

Too bad! I'd like to see what
these artists can REALLY do.

Where is the spirit of King Canute, Eric the Red, and the Vikings gone? Danes today are soooo apologetic about their past, when they used to rape & pillage England.

Get back that spirit, and recall all your envoys in Islamic countries, and advise all non-Muslim Danish citizens to leave those countries immediately. Once that is done, tell all Islamic envoys in Copenhagen to leave. After that, have a public art contest in Copenhagen on who can draw the great pedophile, and then shoot any Mohammedans who come to protest (because, most likely, it will be violent).

Thanks for both of the links to the sets of pictures. I have copies them and will have to e-mail a bunch of them to friends.

Roxane,

You may notice that cartoons 6 & 12 were actually submitted in protest of the newspaper's intent.

The original issue involved an author who could not find illustrators willing to submit drawings of Mohammad for an upcoming children's book, as the illustrator's were intimidated by an Islamic prohibition against drawing animate objects.

The two artists (6 & 12) obviously knew that the newspaper's intent was neither one of education, nor a simple statement of freedom of expression, but rather one of insult.

Had Jyllens Posten published just cartoon 1, the newspaper would have maintained the high road, and any subsequent Muslim outrage would have shown these folks to be the clowns that they are.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4361260.stm

Instead, Muslims have been handed another 'victim card'.

Europeans who can't really miss this one (can they!!!), go the other and the Islamic world will throw their toys on the floor and go blue in the face.

HAHAHA! That's funny. :o)

Posted by: Sebastien

They ordered the pork laced pea soup for the homeless and hungry stopped?

That's astounding. You'd think LOGIC would prevail, and that (not that there are any, they get plenty of Jizya money) pork hating muslims would use some (logic) and NOT go to Christian soup lines, join Jewish or (what? there aren't and muslim charities?) soup lines.

France is in full dhimmitude I'm afraid. They surrendered again, white flags flying and nay a shot fired.

The USA better take their nukes before the Muhammadans get their hands on them.

Too bad! I'd like to see what
these artists can REALLY do.

Posted by: corax

Have you seen Mohammad's "Believe it or ELSE!! ?
http://islamcomicbook.com/

I bet this guy has a million fatwa's issued on him.

"The two artists (6 & 12) obviously knew that the newspaper's intent was neither one of education, nor a simple statement of freedom of expression, but rather one of insult."

And Islam is to be free from criticism and derision, why? That's what you are exposed to when living in the West: self-examination and criticism. Those are fundamental to free societies and it's no wonder that no such thing truly exists in the East.

There is no "high-road" to be taken here, PCRS; as you know they will use any pretext to commit violence and to stifle dissent; publishing insulting cartoons doesn't hand them a victim card unless you're too daft to realize what's really going on (in which case it is our responsibility not to not offend muslims, but rather to educate those who might think of us as being unfair to them when we do insult Muslims, and rightfully so.) Do you really want to argue that we of the open and free societies must refrain from insult, especially when it comes to lampooning a monstrous and murderous ideology/religion that washes its hands in the blood of unbelievers everywhere, daily, across the globe? What's wrong with insulting Islam? Catholics, and Christians of every stripe must endure far worse attacks than just a few silly and "insulting" cartoons on a daily basis from Western culture, so if Islam is too thin-skinned to take a few barbs here and there, perhaps Allah should pack up his camels and go home.

modern prometheus,

"Do you really want to argue that we of the open and free societies must refrain from insult,..."

What does that have to do with the author's initial concern?

I argue that the newspaper should have stuck with the issue at hand.

I'm sorry you can't see that. And please, don't ascribe thoughts to me that I have not myself expressed.

PRCS,

Please, stop, your comments "insult" me.

"What does that have to do with the author's initial concern?"

Everything, considering you seem to favor self-censorship when it comes to protraying the head honcho of the muslim faith as anything other that what he was.

"I argue that the newspaper should have stuck with the issue at hand."

The "issue at hand" was publishing images of the prophet Moe. You took issue with the fact that several of those cartoons were created with the intention of criticising or "insulting" the prophet. Well, it would be very difficult NOT to portray a egomaniacal, murdering pedophile-rapist in anything other than an insulting light wouldn't it? Unless you would like to offer a different history other than the one forged by reality; the one marred by the unadulterated, violent expansionism whose provenance is Mohammed, the Koran and the assorted self-serving hadiths he authored. Pictures of the prophet squeezing smurfs out of his rump or posing in front of a minarette giving the peace symbol aren't particularly true to life, or in line with the real "issue at hand." It's you who's side-stepping the "issue at hand".

"I'm sorry you can't see that. And please, don't ascribe thoughts to me that I have not myself expressed."

Perhaps you should be place more thought into what you write and what it reveals about you then; else others more keen than you may expose your own retarded apologetics and suicidal cluelessness for all to see.

PRCS,

Did you even bother to read the article you quoted?

"Pictorial depictions of the Prophet Muhammad are forbidden in Islam."

Insulting or otherwise. The issue isn't about whether the pics were insulting but that they existed at all. Any depiction would be insulting and is thus, forbidden. So you can continue to lick the muslims sandals for all it's worth but I'm sure others here don't feel quite so comfortable in chains.

modern prometheus,

I am quite well-read on the subject.

"Pictorial depictions of the Prophet Muhammad are forbidden in Islam."

The prohibition, not accepted by all Muslims, concerns drawings of animate objects. As RS has said, there is no unified voice in Isalm.

Journalists often repeat misinformation, and some readers believe them.

More importantly, non-Muslims are under no obligation to abide by Islamic prohibitions.

Jyllens Posten had an opportunity to challenge that in a rational manner.

In order to satisfy the author's original concern, which of the illustrations would you have published?

PCRS,

“The prohibition, not accepted by all Muslims, concerns drawings of animate objects. As RS has said, there is no unified voice in Isalm.”

Just dandy for those who don’t accept that particular edict, but our concern doesn’t lie with them—at this moment—but those loud and unruly mobs, joined by their “moderate” ambassadors who do; and whose constant doom-tongued proselytizing will result in the kowtowing of Western governments and the treatment of Muslims—the new token minority on the block—as a protected class. See?

“More importantly, non-Muslims are under no obligation to abide by Islamic prohibitions.”

So they paper is wholly justified in publishing works which depict the prophet Mohamed, depictions insulting or otherwise.

“In order to satisfy the author's original concern, which of the illustrations would you have published?”

I don’t accept your opinion of what the author’s original concern may be. Inasmuch as the Danish press is a free press, it is damn well obligated to print whatever illustrations it chose to.

Furthermore, and I’ll repeat it again because you either missed it the first time or chose to ignore it:

“You took issue with the fact that several of those cartoons were created with the intention of criticising or "insulting" the prophet. Well, it would be very difficult NOT to portray an egomaniacal, murdering pedophile-rapist in anything other than an insulting light wouldn't it? Unless you would like to offer a different history other than the one forged by reality; the one marred by the unadulterated, violent expansionism whose provenance is Mohammed, the Koran and the assorted self-serving hadiths he authored. Pictures of the prophet squeezing smurfs out of his rump or posing in front of a minarette giving the peace symbol aren't particularly true to life, or in line with the real "issue at hand." It's you who's side-stepping the "issue at hand".”

That said, despite my argument otherwise, I do understand your concerns about not handing the Muslims a new victim card to play with; I just don’t accept it as being tactically useful. You propose that we play by the madman’s rule book, but all that does is legitimize his irrationality. In other words, you’re suggesting a form of appeasement under the guise of not inflaming Muslim outrage; which is as silly as saying that fighting terrorists only creates more terrorists; which is silly as saying more cops on the beat only emboldens criminals. If we try and play by the terrorists’ or the criminals’ rules, we shouldn’t be surprised when we’re defeated unequivocally.

I don’t respect Muslim sensibilities on these matters precisely because they’re entirely irrational; and the only people who will gain by our not adhering to our principals--for the sake of not upsetting Muslim sensibilities—are the enemy themselves.

Again, the paper wanted pictures of the prophet Mohammed. If Muslims are ashamed of their prophet’s blood soaked history and don’t want it depicted pictorially, perhaps they should choose a new religion. Liberalism is always looking for new converts—and they already share many of the same views on the world anyways so that would seem to be a beautiful match to me.

modern prometheus,

"I don’t accept your opinion of what the author’s original concern may be."

http://news.webindia123.com/news/showdetails.asp?id=154468&cat=world

“Mr Juste commissioned the cartoons after learning of the difficulties a children's writer, Kare Bluitgen, had in finding an illustrator for his book on the Koran and the Prophet's life. Mr Bluitgen said all the artists he approached feared the wrath of Muslims if they drew images of Prophet Mohammed.”

That was the issue at hand.

Jyllens Posten had the opportunity to force Danish Muslims to prove (which, IMO, they cannot do) the validity of that arguable Islamic belief. Muslims, and their apologists, should be challenged, with facts, on specific issues.

And illustration number one, alone, would have been sufficient to demonstrate the free speech aspect of the issue.

Any resultant Muslim outrage at that one drawing would have shown them for what they are --intolerant--and would have been a sigificant and noteworthy demonstration of that characteristic, for all to see.

Instead, the newspaper handed them the fig leaf of mockery to hide behind.

“You propose that we play by the madman’s rule book…”

You’ve made a lot of erroneous assumptions about the issue, and about me.

I propose that we play by rules that keep THEM on the defensive.

If you'd like to engage in a cooperative and civil dialogue, I'm amenable.

PRCS,

It’s hard to engage in a civil and cooperative dialogue with someone so completely bent on chasing their own tail and their own tail alone, so enamored with the smell of their own BS.

“’Mr Juste commissioned the cartoons after learning of the difficulties a children's writer, Kare Bluitgen, had in finding an illustrator for his book on the Koran and the Prophet's life. Mr Bluitgen said all the artists he approached feared the wrath of Muslims if they drew images of Prophet Mohammed.’
That was the issue at hand.”

Yes! Images of the Prophet Mohammed! Not even necessarily insulting ones; images alone—according to the BBC source you yourself cited—were enough to send those peaceful mooselimbs in apoplectic fits of indignation. But we in free societies don’t define ourselves by what others tell us we can or cannot say. Except for you who thinks it proper to coddle Muslim insecurities.

“Jyllens Posten had the opportunity to force Danish Muslims to prove (which, IMO, they cannot do) the validity of that arguable Islamic belief. Muslims, and their apologists, should be challenged, with facts, on specific issues.”

…while you yourself choose to shield those Muslims from a test that really counts: is their faith so secure that they can endure self-examination and criticism? Are they willing to view their Prophet for what he was, a pillaging and egomaniacal mass murderer, and move beyond that? That type of “growth” certainly won’t be encouraged so long as people like you refuse to hold the mirror up to nature as it twere and stop coddling their insanity. Simple, right?

“And illustration number one, alone, would have been sufficient to demonstrate the free speech aspect of the issue.”

Which would have, irrespective of the content, enraged Muslims anyways. But you seem to think that that is preferable to goading Muslims into more hysterical behavior by perhaps depicting their prophet for what he was. You instead proscribe censorship which really doesn’t make you any better than those ambassadors excoriating the Danes for doing what any free society is free to engage in: critique. You suggest cowardice.

“Any resultant Muslim outrage at that one drawing would have shown them for what they are --intolerant--and would have been a sigificant and noteworthy demonstration of that characteristic, for all to see.”

Which has nothing to do with the prerogative of a free society to express itself..er..freely. By claiming that there is a step beyond which it wouldn’t be prudent to tread when producing CARTOONS of a religious figure is sheer apologetics. You choose to make Muslims a PROTECTED class because you don’t think they can handle a little criticism; the fact that they cannot is no excuse not to, once again, proceed with what any free society is free to do: critique. It’s not our responsibility if the Muslims can’t take it; it’s their responsibility.

“Instead, the newspaper handed them the fig leaf of mockery to hide behind.”

That’s pure drivel. By setting limits upon what free societies can be expected to show Muslims, YOU are giving them something to hide behind.

“You propose that we play by the madman’s rule book…”
“You’ve made a lot of erroneous assumptions about the issue, and about me.”

Right. One bland cartoon of the prophet, one which doesn’t show him in any kind of historical light, one completely VOID of context, is enough to prove that Muslims are whacko according to you. And you’re not playing by the madman’s rule book when you propose that to produce a picture—a CARTOON—outside of those relatively inoffensive parameters, would just serve to make Muslims even more unhinged? This is you chasing your tail again.

“I propose that we play by rules that keep THEM on the defensive.”

See above. You propose we play by THEIR rules, else you wouldn’t be suggesting we place limits on OUR speech. Don’t be too offensive, that’ll just make them angrier and we certainly don’t want that, do we? That’s inanity! As if they needed any pretext such as a CARTOON to justify any more of their grisly deeds. They don’t. Nonetheless, you propose we treat them with kid gloves and that we should be satisfied with knowing the Muslims will go crazy over any depiction of Mohammed, so why push the envelope? Why, you dolt, is because it’s our prerogative and our right to do so. The murderers don’t define who we are, what we are and what we can and cannot say. Period. If you want to deviate from that line you’re nothing more than a unconscious quisling for terror, whatever you think or say your motives are.

And PRCS,

You skirted the issue again.

"And illustration number one, alone, would have been sufficient to demonstrate the free speech aspect of the issue."

"Illustration #1" wasn't what was called for; a picture of the Prophet Mohammed was asked for. As I said before, and as you ignored again, to produce a picture of Mohammed smelling daisies or trimming his camel's nose hairs isn't a picture of the Prophet Mohammed, is it? We are defined by our actions and Mohammed is best know for doing what, precisely? Exactly. So a picture depicting him as a murderer or a terrorist or even a warrior wouldn't be out of bounds considering what was asked for. Yet you maintain otherwise and that that would be taking things too far. Uh, simply put: the crazy Muslims getting their keffiyahs in a twist over cartoons would agree with you wouldn't they? That's the side you've inadvertantly found yourself on.

modern prometheus,

I've tried my best to have a civil discussion with you.

But, you are as intolerant as any Muslim.

Good bye.

PRCS,

I am humbled by your thorough rebuttal.

modern prometheus, I have been living in New York of over twenty years and am no stranger to grass-roots politics. i put up posters many times, the first time was during Giuliani's mayoral bid against Dinkens. He eventually won and changed the city.

You will never encounter a more hostile person then an Upper West-side liberal or the drug dealer that he buys his weed from.

I was a member of a civic group that with the helped of Mayor Giuliani, took on drug dealers and corrupt officials. We put up hundreds of posters and won.

Although I am Hispanic and the group was multiethnic, we still had to suffer the spurious charges of being racist.

The secret to poster success is, use the right glue and paper making it impossible to remove and the one's that are destroyed you must replace the next day. You should also put them up late at night so a to avoid direct conflict, my favorite time was when I walked my dog.

I think that a well designed poster, that asks serious questions can do a lot, at least it will reach a lot if people who are ignorant of Islam.

El Cid writes:
"I think that a well designed poster, that asks serious questions can do a lot, at least it will reach a lot if people who are ignorant of Islam."

You know, the idea hadn't occurred to me at all
(too low tech) but it's brilliant. Posters! One
more good idea out of JW. Thanks for that.

The format of the poster needs to be worked out.
What is the most hard hitting thing you could do
in a poster.

American, posters, flyers and business cards at first, full page ads and billboards when resources permit.

It would be great if in the future we could have PDF's with specific messages taken form Me Spencer's books or D. C. Watson or any other thinker and writer that can put into words and image.

Why Islam and Jihad are threat to the West

What Mo and the Koran say about infidels

What freedoms we stand to lose if sharia were the law of the land.

Where to go to find out about Islam

I have printed nice Business cards that just say

FIND OUT THE TRUTH ABOUT ISLAM

www.Jihadwatch,org

Maybe on this site or a sister site you can make available many different PDFs so that the rank and file can download print on their home computer and put up on the street, in stores, and any public bulletin board.

Guerrilla advertising is big business in the New York area and any construction site that has blank space is fair game, Lampposts are also plentiful.

I think we should take a queue from Move on, org, they drench the city with there posters, I do my best to remove all that I see.

Imagine if JW vast readership did the same in cities around the world.

Mullahmasher:
Thanks for the link to "Mohammed's Believe it or Else!" Wonderful artwork.

El Cid:
GREAT idea, the posters, cards, flyers. I would volunteer to design and create the artwork & PDF files to distribute, if we could (with the JW directors) come up with a couple of strong messages. Would the JW folks (Robert & Hugh) support the concept, do you think?

(I wouldn't want to place their website URL on a poster without their agreement.)

And who will carry the AR-15 to guard us while we put up posters...?

Mullahmasher:
Thanks for the link to "Mohammed's Believe it or Else!" Wonderful artwork.

El Cid:
GREAT idea, the posters, cards, flyers. I would volunteer to design and create the artwork & PDF files to distribute, if we could (with the JW directors) come up with a couple of strong messages. Would the JW folks (Robert & Hugh) support the concept, do you think?

(I wouldn't want to place their website URL on a poster without their agreement.)

And who will carry the AR-15 to guard us while we put up posters...?

Whoops...apologies.
Didn't mean to send a duplicate post.

I intend to propose this to Robert, and ask that they help draft a careful message, one that adheres to the high and fair principles of this site.

Just the truth in their own words no calls for nuking Mecca or acts of violence.

Just inform the people about the nature of the Jihad.

These PDFs could be posted on a sister site, along with the contribution of others, so that ad-hoc they can be downloaded and put up by people around the world.

They should be in different languages, especially French.

As to the risk, it's up to the Local group to access, putting some flyers in your local church is much less riskier them putting them up on the streets of London, Paris or New York. Leaving them behind in libraries and stores is also less risky.

Let the readers and leaders of the ant-Jihad movement decide what is best and how much risk they will bear.

I think that the posters can or may not endorse JW or any established group. It's ok to put a link to their website, but that matters less them the message.

Speak the truth, with quotes from the Koran or from Islamic organizations as D.C.Watson has done and direct them where to find out more information.

Look at Stop BNP and Moveon ,org as models of how this can be done well.

I intend to propose this to Robert, and ask that they help draft a careful message, one that adheres to the high and fair principles of this site.

Just the truth in their own words no calls for nuking Mecca or acts of violence.

Just inform the people about the nature of the Jihad.

These PDFs could be posted on a sister site, along with the contribution of others, so that ad-hoc they can be downloaded and put up by people around the world.

They should be in different languages, especially French.

As to the risk, it's up to the Local group to access, put some flyers in your local church is much less riskier them putting them up on the streets of London, Paris or New York. Leaving them behind in libraries and stores is also less risky.

Let the readers and leaders of the ant-Jihad movement decide what is best and how much risk they will bear.

I think that the posters can or may not endorse JW or any established group. It's ok to put a link to their website, but that matters less them the message.

Speak the truth, with quotes from the Koran or from Islamic organizations as D.C.Watson has done and direct them where to find out more information.

Look at Stop BNP and Moveon ,org as models of how this can be done well.

El Cid,

Go to:

http://co-jet.org/

Scroll down to the pamphlets section.

Check out Susan's other info, too.

Thanks Prcs this helpful