Denmark's policy is that the newspaper Jyllands-Posten is privately owned and may publish what it wants without government interference. This, evidently, is the policy that they want changed. "Protests against publication of Prophet’s caricatures continue; ‘West provokes Muslims by humiliating Islam,’" from the Arab Times, with thanks to Twostellas:
KUWAIT CITY: Reaction against the publication of caricatures in Danish and Norwegian newspapers of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) continued unabated at the Danish Consulate in Kuwait, reports Al-Qabas daily. The daily said signboards have been planted outside the consulate asking for protection of Islam and Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). An unidentified person is also said to have dumped garbage in front of the consulate as a sign of protest....A security source said that the Ministry of Interior understands and respects the feelings of people, but the law must be respected. The same source said such acts around the embassies are unacceptable. Dean of the Faculty of Sharia at the Kuwait University Dr Mohammad Al-Tabtabaei said Denmark has lost about 40 million euros over the past few days because the Muslims have boycotted purchasing the Danish products in retaliation for caricatures published by Denmark and Norway depicting Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), reports Al-Rai Al-Aam daily. Dr Tabtabaei added the losses will be bigger and Muslims will continue to boycott the products unless the Denmark changes its policy. Speaking at a symposium held by the Islamic Heritage Revival Society, Dr Tabtabaei pointed out abusing Islam is a conspiracy interwoven by masonry and Zionism and the radical right-wingers. He added Christians are not involved in this conspiracy.
Dr Tabtabaei said the Muslim and Arab nations must work hand in hand and continue to boycott the Danish products. Dr Ismail Al-Shatti was recently quoted as saying the West provokes the Muslims by humiliating Islam and Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) because of the weaknesses of Arab and Muslim states who are unable to respond effectively. Al-Shatti added terrorist attacks in several parts of the world led to Islam’s humiliation in the West because Westerners have failed to differentiate between individuals who carry out these acts and Islam which rejects violence and calls for forgiveness and tolerance. Al-Shatti is of the opinion that the Queen of Denmark must apologize for the publication of caricatures in one of her country’s newspapers which abuse Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).
Well, why not show us some of that tolerance by backing off on asking the Queen to apologize?
If the queen of Denmark should apologize for what was published in a Danish newspaper, then what about the Saudi king apologizing for 911? Talk about double standarts.
If she doesn't know the right Arabic (or Urdu) words/fonts to use ....I can help.
للشفقة
will do for starters.
Funnily enough, I don't recall their tender sensibilities being offended when they begged us to come and save their sorry selves in the first Gulf war. Sniveling whiners.
libbysmom: funny how things get put in perspective eh?
Europe and the US might disagree on how to go about things, but at least we can still talk reasonably normal to each other.
Naseem: Nonsense. The queen is NOT responsible for the contents of any newspaper. Or can I now also demand apologies for the shredding of bibles in Saudi Arabia from their king as being a major offense to the christians?
And since we're on that topic, explain to me exactly what the Queen has to apologize for? Remember, it's not mean if it's true.
In honor of the fictional utopia of al-Andalus, how about an "apology" in Spanish?
"Me cago en tu alma."
- Julio Cortázar, Rayuela, Chapter 56.
Dr Tabtabaei pointed out abusing Islam is a conspiracy interwoven by masonry and Zionism and the radical right-wingers. He added Christians are not involved in this conspiracy.
Sounds like he is quoting article 22 from the Hamas Charter.
http://www.mideastweb.org/hamas.htm
so the Kuwaitis are getting onto the "blame the jooooos" bandwagon so.
how surprising.
here's hoping the israelis "accidentally" drop a bomb or two on their flight back from blowing the crap out of the iranian nuke facilities.
BBC Newsnight broadcast last night - a special edition about the cartoon issue.
video available on this page (realplayer):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/4687270.stm
watch out for the bearded Islamic moonbat ranting on about how Islam is a "superior way of life".
in response to Jeremy Paxman's "why dont you go live in Iran?" question, the Islamonutter responsds that he doesnt need to , because Islam will take over the entire world.
however, the BBC seems to be getting its act together - finally. that newsnight edition mentions the fake cartoons and the danish imam middle east tour. the iranian connection is also mentioned.
"Dr Tabtabaei pointed out abusing Islam is a conspiracy interwoven by masonry and Zionism and the radical right-wingers. He added Christians are not involved in this conspiracy."
yea right... I seem to remember at the last lodge meeting my Masonic brothers and I cooking up this whole thing... then we called our Zionist allies and let them in on it.
Canuck
In societies committed to the rule of law and to free speech, we may object in the strongest possible terms to something that someone has said or put into print, but we respect their right to do that. More importantly, we respect their right to life, which means that murder or violence is not justified even in the face of offensive free speech.
Clearly, some people want to be able to moderate free speech. As Lenin famously asked: "Who, Whom", meaning who will decide and for whom will that decision have the weight of law? Who will be advantaged when we go a little further down that slope to where any criticism that is too effective because it is a bit too truthful cuts a bit too deep?
In the name of not offending Islam, we have the BBC, what used to be a respected news organization, finding it impossible to call a terrorist for what he is. If this is how self-moderation to avoid offence distorts the truth, what will the truth look like if we ever give government the job of deciding what stories will be covered or not covered, and what terms will be used and what terms will be forbidden? Shades of 1984!
Was I, as a Christian, offended by the infamous Andres Serrano work Piss Christ - a photograph of a crucifix submerged in urine? It was revolting.
Would this excuse me sticking a knife into Serrano's chest along with a note expressing my feelings? No.
What does it say about the values of a society where someone can blow up the "holy sites" of various factions on a "holy day" in a "holy city" as worshippers are leaving their assembly? Is an outside observer somehow wrong when he rightly observes that this implies that violence, bloodshed and ruthless disregard for the lives of otherwise innocent people are an integral part of this value system? To complain about a dozen cartoons yet be silent on co-religionist violence is strikingly hypocritical. Even more so at the rumor that a US soldier abused a Koran once, but fail to mention all the korans their own followers have blow up. If so, what is really at work here?
Maybe the problem with the cartoon of their "prophet" with a turban-morphed-bomb on his head is that it is too truthful, too revealing, and cuts too close for people who insist to non-believers theirs is a "religion of peace", while its practitioners repeatedly use "holy sites" for arms depots, and repeatedly find it easy to demonstrate by the tens of thousands against any "offence", but fail to demonstrate even in the tens of hundreds for bloodshed caused by their very own fellow believers.
Free speech is ultimately about finding truth. The West solves the problem by allowing people to freely choose their sources. Those that are not credible, fall by the wayside because nobody supports them. This is the exact reason for the decline in circulation of the left-leaning daily newspapers such as the LA Times. It is the exact reason for the rise of internet blogs.
Don't forget, someone has to decide! Who, Whom! If we are not free to decide for ourselves, someone will assume the power to do it for us. That someone will always use the credible threat of violence (either private violence like the murder of Theo van Gogh, or through the power of State censors), to enforce his preferences and policies.
Clearly in countries where Islam is allowed to influence policymaking, unfavorable news is forbidden by the most violent sanctions. We cannot allow Islamists to gain that foothold in the west, or the west will cease to exist.
The sign of the Islamist cartoon protester in London said it all: "To Hell with Freedom!"
archduke: one can only hope the media is finally daring to push through the taqiyya.
And there'll be hell to pay if they even dare try make this soil dar al-Islam. I'll show them the meaning of dar al-Harb for sure. My ancestors didn't give their lives for nothing in the last 700-800 years we've been living here. We'll bring back the old Visigoth/Ostrogoth/Germanic/Teutonic way of dealing with this.
asmodai - you can wriggle all you want...that's what worms do.
Allah has shown all muslims a map of the flat earth...and shown that all are parts of the ummah...all are the fruits of Allah....his childrens only need to spread ...and enjoy.
"his childrens only need to spread ..and enjoy."
Is that a veiled reference to the child rape victim Aisha?