A new twist on Muhammad the Bear has elicited the video above, which is currently available at YouTube, though that could change. Interestingly, there have been at least two prior depections of Muhammad on South Park -- one in 2001 (shown here, on the right), and another in 2006 that didn't make it to air, but can be found online. But a bear suit... that means war! Who knows, maybe it's because the Pedobear jokes all but write themselves.
Oodles of hateful rhetoric on a variety of topics and against a variety of people -- Theo Van Gogh, Salman Rushdie, Kurt Westergaard, Lars Vilks, and Geert Wilders -- can be found in the remainder of the video.
"Security Brief: Radical Islamic Web site takes on 'South Park'," from CNN, April 19:
The radical Islamic Web site Revolutionmuslim.com is going after the creators of the TV cartoon series "South Park" after an episode last week included an image of the Prophet Mohammed in disguise.
Revolutionmuslim.com, based in New York, was the subject of a CNN investigation last year for its radical rhetoric supporting "jihad" against the West and praising al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. Its organizers insist they act within the law and seek to protect Islam.
On Sunday, Revolutionmuslim.com posted an entry that included a warning to South Park creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone that they risk violent retribution - after the 200th episode last week included a satirical discussion about whether an image of the prophet could be shown. In the end, he is portrayed disguised in a bear suit.
The posting on Revolutionmuslim.com says: "We have to warn Matt and Trey that what they are doing is stupid and they will probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show. This is not a threat, but a warning of the reality of what will likely happen to them."
Theo van Gogh was a Dutch filmmaker who was murdered by an Islamic extremist in 2004 after making a short documentary on violence against women in some Islamic societies. The posting on Revolutionmuslim.com features a graphic photograph of Van Gogh with his throat cut and a dagger in his chest.
The entry on Revolutionmuslim.com goes on to advise readers:
"You can contact them [the makers of South Park], or pay Comedy Central or their own company a visit at these addresses ..." before listing Comedy Central's New York address, and the Los Angeles, California, address of Parker and Sloane's production company.
Contacted by CNN, the author of the post, Abu Talhah al Amrikee, said that providing the addresses was not intended as a threat to the creators of South Park but to give people the opportunity to protest.
Over still photographs of Parker, Stone, van Gogh and others, the Web site runs audio of a sermon by the radical U.S.-born preacher Anwar al-Awlaki, who is now in hiding in Yemen. The sermon, recorded some time ago, talks about assassinating those who have "defamed" the Prophet Mohammed - citing one religious authority as saying "Harming Allah and his messenger is a reason to encourage Muslims to kill whoever does that." U.S. officials say al-Awlaki is on a list of al Qaeda leaders targeted for capture or assassination.
The clip ends with a warning on a graphic directed at Parker and Stone, saying "The Dust Will Never Settle Down."
Al Amrikee said the purpose of including the al-Awlaki sermon in his posting was to remind Muslims that insulting the prophet is a severe offense for which the punishment in Islam is death. He said RevolutionMuslim may hold protests about the show.
Calls to Comedy Central were not returned.
"Harming allah and its messenger is a reason to encourage mahoundians to kill whoever does that."
Wow, wow... Since mahound's imaginary alter-ego allah's is supposed to be so powerful that its hands aren't fettered by those pesky natural laws which inspired Christian and Jewish scientists to bring about the development of modern science, and which are supposed to be an expression of how God in Judaism and Christianity rules the universe, how come HUMAN INFIDELS are able to harm the oh-so-almighty-allah??? The one and only which (not who) could decide tomorrow that water molecules are no longer going to be made up of oxygen and hydrogen atoms, but of sulfur and sodium???
I wonder if that slip of mahoundian tongue should turn the fatwa against the dipsticks that issued the death threat...
Contributor: The CNN link in your article just points back to JW.
lol, will it never stop!!
And besides, it's a cartoon...uh wait a minute..
never mind.
"The radical Islamic Web site Revolutionmuslim.com is going after the creators of the TV cartoon series "South Park" after an episode last week included an image of the Prophet Mohammed in disguise."
You know what's really funny? These guys aren't radical at all. Just Muslims, plain and simple. Shiny, happy Muslims. Time for Americans and other normal people to take their heads out and call a rose a rose.
A Muslim who follows his religion, by any other name, still stinks to high heaven and is not worthy to live in civilization. Sorry Ibby. Roll that up in your prayer rug and kneel on it.
Fixed. Thanks.
Where are CAIR and all these muslim groups? Why aren't they protesting the fact that Revolutionmuslim.com is directly threatening to harm the producers of a tv cartoon?
What an insane "religion", eh? Further PROOF that islam is an evil death cult ...
And the music at the end of the video was creepy, too.
Muslim sensitivity training a la Eric Cartman, and some history of Mo and SP:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNtDrUhcKyQ
Muslim sensitivity training a la Eric Cartman, and some history of Mo and SP:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNtDrUhcKyQ
"There is no fun in Islam ".
Hey, let's get the word out!
That Blog at CNN is wide open, and I am the only person who has pointed out that this is not an isolated incident but an example of what is coming. You can bet that apologists will hijack the blog as soon as they notice it.
Get over to http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/04/19/security-brief-radical-islamic-web-site-takes-on-south-park/ and help inform.
Excellent point. Why don't you present it to the public at large over at CNN?
The fact that some group of people wants to kill you, or your wife, or children, parents, friends, elected officals, etc. over something like a cartoon should tell you all you need to know.
When someone like Qaradawi tells Muslims to "rage" over this, you can't say you weren't warned.
I don't know how much more explicit it's possible to get in terms of a clear call for violence/killing in the name of Islam than is contained in this video clip. Zachary "Abu Talhah al Amrikee" Chesser should be picked up and charged with incitement to violence and put away for a very long time.
Chesser isn't very smart to be posting such stuff when information about him is so easy to track down on the internet, for example his home address and phone number on whitepages.com. If the authorities hurry, they might be able to rescue HIM before he is visited by some concerned citizens who might want to discuss his philosophies in person.
Exit pursued by a bear?
Marisol wrote a very good piece at the New English Review on this subject a few years ago called Death by Cartoon.
I didn't notice before, but it looks like CNN will not be approving my comment there (I am guessing because comments placed 35 min. after mine are approved but mine is still "awaiting moderation").
Look at this comment by "Ummit" at the CNN blog:
When u know that Muslims are sensitive towards their prophet (by the way Muslims recognize Jesus as propeht also), why do u want to hurt their feelings. Isnt this extremism also??
Ummit is the Rodney King of religion. Can't we all be nice to each other and just get along?
Blaine, my post is awaiting moderation. I dont know if they will allow it so I'm posting it here as well.
Its been aparant to me that for years now Muslims here in the America are treated with kid gloves when it comes to the issue of free speach. Is it that the media is afraid of the so called radical Muslims retaliating to anything they deem disrespectful or insulting to Muhammad or Islam? No other religion gets the "walking on eggshells" approach from the mainstream media that Islam does.
I guess we'll see how "Moderate" CNN is.
More info about Zachary "Abu Talhah al Amrikee" Chesser gleaned from Whois lookup http://cqcounter.com/whois/domain/youtubejihad.org.html. The email address is for George Mason University.
Domain ID:D158494681-LROR
Domain Name:YOUTUBEJIHAD.ORG
Created On:02-Mar-2010 17:17:14 UTC
Last Updated On:02-Mar-2010 17:17:15 UTC
Expiration Date:02-Mar-2011 17:17:14 UTC
Sponsoring Registrar:Wild West Domains, Inc. (R120-LROR)
...
Registrant Name:Zachary Chesser
Registrant Street1:13017 bathgate way
...
Registrant City:Bristow
Registrant State/Province:Virginia
Registrant Postal Code:20136
Registrant Country:US
Registrant Phone:+1.7036009926
...
Registrant Email:zchesser@gmu.edu
Admin ID:CR43106270
Admin Name:Zachary Chesser
Admin Street1:13017 bathgate way
...
Admin City:Bristow
Admin State/Province:Virginia
Admin Postal Code:20136
Admin Country:US
Admin Phone:+1.7036009926
...
Admin Email:zchesser@gmu.edu
Tech ID:CR43106269
Tech Name:Zachary Chesser
Tech Street1:13017 bathgate way
...
Tech City:Bristow
Tech State/Province:Virginia
Tech Postal Code:20136
Tech Country:US
Tech Phone:+1.7036009926
...
Tech Email:zchesser@gmu.edu
Name Server:NS1.WORDPRESS.COM
Name Server:NS2.WORDPRESS.COM
The comment by Shahiq is a good one.
He, as a Muslim, is patting himself on the back for being gracious about respecting Jesus. How much graciousness to another religion does it show when you respect a prophet shared by your religion and the other religion. The test is if you respect a religious figure that the other religions holds but which your religion does not. Muslims fail that test horribly.
Thanks for the email address Eastview. If this is indeed Zachary's email address, I suggest we all email him pictures of all the cartoons of the pedophile Muhammad. My favorite is that of the bomb on his head as a turban---who knows, maybe if he gets enough Zachary's head will explode into reason.
Interested!!!
Great to see you again; hope you're well. Thanks for mentioning that; it seems like ancient history now. But the more things change...
The bear suit was PEFECT. Who could forget this gem from 2007...
"Thousands of Islamic fanatics wielding knives demand jailed teddy bear teacher is executed"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-497490/Thousands-Islamic-fanatics-wielding-knives-demand-jailed-teddy-bear-teacher-executed.html
Looks like I am definitely blacklisted by CNN. My last (and final) attempt just answered Shahiq and replied back with an analogous question which, unlike his question, makes sense. I guess that replying in-kind is too inflammatory for a family outfit like CNN.
I love South Park! It's brilliant! And soooo funny!
I watched this episode the other night - ha-ha! The goofy bear suit they put Mohammed in! It's hilarious! LOL! So right!
Now, the Barbaric Mohammedans have issued death threats against Parker and Stone. You pitiful, pathetic, disgusting, revolting, repellent, evil, Muslims. You're evil. Your "god" is satan.
Without using the "eff" word - Go _ Yourselves, Barbarians.
Defame Mohammed! Defame allah! They DESERVE to be defamed! Just as Hitler and Nazism DESERVE to be defamed!
"A Muslim who follows his religion, by any other name, still stinks to high heaven and is not worthy to live in civilization. Sorry Ibby. Roll that up in your prayer rug and kneel on it." - IsabellatheCrusader
Exactly. Got that, doug hoopster? You convert - not "revert" - CONVERT. There is no "revert" - LOL! LOL! LOL! You Muslims are pathetic humans. Utterly pathetic.
Forget about insulting muhammad ...
What an insult to the cute lil' bear!
Bravo "South Park!"
Eh, pathetic convert Loser doug hoopster??!
Bravo "South Park!" Down with pathetic islam, pathetic Warlord Mo, and the pathetic Hate Book "Mein Qurampf."
UPDATE:
Sorry to blab so much here. I won't comment any more in this blog post (unless somebody asks me something).
I just wanted to say that CNN finally approved my 2nd post.
Unfortunately, it's likely that nobody will ever read it, since they approved about 40 intervening posts before they approved mine. Maybe next week they'll approve my original post (which should be #6 in the blog).
The posting on Revolutionmuslim.com says: "We have to warn Matt and Trey that what they are doing is stupid and they will probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show. This is not a threat, but a warning of the reality of what will likely happen to them."
If this had been posted exactly the same, word for word, on JW or Atlas Shrugs or a number of other blogs, then the Mohammedans would be screaming in protest that it was bigotry and Islamophobia trying to portray all Mohammedans as hot-headed and violent.
"Forget about insulting Muhammad ...
What an insult to the cute li'l bear!"
lol! Right on, champ!
Here's what I wrote on CNN's comment section.
April 19th, 2010
5:14 pm ET
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Er, it's a CARTOON people, and a COMEDY show, lol.
South Park makes fun of everything and everyone. Live with it.
Anyone else notice it's always the same group calling for "death" whenever they feel they've been offended?
Please.
Posted by: gymgal
Let's see if they post it.
You're not alone. I gave up on CNN years ago when they wouldn't post criticism (all true) of Islam. Now, I find Foxnews and TheFoxNation doing the same since a prince of Saudi Arabia bought a 25% interest in Murdoch's company. Just try using the words "Islamic" or "jihad," and definitely those words together and see if it makes the cut. FoxNews, like Obama, has bowed to Saudi Arabia.
"You're not alone. I gave up on CNN years ago"
I wouldn't waste my time trying to comment on that PC pos.
Wait, let me get this straight:
"Help Us Remove This Filth," written by Muslims?
NEWSFLASH - YOU are the "Filth," Muslims. YOU. YOU and Islam.
Bravo "South Park" and it's creators Parker and Stone!
"Exeunt pursued by a bear?"
Interested, Muslims don't read Shakespeare.
The "Mein Qurampf" is their only reading material. For those few who can actually read.
I have dealt back and forth over there with a few issues but won't anymore. There are "resident" muslim apologists who circle the comments board, awaiting any sign of criticism so they can descend and attack. So sensitive are they that, one time, when I pointed out to a clueless poster that Iran is an Islamic Theocracy -- a totalitarian system -- I was severly taken to task for being an "Islamophobic bigot."
Right, I never understood that either.
"For consider him that endured such contradiction of sinners against himself, lest ye be wearied and faint in your minds." (Hebrews 12:3)
Choke on bacon fat, Zackie Chesser--or, at least, go to jail.
The makers of South park and radical Muslims richly deserve each other. South Park's portrayals of Jesus Christ as a miserable pansy are utterly blasphemous and offensive. I would not only not shed a tear if the show went off the air, but I would cheer. If I do not send the producers death threats or letter bombs, it's because I plead the Sixth Commandment (Exodus 20 or Deuteronomy 5, for those cultured despisers who are ashamed to admit that a mixed-breed Redneck Fundie knows more about his religion than they do)and texts such as the one quoted above.
Unfortunately, our media, political, and legal elites who worked so hard to live down Ruggles v. New York (1811) and open the floodgates of blasphemy against anything Christian
thought they'd have the undying gratitude of the Third World if they accommodated Islam to the nth degree. In so doing, they are maaking things doubly miserable for those of us who believe that salvation came in Jesus Christ. But if I am louder in wanting Zach Chesser locked up than I am for wanting South Park to lose money, it's only because I understand that our media/political/legal elites who fostered an atmosphere in which South Park is anything but disgusting are also gutless, spineless wonders who will cringe and plead pitifully for mercy if radical Muslims only glower at them.
How absolutely right you are, F-F-F.
Now you know why my last post sounds so bitter--God forgive me.
Check out what our opposites make of all this:
http://forums.islamicawakening.com/f18/south-park-plans-depict-prophet-muhammad-34763/
Not for the faint hearted! Beware!
Where the hell to start...
Isabella, LOL: "Roll that up in your prayer rug and kneel on it."
Does Muhammed sh** in the woods?
Revolutionmuslim.com has posted an outright death threat against Trey and Stone. Why the hell aren't they under arrest?
How would Americans feel if Trey and Stone made fun of Jesus? Have these muslimorons even seen this episode -- or ANY South Park episodes? Have Trey and Stone been threatened with death by outraged Christians, Jews, Mormons, Hindus, or followers of Sea Man?
OK, maybe Scientologists, but they threaten everybody.
Question: Will hanging a miniature stuffed bear from my rear view mirror now be considered a "hate crime"? And does anybody know where I can find an itty bitty stuffed teddy bear?
Here is the insane irony regarding this incident.
The 1st time South Park had a show with the Prophet Muhammed in it, it had nothing to do with Islam directly. The episode was about the leaders of the world religions including the Prophet Muhammed, Jesus, Krishna, Buddah and Seaman (a running joke) belonging to a group called "The Super Best Friends."
They actually had a physical character for the Prophet Muhammed and not a single Muslim organization in the world complained about it because it aired on July 2001- BEFORE 9/11 !
The 2nd episode with the Prophet Muhammed was right after the whole Danish cartoon incident and the episode literally dealt with free speech regarding showing the Prophet Muhammed in an episode of Family Guy. Ironically, the final scene of that episode had the Prophet Muhammed giving a helmet to Peter from Family Guy but Comedy Central REFUSED to air the episode.
Now, this latest episode is about celebrities wanting to get the power of the Prophet Muhammed because it seems he is the one person who South Park isn't allowed to make fun of.
OH THE IRONY, SWEET IRONY !
"Re: South Park Plans to Depict Prophet Muhammad
Someone just needs to remind them about Van Gogh."
-----------------------
Have we heard this kind of Supremacist attitude before?
"Someone just needs to remind them about 9/11."
"Someone just needs to remind them about the U.S.S. Cole."
"Someone just needs to remind them about Fort Hood."
"Someone just needs to remind them about 7/7."
Our would-be "superiors" wish to "remind us" about a lot of things, don't they?
NorseCrusader,
I couldn't remain there very long. I was starting to break out in hives.
"Does Muhammed sh** in the woods?"
LOL!!! Good one. (Except there aren't any "woods" in Arabia. How about a stand of date palms, instead?)
The entry on Revolutionmuslim.com goes on to advise readers:
"You can contact them [the makers of South Park], or pay Comedy Central or their own company a visit at these addresses ..." before listing Comedy Central's New York address, and the Los Angeles, California, address of Parker and Sloane's production company. -- from the story
OK douchebag, how about this? (summarizing from an earlier post)
Abu Talhah al Amrikee's real name is Zachary Chesser. "You can contact him or pay him a visit" using the following info:
Zachary Chesser
13017 Bathgate Way
Bristow, VA 20136
Phone: (703)600-9926
Email: zchesser@gmu.edu
I would have picked a different animal suit for mohammed to wear. Guess?!?! hahaha
I was number 11 when I posted my blog and it still hasnt been approved. I posted a second one seeing that everyone was lashing out at Islam. I put the link to this site there and that blog isnt even in the now 216 blogs, not even being moderated.
Maybe I'll try again.
If anyone were to contact this guy, could he come back with harassment allegations? Anyone know the law on this?
I'm thinking CNN isnt likeing the link to this site.
The world has a huge problem on its hands. We've got a religion with more than a billion followers which was founded by a control freak and which has been perpetuated by control freaks. I mean you can't make this stuff up-------say the wrong words about Mohammed or Islam and we will kill you. We're talking terminal adolescence here. Lethal hissy fits.
Islam is sick. Deeply sick. I have no time anymore for anyone who thinks it can be reformed or that there is a good Islam somewhere beneath all the nonsense. Islam is destructive. It's childish. It's pathetic. And Mohammed was a terrrible, horrible man. All this rot must go (and it never will unless millions upon millions of Muslims realize that they've been had). Islam is one of the greatest mistakes in man's history. Maybe the greatest. The first step is to read the entire Islamic world the riot act. Not there yet. Not even close. For now, South Park must lead the way. The elites remain clueless and timid. Still drifting.
Muslims don't like images of Mohammed. But they love images of the Name of Allah. Just so happens that as well as images created by the Zionist conspiracy against all Muslims we also have images of the Name of Allah available. Below are images created by Muslims in calligraphy. I tell you, they are just about perfect. But if Muslims get offended for some reason, let it be known that I didn't post those images. No, sirree, they would be the obvious work of my neighbour downstairs, he being the nasty little guy who pounds on the ceiling whenever I have a loud party at all hours of the night. I'm so devious that I am actually the guy downstairs. Take out your Islamically inspired hostilities on him, and then I'll feel REALLY bad. Till then, perfect pictures of "More things that look like Allah."
http://nodhimmitude.blogspot.com/2009/04/more-things-that-look-like-allah.html
It gets even more graphic Eleanor.
Asalamu Alaikum, Our Shaykhs, may Allah reward and Protect them have given us from Qur’an and Sunnah the best actions to take and finish off the like of these two kafirs. So the options we have to deal with these two kafirs and anyone who follow them in their blasphemous actions are:
1. Killing and annihilating them either by gunning them down, bombing them, or striking their necks with swords or knives
2. Crucifying them, i.e. nailing them on a tree or a pole, and let them die a slow excruciating death
3. Cutting off from opposite sides their hands and feet with axes, swords or guns, and let them wander off until death comes to them.
4. Exiling them from the land May Allah Azza wa Jall destroy and punish them in this world and in the everlasting painful punishment in the Fire of Hell
I'm sorry, I have a twisted sense of humour. I found all of that hilarious!
I have no idea. As you can see, I'm merely echoing the approach this scumbag used and don't urge any particular course of action. The contact information is publicly available from the Whois database (which, BTW, can be used to find contact information on quite a large number of other sleazebags like this who operate Internet sites, should anyone be interested).
I'm with you 100% on that! Meanwhile, regular, everyday Americans (westerners) are still having trouble "seeing" what is really happening. In so many cases, they even stoop so low as to "defend" this abomination and all of its hideous, destructive tentacles.
They remain clueless that what they are defending is, in fact, determined to destroy life as they know it. They "believe" they are just defending someone's right to "religious freedom," and they actually feel good about "standing up for" the poor, oppressed minority.
So frustrating.
Spoiled-rotten, misinformed, idealistic moonbats who cannot see the "forest for the Peace."
I have one in my family. That does not make for happy family get-togethers.
No DefenderOfIslam, know peace,
Know DefenderOfIslam, no hope.
A follow-up about using Whois, for those who might wonder: I took the liberty of running a Whois lookup on jihadwatch.org, and was happy to see that the registration name is listed as "private" and the site is hosted by a proxy server. This means that Robert doesn't have to worry about having his Secure Locationville address being discovered. Too bad Chesser wasn't bright enough to think of this before he spouted off with his Islamomurderous rhetoric. Typical of Muslim Cargo-Cult retards playing around with Infidel technology they don't understand. Hopefully the Feds are already on this case.
The makers of South park and radical Muslims richly deserve each other. South Park's portrayals of Jesus Christ as a miserable pansy are utterly blasphemous and offensive.
I'm with Kepha on this one.
This Bear Mohammed was only the second time a depiction of Mohammed made it on air -- as Marisol writes:
"Interestingly, there have been at least two prior depections of Muhammad on South Park -- one in 2001 (shown here, on the right), and another in 2006 that didn't make it to air, but can be found online."
So, Matt and Trey have seen fit to take jabs at Mohammed three times in all the years they've been churning out South Park. (And all other jabs against Islam have always been couched as jabs against Osama bin Laden and "terrorists".) Compare that to the literally hundreds of far, far more offensive satires and mockeries they've dished out on their show against not only Jesus Christ, but also Moses, Christians, Catholics, Mary, the Pope, and God Himself.
You guys really are desperate for crumbs if you laud Matt and Trey for anything in this regard. Frankly, I feel that the reality of a death threat may finally puncture the bubble those snotnoses have been lucky enough to live in, in a society where they can mercilessly, repeatedly, for years attack all things Christian with utter impunity and not a shred of concern for their lives.
From people like them, as well as from comedians like Bill Maher (with his Religulous film that passes lightly over Islam and throttles Christianity) and Lewis Black (whose book Me of Little Faith does pretty much the same), not to mention the creators of The Simpsons, all the talk show hosts and writers, Larry David -- the list goes on and on -- the only thing that can save them in my estimation is if they telegraph to us somehow -- perhaps through elliptical language, a frightened look in the eyes, furtive hand gestures, or passing a note to us out of view of the PC MC guards -- that the only reason they are being so wildly asymmetrical in their satire is because they are afraid.
I've written a little note but have not sent it. It goes:
Dear Mr. XXXXXXXXXX
Do you think that it's appropriate, in the United States of America, to threaten the murder of, or to attempt to incite the murder of, U.S. citizens based upon (your) charges of blasphemy of your religion? Do you understand that your intentions contravene the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights, and everything they stand for in regards to individual liberties and rights for its citizes? Is this your version of the "American" way? I respectfully remind you that we do not live in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, nor do we live in the Islamic Republic of Iran, or any other such Islamic place where depictions of your so-call prophet are punishable by death.
I encourage you to get a map and double check your current location on it. And speaking of which, just for confirmation of information available in published reports, is your current address:
(Address)
and is your telephone # (number)
?
Thank you in advance for checking out that map and for reviewing the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights. But, I'm certain that you would have quickly reviewed these documents anyway, and without prompting, considering the heinous nature of the crimes you are attempting to perpetrate, either by yourself, or as part of a conspiracy.
Sincerely,
Eleanor (xxxxxxx)
As a Muslim, I am continually amazed at the selective interpretation used by some other Muslims. In this case, death threats against someone who is not Muslim for depicting prophet Muhammad (sallahu aleyhi wa sallem) but not encouraging the same sort of action for depictions of Jesus (sallahu aleyhi wa sallem) or Moses (sallahu aleyhi wa sallem). None of these prophets are to be insulted by the Muslims and none should be depicted because of the very real problem that iconography creates in the form of worship for mere men.
The Muslims were forbidden this to keep them from worshiping the prophets as they may be the best of men but are also incapable of interceding on our behalf. I don't see that as being part of the issue here with Matt and Trey's depiction of the prophets. It is insulting, I think we should certainly speak out against it the same as we should speak out against disrespect for other belief systems. Does it merit a death penalty? No, these men did not accept Islam and do not live under our law.
A question though for the guardians of free speech here on jihadwatch? In some places in Europe, it is forbidden to engage in some forms of revisionism such as Holocaust denial. The reasoning is sound, it has the potential for causing violence against the Jewish people. Should such protections also be used for religions? There is a very real danger to some religious communities from those hostile to their belief systems and vice versa there is a very real danger that fundamentalists will take matters into their own hands. (Hutaree militia? Irgun? Al Qaeda?)
"Typical of Muslim Cargo-Cult retards playing around with Infidel technology they don't understand."
-------------------
"Cargo-Cult retards!"
LOVE IT!!!!
Now I've had my good laugh for the day!
It's typical for news site comments to automatically or manually prohibit links of all sorts. I can't fault them for that, because there is a considerable risk of competitors siphoning off user base, and for directing to spam and fraud sites. If you read the fine print about their comment policy, you'll probably see that they prohibit use of URLs.
It is possible to be more selective about allowing/prohibiting URLs, but that entails considerable risks and costs that are just avoided by a rigorous no-URL policy.
Gerbil Tea sez:
" No, these men did not accept Islam and do not live under our law."
Non Muslims not accepting Islam has never stopped Muslims from forcing Islamic law upon the Non Muslims....
I just tried to look at their site and ended up with this:
Internal Server Error
The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.
Please contact the server administrator, webmaster@revolutionmuslim.com and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error.
More information about this error may be available in the server error log.
Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.
My sympathy is with bears everywhere,
"Should such protections also be used for religions? There is a very real danger to some religious communities from those hostile to their belief systems and vice versa there is a very real danger that fundamentalists will take matters into their own hands. (Hutaree militia? Irgun? Al Qaeda?)"
---------------------
Hutaree militia?! You mean all nine of them? Well, protecting them, or protecting against them, might well be just too far beyond our capabilities and resources...LOL
Seriously, while I think they are despicable, I'm sorry but I just refuse to place that tiny of a nothing, pathetic little "militia," that in no way represents mainstream Christianity, in the same thought or discussion as Al Qaeda, which does reflect the teachings of mainstream Islam.
Protection for all religions? No, too problematic. Some don't need it, some don't want it, but there is one that REALLY DOES want it, isn't there? Which one? Why, the one that's a religion/government/complete social system all-in-one!
And they want to be invincible, and think they will be.
But we have their number.
Gerbil, your attempt at deflection falls flat. The topic is murder sanctioned by Islam for "insults" that, while they might warrant disapproval, in no civilized country do they warrant death. DEATH! Islam is the only religion that calls for this, and your attempts at moral equivalence by citing laws against holocaust denial and others who you speculate might "take matters into their own hands" is pathetic. We don't have to speculate about Islam. Your attitude about this, and that of your whole religion, goes so far beyond "insulting" that there aren't words to describe it. If the same metric used by Islam to define what constitutes a capital crime, calibrated using "insult" as a fiducial, were to be used to judge Islam, then the entire religion stands condemned.
The West is still trying to find the appropriate response to what our forebears instinctively knew for more than a thousand years, but which are only dimly remembered now. But a few more 9/11s or 7/7s will help jiggle those memories. When they come back it will likely be with a rush, and you probably won't like the results.
Can revolutionmuslim.com point to where in the Koran it says that images of the thieving, lying, raping,deranged ancient desert nomad are forbidden?
exsgtbrown, how familiar are you with Islamic law as it pertains to the dangers of shirk (associating partners with God)? There is a great deal of debate among the scholars as to what constitutes shirk. For example, there is an opinion that games such as chess are haram because they have miniature pieces that resemble people and animals. The supposed danger is that men will try to worship these pieces the same as any other kind of "statue". This is a minority opinion and very few of us follow it, but it's out there.
There's also the opinion that pictures are shirk. Have you been to an Islamic country recently? The vast majority have magazines, advertisements etc. Very few people accept this minority opinion.
So too is it a minority opinion that we can apply a death penalty to non Muslims engaged in shirk or what outwardly may appear to be shirk. We certainly do not presently carry out a death penalty for the Ahmadiyya, Baha'i or the Nation of Islam despite all three of these organizations having members who may identify as Muslim yet are all likely guilty of shirk. There may be Muslims who carry out extrajudicial "justice" and may engage in harassment or terrorism of these groups but do they represent the mainstream opinion of Muslims or the scholars?
Matt and Trey aren't Muslim and while insh'Allah I pray that one day they'll see the light (not holding my breath here) I don't expect them to live as Muslims do. Much the same as an observant Jew might expect a non Jew to follow the Noahide commandments, I expect that they should follow the most basic tenets of civilized humanity and that's about it.
Eastview, I would like to call to your attention numerous attempts by various Christian sects (mostly the Catholic church but others as well!) who have engaged in purges of people deemed heretics by the establishment. The Albigensian Crusade is probably the worst of these, why did the Cathars deserve to be exterminated and what scriptural basis did the Church use? Was it purely the result of a land grab or is there a deep seated problem with Christianity that causes it to fracture and accuse the other sects of not being "the real deal"?
This sort of thing doesn't happen often in Christianity today, maybe it has evolved a bit. Perhaps it has been tempered by the pluralist societies that sprung up within the borders of Christendom. Maybe even Robert and others are right when they say that Christianity may have caused this change! Regardless, we can not ignore the possibility that fanatical devotees of Christianity will do what fanatics do best given the right circumstances/environment.
The problem here is not uniquely Islamic, it's a problem with fanatics in general.
GerbilTea, for all I know you really are a person of good will, and I appreciate your shock at the death threats. And, yes, in my various travels I've gotten kindly treatment at Muslim hands myself, so I'm not one to welcome a global conflagration of civilizations.
But, we really have to overturn lots of stones (reference to old American saying intentional) to find people like the Hutaree Militia--yes, to other posters, all nine of them. Yet Islam everywhere from Ningxia to Nigeria, Mindanao to Mauretania, and Kama River to the Comorro Islands seems to be bursting at the seams with such people--even in London and New York.
Speaking as a Christian--and I suppose you are aware that not everyone here is a Christian--I live with these texts:
For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strongholds (I Corinthians 10:4)
If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men (Romans 12:12)
Thou hast pity on the gourd, for which thou hast not labored, neither madest it grow; which came up in a night and perished in a night: And should not I [God--YHWH]spare Nineveh, that great city, wherein are more than sixscore thousand persons that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand; and also much cattle? (Jonah 4:10-11)
Perhaps the last requires a lot more familiarity with the Old Testament in order to catch all of its irenicist force.
Most of my life I have seen Christian consciences poked and irritated with the Bible, and I see a private school, homeless shelter, counseling center, or some other amelioration of human suffering follow; and people like the Hutarees [?] shock me, and shock many more Christians, including those like me who believe that there actually is such a thing as a just war and right of rebellion as well as those of a totally pacifistic bent. I look back in history and see much of the same; with every Urban II who preached full indulgence for Crusading, matched by two or three William Tyndale's who say that there is no Scriptural warrant for such a thing (cf. Tyndale's _Concerning the Obedience of a Christian_). Yet in Islam, it seems (of course, to an outsider), that someone uses the Qu'ran and Hadith to prick a Muslim conscience, someone or something blows up. I'd like to believe better of Islam, but as of now, cannot.
It won't work, Gerbil. Splitting the hairs of the various kinds of "shirk" is a pastime that only those who are besotted by Islam or the views of its jurists care about, exceptions being historians and those who, in the spirit of Sun Tzu, study Islam in self defense, which would include many people here. It's not that we're unfamiliar with these concepts, as perhaps you might like to believe, but rather that we resolutely reject the authority of the Qur'an, the hadith, and the sira as being superior to the laws that have evolved since Muhammad's time. Actually, we believe that what Muhammad brought into the world was a giant step backward in terms of both civilization and religion, his statements and those of his followers to the contrary notwithstanding. Its resurgence in the world is a distraction that most of us would rather not have to deal with, but if we must, we will.
Eleanor, I agree 100% that the Hutaree milita is a speck. I pointed them out because on this blog there is an attitude that Christians NEVER engage in terrorism which isn't really true. These people are the most recent example and are on everyone's mind at the moment. What they represent though is a capacity in Christianity to hold people who are fanatics devoted to this concept of "the End Times". The Hutaree supposedly wanted to hasten onto "the End Times" and they are not alone among militia groups with this doctrine.
Is their idea supported by scripture? I don't believe so, but so much of Revelations is such a blur that I wouldn't doubt that they are able to twist some of it to their liking. Given the right conditions and circumstances Christians and any other religion can give rise to fanatics who believe the ends justify the means.
We see this problem most dramatically in Islam today. Let me blunt with all of you: there is a problem with Islam today. I don't know if it has always been there or a product of recent events. What I do know is that we Muslims are out there protesting it but you aren't necessarily seeing it.
The problem is uniquely Islamic and you're clueless and here's why (you'd think by now everyone would know this but they don't----like you): When Christians performed badly in centuries past they did so IN SPITE OF their religion and not because of it. When Muslims go postal they do so PRECISELY because their rotten holy book, the Hadith and Islamic schools of theology say it's OK to wage war on the unbeliever or to kill him if he insults Mohammed or Islam. Do you finally get this? If not, get it.
Christianity's theological blueprint is harmless. Islam's theological blueprint is not. This ain't rocket science. The difference could not be greater. Get it? As for "fanatical devotees of Christianity" doing heinous things, yeah, we see that all the time-------Presbyterian suicide bombers, Methodists sawing off heads, Catholics taking hostages, Lutherans threatening to kill those who insult Martin Luther, etc. So tired of this tu quoque nonsense spouted by rubes like you. Done here.
GerbilTea wrote:
"A question though for the guardians of free speech here on jihadwatch? In some places in Europe, it is forbidden to engage in some forms of revisionism such as Holocaust denial."
Well, Holocaust denial, not actually a factually logical denial at all, but rather an affirmation of the merits of the Holocaust itself, does not directly promote another Holocaust, although an argument to the peripheral affects in attitudes and ultimately future actions aginst Jews, can certainly be made.
Regarding the similarity in the "dangers" of iconic depiction of Muhammad, like other originally Judaic prophets like Moses and originally exclusive Christian prophets, like Jesus, GerbilTea wrote:
"None of these prophets are to be insulted by the Muslims and none should be depicted because of the very real problem that iconography creates in the form of worship for mere men."
And yet, for all this blather and obfuscation by GerbilTea, there has never been an outrage by Muslims by the visual iconic representations of the "Islamic" prophets Moses or Jesus. There's the rub.
The truth, which GerbilTea is unsuccessfully trying to hide, is that in Islam...Muhammad's Islam, Moses and Jesus are just subordinate, plagarized, by-line "prophets" in the historical aggrandizement of the child-raping, murdering, pillaging warlord, Muhammad, the founder of Islam, futilely being passed off through the centuries as a slave to a fictional deity known as Allah.
One would logically assume that the free speech exercised in the "Christ-in a-jar-of-piss" exhibit, would have exorcised all Muslims, but ironicly, nary a peep was heard from a billion Muslims worldwide, with the weak assertion by GerbilTea here, aside.
The conclusion?
Islam is a lie. Muslims are altogether full of you know what, and will stop at nothing, ever, to try to perpetuate this grand deception that Islam is anything but a "religion of peace", minus the obvious body count of course, and that Moses and Jesus were anything but obvious tools for manipulation in Muhammad's attempted re-write of religious history.
GerbilTea's latest relevant example, the Hutaree, was especially amusing, yet most egregious, though absolutely expected in the same breath. The only thing missing is the NPR comparison by Jenkins of the violence "inherent" in the Bible as opposed to the Qur'an.
Oh, that and a shout out to another regularly used singular point of taqqiya, Timothy McVeigh, especially on the eve of the anniversary of the Oklahoma bombing of a federal building, as "another" example of "Christian" extremism.
Nice try though.
GerbilTea responds:
"exsgtbrown, how familiar are you with Islamic law as it pertains to the dangers of shirk (associating partners with God)?"
This thread isn't about Shirk (at least not in the simplistic way you seem to be saying: see below). It's about Blasphemy -- under the category of Hudud in Islamic law. Over 70% of Muslims in Pakistan support death penalty for blasphemy. Similar percentages are likely in all other Muslim countries.
"Matt and Trey aren't Muslim and ... I don't expect them to live as Muslims do."
What you expect, and what Islamic law expects, are two different things. The realm in which Matt and Trey live is the Dar-al-Harb -- the Realm of War between Muslims and non-Muslims, a war caused by the refusal of Unbelievers in that realm to accept the supremacy of Islam. Muslim regimes from the beginning and throughout history have executed Unbelievers for the crime of blasphemy. In a non-Islamic country, Muslims simply have to take it upon themselves to carry out the sentence, since the laws of a non-Islamic land are not only contemptible to the Muslim, they themselves constitute Shirk, for they invest divine authority of making laws (which Muslims believe only should derive from Allah) in other powers (human beings, in modern democracy).
In this overall context, obviously, there is plenty of right for Muslims to accuse them of blasphemy and to execute the sentence.
Wellington, a couple of things to note here.
1.) Sure! We don't presently see Methodists etc sawing off heads. The whole point of my argument is that there's no guarantees that such things will NOT happen. It's not as if the Jonestown massacre, Ku Klux Klan or militia end times weirdos are from some distant past. The KKK masquerades as being a Protestant organization while it holds no legitimate scriptural backing. They are still the largest terrorist organization on U.S. soil and they are still comprised entirely of Christians.
Just because the methods may differ or because the countries Christianity is the chief faith in are more stable does not mean that Christianity has someone been inoculated against violence.
2.) In spite of their religion? Here we have a faith with such gems as "do not suffer a witch to live" and orders from a deity to slay a people "every man, woman, child and beast of burden" and you're telling me that Islam is somehow uniquely bad? Just a few months ago, Benjamin Netanyahu used the latter while discussing Iran at Auschwitz. At the site of a genocide he commented from a Biblical genocide, encouraged by God against the Amalekites and described Iran as a new Amalek. You seriously want the Muslims or anyone else to believe that Christianity and Judaism can not be interpreted to go off the deep end? Really?
3.) Tu quoque is a logical fallacy if someone points something out but they have the same exact problem. So... you're guilty of tu quoque. Until you can remove 1 Samuel, Exodus (Moses encouraging child rape) and other gems you really don't have a case for unique scriptural stances in Islam.
With respect, GerbilTea, the Crusades ended more than 700 years ago, and you're cherry picking to find one to make your point. Yes, fanatics are dangerous, and we've certainly had our share of these in the history of Christianity. But they've largely been tamed. Where are the taming forces in Islam, where widespread fanaticism continues to rage today?
When discussing most things, it's useful to establish a metric to be able to measure the relative importance of things. Take "fanatic" as an example to focus on. But first let's consider an analogy, using the world "dollar." You wouldn't say that a dollar in your pocket was the same as a million dollars in the bank, would you, merely because they are both denominated in dollars? Of course not. If your job is to manage finances, then you focus on the million dollars in the bank, not the single dollar in your pocket.
OK, now consider "fanatic." Your statement equating fanaticism in Christianity and in Islam exhibits the same sort of logical weakness as a statement equating a dollar in your pocket to a million dollars in the bank. The world doesn't have to worry about Christian fanaticism, which if it exists at all is at the dollar-in-your-pocket level. But it very much has to worry about Islamic fanaticism, which is at the million-dollars-in-the-bank level, so this is what requires the attention.
Eastview: What a fantastic analogy! I've never heard that one before, but it is so apt. I hope you won't mind if it gets "borrowed" occasionally?
I think I disagree with the assessment made by a couple people here that commenting at cnn.com is useless. Though they don't accept all of our comments, I think the accepted portion of our comments have resulted in an important contribution. Thousands of people will read about the South Park incident there, and will see that there are many people who see it as evidence of a general Islamic threat. That impression would probably not be as strong if we had taken the easy path and discussed it just among ourselves here.
Gerbil Tea asks:
"
There may be Muslims who carry out extrajudicial "justice" and may engage in harassment or terrorism of these groups but do they represent the mainstream opinion of Muslims or the scholars?:
Will Gerbil Tea kindly produce Islamic jurists or Islamic scholars who argue that Muslims should not wage war against unbelievers -- as unbelievers -- under any circumstances, but should live with them as equals not just on a temporary basis until they become strong enough to impose Islamic law, but on a permanent basis? I would love to see them.
Eastview, it's definitely fair to say that there's a real problem with Islam today. I think that's the one thing everyone commenting right now can agree upon. Dealing with the world's second largest religion and trying to encourage some reforms is not going to be aided by many of the attitudes we find here today. On this board I have encountered people who claimed to champion free speech and pluralism yet call for the Qur'an to be banned, an end to Muslim immigration and even very rarely the expulsion of the Muslims or (one time only) the murder of Muslims.
The taming forces that you speak of exist but they can only come from within Islam itself, not from outside critics who may raise reasonable objections to Islam but from within our own. What I often find here though is condemnations of Muslims who are trying to do just that. Tariq Ramadan is the best example of this. In most Islamic circles this man is considered to be something of liberal, a major reformer. Here he's concerned a liar and a "taqiyyah artist" (he's not Shi'ite but whatever).
I liked your analogy with the finances but I want to ask you to look at this from the worldview of most Muslims for a moment. Also, I am going to be flamed for this heavily. To most Muslims, the modern state of Israel is engaged in acts of terrorism based on their nationalistic and religious aims. Despite Israel being recognized as a nation by most of the West, Muslims view it as being an occupying power. They don't consider its authority to be legitimate and they think that the stratification of its society, theocratic elements and outright murder of civilians put it on the same level as that of wacked out terrorists. In our worldview, WE are the ones under siege and YOU are the ones financing it. Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, supporting various medieval monarchies and despotisms... we often tend to see the West as being involved in a struggle against us.
When I watch Arab news sources, I see constant coverage of this. This is even from very liberal Arab news that I continually hear about Western aggression that is sanctioned by governments and is either denied by them or given comfortable euphemisms like "collateral damage".
Somewhere in between these two extremes is likely a more accurate picture of what is really going on. What's really going on is fanatics devoted to religion or national identity are causing immense suffering in the world today.
I agree people should, I just became tired of always having to deal, it seemed, with the very same shill every time. It's important that those who really know nothing (and they are, sadly, very numerous) get to see the non-mainstream other-side-of-the argument that they're not exposed to in the MSM.
I agree, naming a cute cuddly teddy bear for an inhuman monster named Muhammad is an outrage and disgusting. In fact naming any animal like a dog or pig after Muhammad would be an insult to these two wonderful animals. If you really want to name an animal Muhammad perhaps a shark or a snake, or a hyena or a Tasmanian devil would represent him more.
I was talking about Christianity, not quotes from the Old Testament, which, by the way, are not a paradigm for action for all time (how many Jews are doing away with witches these days?) The Christian theological blueprint is harmless; the Islamic theological blueprint is not. Christians don't have the same problem as Muslims. You're the one deeply guilty of tu quoque fallacious reasoning. And your positing that Christians MIGHT to awful things is pathetic in the extreme. Muslims DO awful things in the name of their faith and on a daily basis. It really is instructive to see the lengths which apologists for Islam will go to defend what Bertrand Russell observed was the only major faith which is a totalitarian ideology as well as a religion.
Blaine I agree, and I thought the same thing as I read through the comments. They chose not to put mine up (big surprise), but there are an awful lot of them there that espouse our sentiments.
Gerbil Tea...where've ya been? Trolling elsewhere I would guess.
GerbilTea writes:
"Sure! We don't presently see Methodists etc sawing off heads. The whole point of my argument is that there's no guarantees that such things will NOT happen."
Au contraire, there is a reasonable guarantee that Methodists will not start sawing off heads. But the kind of sanity of mind required to appreciate that guarantee is missing in GerbilTea. No amount of persuasion can heal the insane.
"It's not as if the Jonestown massacre, Ku Klux Klan or militia end times weirdos are from some distant past."
Neither Jonestown (which was a radical Leftist cult masquerading as a Christian movement) nor the KKK (which do not reflect the Christianity of the mainstream as listed by Wellington to whom GerbilTea was responding) are pertinent here.
"The KKK ...are still the largest terrorist organization on U.S. soil..."
Wrong. According to the MIPT Terrorism Knowledge Base (as of 2008):
Ku Klux Klan (KKK)
Strength: Less than 500 members
Classification: Racist
Last Attack: Unknown
“According to the Anti-Defamation League, “Today, there is no such thing as the Ku Klux Klan.” (ADL, 338) The modern Klan has fragmented into multiple small, squabbling factions. Young white supremacists consider the Klan to be antiquated and ineffectual. There are three national umbrella groups (Imperial Klans of America, American Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, and Knights of the White Kamelia), but most Klan groups are independent of these national organizations. Some factions of the Klan have tried to broaden their appeal by softening their racist rhetoric with euphemisms and taking part in community service programs like Adopt-A-Highway.”
GerbilTea also wrote:
"The KKK masquerades as being a Protestant organization while it holds no legitimate scriptural backing. They are still the largest terrorist organization on U.S. soil and they are still comprised entirely of Christians."
Also, wrong. The MIPT Terrorism Knowledge Base classifies different terrorist organizations by categories, including "Racist" or "Religious". They classify the KKK as a "Racist" group, not a "Religious" one. The KKK at best have cobbled together a cult based on various different strands of heretical Christian teachings, New Age spiritualism, and weird ideologies.
GerbilTea goes on to worry about ancient history and the Middle Ages. Since we are talking about groups who want to kill us now, in barbaric ways now, these comments by GerbilTea are not pertinent.
gym, sadly I have other duties which prevent me from spending too much on jihadwatch though I am happy to make an appearance now and then. You folks should be happy to have some dissent, otherwise you just have the usual mutual admiration society. Isn't that what this lovely free speech thing is all about?
Hesperado. Fine. We'll just all agree that Methodists belong to the one true uncorrupted faith and they make the best neighbors incapable of holy war. I'd like to convert!
On a more serious note about the KKK, I can accept that they might no longer be the largest terrorist organization in America. At one time, part of their agenda was to terrorize Catholics and Jews but they have probably "softened" on the Papists but still hate the Jews. Maybe at this rate they'll reform to a level on par with the Nation of Islam or other closet racist organizations.
Many of them still adhere to their "Christian Identity" beliefs and these concepts are very popular among "White Nationalists" in general. Here's a group of people so confused that they have been able to turn Christianity upside down and claim that Jesus wasn't even a Hebrew. They're a fringe group, but I make the same claim of al Qaeda. Do you see where I am coming from here?
bin Laden no more so speaks for Islam than David Duke speaks for Christianity.
Does anyone know who these guys are and where they are located?
"jewdog", the proprietor of revolutionmuslim is yusuf al-khattab who lives partially in New York and partially in Morocco. Planning to pay him a visit?
GerbilTea : The problem here is not uniquely Islamic, it's a problem with fanatics in general.
Here, allow me : The problem here is not uniquely Islamic, it's a problem with religion in general.
There, fixed it.
"Maybe at this rate they'll reform to a level on par with the Nation of Islam or other closet racist organizations."
The Nation of Islam is way more racist than the clan. Any Org that has the word Islam in it refers back to the root of the problem, the Qur'an.
"Here's a group of people so confused that they have been able to turn Christianity upside down and claim that Jesus wasn't even a Hebrew."
They sound just like Moslems to me. Palistinian Jesus anyone?
"bin Laden no more so speaks for Islam than David Duke speaks for Christianity."
Right, Osama Bin Luden,(heh) David Duke, they both pale in compairison to Islams spoksman.
The original clansman... Mohammed.
"the proprietor of revolutionmuslim is yusuf al-khattab who lives partially in New York and partially in Morocco."
You make him sound like a businessman.
Sounds like someone has a little extra time to "hang out" on the rev-muslem site. *wink*
GerbilTea,
You sound a bit self-satisfied.
I gather that many Muslims, since they obey the Islamic rule of reciting the Qur'an only in Arabic, don't always know very much about what the Qur'an actually says. Four-fifths of the world's Muslims don't speak Arabic, and even Arabs, so I'm told, have trouble understanding the archaic Arabic of the Qur'an. So I don't entirely blame all Muslims for the contents of their faith. But as time goes by, Muslims become more and more responsible for knowing what they are supporting.
And what I wonder, GerbilTea, is why you are part of a religion whose founder repeatedly called for the death of apostates? Even now, all the schools of Islamic law support death for apostates, precisely because Muhammad called for it.
For example, in Sahih Bukhari, the most canonical of hadith collections, Muhammad said, "Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him."
What amazes me, GerbilTea, is how you have the audacity to come here and apparently think you are going to impress us merely because you have a moderate tone. How can you follow a religion like this:
QUR'AN CHAPTER 9, VERSE 123, FIGHT AND BE HARSH:
MUHAMMAD OBEYS ALLAH'S COMMAND TO BE HARSH:
From page 515 of THE EARLIEST MUSLIM BIOGRAPHY OF MUHAMMAD, here is HOW MUHAMMAD ORDERED THE TORTURE AND BEHEADING OF A MAN IN ORDER TO GET THE MAN'S TREASURE:
How can you follow a torturer as your chief role model and expect to get any respect here, GerbilTea?
You pretend, GerbilTea, and lie to yourself or to us, that Islamic law is not supposed to be imposed on non-Muslims. But I'll quote you your own core texts:
In Sahih Bukhari, the most canonical hadith collection, Muhammad said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah."
In other words, Muhammad says here that if you are non-Muslim, your right to life will not be sacred to Muslims, nor your right to property.
Do you really expect people here to be thankful for your enlightened outlook on religion, GerbilTea? When you follow Muhammad, who says that the earth belongs to him:
How will Muhammad do such things? He says with terror:
MUHAMMAD SAYS HE HAS BEEN MADE VICTORIOUS WITH TERROR:
GerbilTea, how can you justify being part of a religion founded by a man like Muhammad? How can you show up here without total shame about what you support? Bist du verrückt? What about this?
BEHEADING AND TERROR IN THE QUR'AN
Qur'an Chapter 8, Verse 12 (Shakir)
When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.
GerbilTea, to me you sound a bit like the "enlightened slave owner" who wants his slaves to like him, wants to show what a good, enlightened massa he is, and doesn't realize the slaves just want to get off your damn plantation and tell you to go to hell, and if you get in our way, cut you down so we can be free of your despotism and phony kindness. We just don't like slavemasters, and we don't give a damn how "moderate" and "nice" you are.
And then, GerbilTea, there is Qur'an Chapter 9, Verse 29:
"...with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." These lines and that whole verse are just one part of the basis, in core Islamic texts, for the subjection of non-Muslims as second-class citizens under Islamic law. Have you read Bat Ye'or's Islam and Dhimmitude? No? But why would you. You don't really give a damn, do you? Hey, maybe you can even take one of your pretty dhimmi slaves out back and show her how good a massa you are. After all, Islam's own core texts show that Muhammad took women as slaves from war and used them for sex.
There is really just so much that is disgusting in Islamic texts and in Muhammad's behavior, that I find it astounding you can come here, GerbilTea, and think you might charm someone with your enlightened Islam. Talk about putting lipstick on a pig. I can't take it anymore. With this threat on the South Park guys, I've lost patience.
Ref Blair's failure to get CNN to post comment, let's see how this one does. Note that it's purely factual.....
I don't hold my breath....
Z (#230). "....if the makers of South Park actually committed a crime..." ?? It is not a "crime" under any US law to depict Muhammad. It is only a "crime" to modern (and ignorant, willfully or otherwise) people, who do not know that Muhammad has been depicted down the ages by Muslim and non-Muslim artists alike. In fact, "South Park" itself showed Muhammad in a 2001 episode, with no repercussions, because that was before the Danish Imams beat up on the Danish cartoons.
As to "what would Muhammad do" if he saw "South Park" making fun of him and/or Islam? The answer is, just like "RevolutionIslam.com". Don't you know that Muhammad had a satirical poet Asma bint Marwan put to death because she made fun of him. Asked by the fellow who carried out the murder at Muhammad's request (Umayr b. Adiy al-Khatmi) if there would be any evil consequences the apostle said "Two goats won't butt their heads about her". Read your own history! That's the example of the Prophet: kill those who make fun of you. Didn't you hear Anwar al-Awlaki on the video? He tells the story about the same thing: killing in the name of Allah and of Muhammad of those who make fun of Muhammad, of Allah or of Islam.
That's what we're dealing with here: RevolutionIslam is just being true to the teachings.
Peter F. Hong Kong
Well savaged, traeh! It's the 21st Century and people are STILL taken in by this absolute rubbish.
It would be one thing if were relatively harmless, yet it's not. I can't name a more toxic religion than islam. Anyone? Is there a more vile collection of opportunistically sacrosanct rantings than the quran?
You could always just send him a cute little teeny-tiny fluffy teddy bear. Or a card with a teddy bear on; maybe you can find one of those musical cards, one that plays 'the teddy bears' picnic'.
No threats. No words, even.
Deluge him with cute.
Except that every one of those cute lil' bears will remind him of the South Park episode!
Well argued, traeh.
"In our worldview, WE are the ones under siege and YOU are the ones financing it. Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, supporting various medieval monarchies and despotisms... we often tend to see the West as being involved in a struggle against us."
-----------------
Why is America doing that? Because your attempts to keep the true teachings of Islam from western eyes and minds has been very successful.
They don't understand it, and what happens to logistics and diplomacy and all that when one side fails to understand the other? They make a lot of mistakes. Mistakes in judgement and mistakes in deciding who they should "support" and who they should avoid.
But that's exactly what your "leaders" want. They benefit (and Islam benefits) by the west fumbling around like idiots trying to "win hearts and minds," and also by keeping you so pissed off all the time.
Muslims have this world view because that is what Islam inclucates -- always has. Islam does not, in any way, encourage Muslims to ever "think outside the box," or do critical, real-world (or realpolitikal) analyses of any situation.
It's always just emotion, emotion, emotion. And that emotion is RAGE.
How many times has the "peace process" been scuttled by one Arab "leader" or another, and for what petty reasons?
Would it not have been better to have accepted a state (even if it wasn't what you ultimately wanted) and then worked -- from a position of legitimacy -- toward improving your situation?
Guess not. Guess you like that permanent "refugee" status because you always get such a nice big "pity party" from the unenlightened moonbats of the world who continue to mindlessly support you.
They see you as "victims" and "good guys." My brother is one of them, but he's a moonbat.
We, who have a bit of knowledge about your system, know better.
But I digress. You are victims, but you're the self-perpetuating victims of an ideology that is utterly fascistic and wholly inimical to innovation and modernity.
Just look at the Muslim world -- the west has pumped in trillions of dollars in aid, and what has been done with it?
Why, that aid has largely ended up in the pockets of the crooked monarchies and "despots" you compalin about.
And why is Israel an "occupier?" Are they, really? Are they really your enemy? Why? Because Islam says so, in so many places and so many ways in the Islamic texts it makes ones head spin.
So much hate, from the very beginning with Muhammad. The Jews hold a very special status in Islam, don't they? The most virulent of Allah's hate is reserved for the descendants of the "monkeys and pigs."
They will always be your enemy, no matter what, because they are the enemy of Allah in the Qu'ran. Israel could vanish tommorrow and Muslims all over the world would still be in a state of rage about "the next thing."
And then the next thing. And then the next.
Islam and muslims must grow up and perform some serious, modern, and forward-thinking introspection.
But I'm wasting my breath.
I had a response to traeh's epic and then my browser crashed.
Here's the meat of it.
1.) You make it sound like all of the jurists of all four madhabs are for a death penalty. You can take this up with ibn Tamiyyah and other BIG names who said the exact opposite.
2.) That man was executed because he murdered a man and stole his wealth. He was tortured and beheaded for his crimes. I fail to see how this is remarkably different from other prophets who tortured and executed men.
3.) Nice selective quote of that hadith from Bukhari. You failed to quote the rest of it that enjoins them to live as the Muslims do and the context which is the prophet enjoining his allies to Islam.
4.) Various aya from Surah 9. Fantastic. Here's a question for you, are you a Meccan polytheist? NO?!?!?! Then you have nothing to fear because that surah deals SPECIFICALLY with that. Do you really believe this is a commandment to fight people for all time? Cut at their necks and smite their finger tips? This is the middle ages, an armored man is weak at those points.
Commenting on this and saying this is exhortation for warfare for all time is like saying that the Jews should fight unbelievers for all time because of 1 Samuel. I mean, really?
I'd go further into detail but I am starting to find this all very boring. You seem to have zero perspective.
I suppose I must disagree, Hesperado, that South Park and the radical Muslims deserve each other. When non-felonious non-Muslims -- in this case famous and successful American comedy writers -- are threatened with death by Muslims, we should put aside bitterness, close ranks around the people attacked, and give unconditional support to them. Especially in this kind of situation, our position should be unambiguously on one side only, and divisions between non-Muslims should be put on hold, or forgiven and forgotten.
And the Team America film was pretty funny, and poked fun at the Left and Arabs pretty innovatively. But that's beside the point. This video is a direct violent threat on cultural freedom in the United States. And your response is to stay neutral, because you find the comedy writers have been idiots or hypocrites sometimes? If you hold infidels up to that standard, we'll never win.
"an armored man is weak at those points. "
Gosh thats weird, so is an unarmored man.
Perspective... Give me a break.
Question Everything:
"GerbilTea : The problem here is not uniquely Islamic, it's a problem with fanatics in general.
Here, allow me : The problem here is not uniquely Islamic, it's a problem with religion in general.
There, fixed it."
Here, allow me: "The problem here is uniquely Islamic."
There fixed it!
Traeh
*brilliant* post.
Says it all. Nothing to add.
Question_Everything:
GerbilTea : The problem here is not uniquely Islamic, it's a problem with fanatics in general.
Here, allow me : The problem here is not uniquely Islamic, it's a problem with religion in general.
There, fixed it.
[Meeker] : Here, allow me: "The problem here is uniquely Islamic".
There, fixed it.
I was thinking about dead flowers, and maybe a tarot card to freak him out...LOL
First of all, Trey Parker and Matt Stone should contact the police immediately. I hope they have already done so. This cannot be let pass. Allowing death threats, even camouflaged ones, to go unpunished endangers everyone and threatens our democracies. Parker and Stone have an obligation to go after Revolutionmuslim legally. Let the police and possibly the intelligence agencies sort out the nature of this threat; do not dismiss it. The people at Revolutionmuslim who made these threats cannot be allowed to get away with this without being prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Freedom of expression does not include the freedom to make death threats.
"The posting on Revolutionmuslim.com says: "We have to warn Matt and Trey that what they are doing is stupid and they will probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show. This is not a threat, but a warning of the reality of what will likely happen to them.""
Note how the writer of this statement on Revolutionmuslim lies about what they are obviously doing. Take a look and listen to the material and statements they've posted on this South Park incident. It can easily be concluded from this material that
They believe in the death penalty for blasphemy against Islam and Muhammad.
They regard what Parker and Stone have done as blasphemy against Islam and Muhammad.
They agree that individual Muslims, including themselves, have an obligation to violently attack and/or kill critics of Islam and Muhammad.
They are posting these materials and statements with the intention of threatening Parker and Stone, and anyone who may be deemed to have disrespected Muhammad.
They make a threat in substance, then (without substance) deny that they are making a threat, but then still stand to benefit from the pressure or coercion that arises from having made the threat. This is still making use of a threat. I would love to see a judge deal with this, given the actual statements and postings on Revolutionmuslim right now.
Imagine, if you will, person A threatens to person B that person A's gang is going to kill person B to stop him from talking about a certain subject in a disrespectful manner. Person B says, "Hey, you're threatening me! I'm calling the cops!" Then person A says "No, that was not a threat." Yet person B, having heard the threat, has no reason to believe the empty denial of the threat, which could easily be deception. Hence, person B still feels some major compulsion to avoid talking about that certain subject in a disrespectful manner. Person A knows full well that person B is still under this fear/compulsion, and possibly even planned the whole sequence with this state of affairs as the goal of the threat-plus-denial.
Likewise, if person A says "Some of my friends are going to kill you...[pause] Just kidding!", this is still a threat, the threat still holds, because there is no way to tell whether or not the threat was truly a joke or really intended to have the effect of creating fear for some purpose. Wouldn't most people be appropriately fearful of such a "joker"?
Well, it's clear enough that the folks at Revolutionmuslim who made the threat are not joking. Even in denying the threat while making a threat, they still may stand to benefit from the effect of the threat by obtaining their objective in some form, such as a reduction in less-than-flattering depictions of Muhammad and Islam, while all other ideologies remain relatively open to criticism. Are our legal systems in the West, and in the U.S. in this case, not prepared to handle these sorts of abuses?
Isn't it true that death threats in some jurisdictions are handled objectively; i.e., if a person makes a threat, nothing else they say about the threat, or about their intentions, matters? They are prosecuted as having made the threat anyway? Failing criminal prosecution, perhaps Revolutionmuslim could be sued?
Ladies and gentlemen
Mohammed in a teddy-bear suit. Like John Gacy in a clown suit...
I do wonder whether someone over at South Park may not have come across the references to 'CAIR-bears' that have been made, more than once, at this forum.
Mohammed the Aisha-raping Safiyya-raping mass-murdering Jew-hating thieving town-destroying poet-assassinating warlord and sand pirate, dressed up in a cute teddybear suit: what a great way to capture the creepiness of Muslim da'wa in the West at this time, as well as the twofacedness of Islam; the way in which it uses smiling deception and flowery nice-sounding Meccan verses and 'interfaith' dialogue, either to disarm suspicion and protect itself while it's building up strength relative to a bunch of as-yet-too-powerful-to-attack Infidels, or else, to lure naive victims into a trap.
Behind the smiling mask there's a monster.
Final thought: given the texts that Traeh has summed up for us above, and in particular, the fact that even on American soil it is seriously dangerous for any Muslim to publicly apostasise, because of the Law of Apostasy in Islam, the largest terrorist organisation on American soil is, to put it bluntly, the Ummah; the Muslim 'community', which provides the sheltering sea in which the jihadist assassins swim and from which they naturally, inevitably, perpetually arise.
Here's a link to Fox's story on revolutionmuslim back in 2008
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,341811,00.html
Have a read of some of the offensive things they have/had up on their site. Lovely.
Now, just to inspire our resident parodists:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZANKFxrcKU&feature=related
I'm glad to see GerbilTea here. He's a lot better than Mikey.
But Dude, Gerbil...you are going to get so much truthful debate that if you're sane you will just leave Islam after considering it all.
BTW, I'm kind of scared to ask, but what's with the handle? Do you have a gerbil steeping somewhere? Yech.
Sorry GerbilTea, but I think you are in denial. You provide not a single quotation and reference that a person could check -- you merely make assertions. Answer my statements with evidence from the core Islamic texts. Otherwise I will assume you are a liar saying anything, no matter how false, so long as it hides your shame. But why be ashamed? Why not leave Islam as so many have done, and join some other religion?
Among other things, I quoted to you the earliest Muslim biography of Muhammad, where the Muslim biographer says that Muhammad had a man tortured by kindling a fire on his chest till the man was near dead. Muhammad, says the Muslim biographer, did this to make the man reveal where he had hidden treasure. Now you, Gerbil, claim that the man had stolen the treasure. Where in the core Islamic texts does it say that? If you can't show me something I can verify, you are a liar. You add, to the poor man's torture by Muhammad, your own slander of him by calling him a thief, when he was not.
You made some other dubious claims, unbacked by any evidence, as well as some outright false claims. But let's just deal with one, the torture case in question, for now.
I take that as a challenge! LOL
I'm workin' it...I'll get back to ya...
~E
"BTW, I'm kind of scared to ask, but what's with the handle? Do you have a gerbil steeping somewhere? Yech."
hahaha! ...maybe he likes to drink gerbil droppings steeping in hot water, lol ...
dumbledoresarmy,
Thank you. (Did you mean the short comment to Hesperado? Or the epic to Gerbil?)
Thank you, Wellington.
Actually, CNN *did* post my entry (7:11pm above), as #230 in that thread....
Alright, for better or for worse here are the lyrics for the "Parody-on-Demand" request from dumbledoresarmy. (All complaints, please, to dumbledoresarmy!) LOL!
(The premise of this parody is that there's a "famous" man inside a bear suit, hanging out down in the woods...you know...like ya do).
MAHOUNDY-BEAR'S "PICNIC"
If you go down in the woods today
You're sure of a big surprise
If you go down in the woods today
the ladies are in "disguise"
mahoundy-bear, and we know he was
he'll gather girls for certain, because
Today's the day mahoundy-bear has his "picnic!"
----- charming musical interlude -----
This mahoundy-bear,
Who's got wood?
Is sure of a treat today
There's lots of marvelous things to eat
and wonderful games to play.
Beneath the trees where nobody sees
They'll hide and seek right there on his knees
that's the way mahoundy-bear likes his "picnic."
"Picnic" time for mahoundy-bear
Haram mahoundy-bear is having a halal time today
watch them catch them "unawares"
And see them "picnic" on his holiday
See them scream and try to shout
they just cannot get out
cause he's got.
They're under where?
At 6 'clock their mullahs and daddys
will take them home to bed
Cause of tired-out mahoundy-bear
----- shorter enchanting musical interlude -----
If you go down in the woods today
You'd better not go alone.
A "bear" is down in the woods today
So safer to stay at home.
Mahoundy-bear, and we know he was
hangs out down there, for certain because
Today's the day mahoundy-bear has his "picnic!"
Eleanor, I have something written in answer to your query regarding your brother. I'll post it and let have the link if you're interested.
Yalla, Dag.
Yes, please. Thank you! His bizarre-o views are crossing over, bigtime, into the Islamic arena.
...speaking of blasphemy penalties, official and unofficial, in modern moderate Indonesia, the state can put blasphemers in jail for five years, and if that doesn't work, mobs of vigilante Muslim activists might attack and kill an alleged blasphemer.
A recent story from the New York Times:
Law Banning Blasphemy Is Upheld in Indonesia
By PETER GELLING
Published: April 19, 2010
Excerpts:
"JAKARTA, Indonesia — Indonesia’s Constitutional Court ruled 8 to 1 Monday that a controversial 45-year-old law banning religious blasphemy was constitutional.
[...] In practice, the law is applied primarily to perceived offenses against mainstream Islam; nearly 90 percent of Indonesia’s 240 million people are Muslims. [...]"
traeh,
The gist of my post was not that we should not try to help Matt and Trey; nor that we should not rail against this death threat on principle. I was only referring to the utter lack of respect I have for them, and remarked that "...the reality of a death threat may finally puncture the bubble those snotnoses have been lucky enough to live in, in a society where they can mercilessly, repeatedly, for years attack all things Christian with utter impunity and not a shred of concern for their lives."
Both -- outrage at the threat; contempt for the threatened -- can be maintained at the same time.
The South Park crew should be upheld as heroes of western civilization -- precisely because we have created a culture where adolescent puncturing and lampooning of every sort of gravity and pomposity is a viable and much appreciated way of making a living.
They may be a pack of asses, but they are OUR asses, and characteristic of OUR way of assininity.
And they're damned funny too.
I meant your long comment to Gerbil Tea.
That probably wasn't very clear as well. So, to clarify:
You asked -" dumbledoresarmy, Thank you. (Did you mean the short comment to Hesperado? Or the epic to Gerbil?)".
I meant 'the epic to Gerbil', that is, your first extended reply to GT, the one posted on April 19 at 7.09 pm, beginning "GerbilTea, You sound a bit self-satisfied."
You excelled yourself. Cool, rational and factual.
Gerbil Tea asserts:
"The KKK masquerades as being a Protestant organization while it holds no legitimate scriptural backing. They are still the largest terrorist organization on U.S. soil and they are still comprised entirely of Christians."
Did you fail in your "American History" class?...the KKK is not a religious organization it is a racial one.
In fact:
Islamic terrorists murder more people every day than the Ku Klux Klan has in the last 50 years.
The KKK has been accused of murdering just three blacks since 1960..Is this what you would call a large terrorist orginization?...just in one incident alone recently in Africa, Muslims attacked a Christian village killing about 500...every day Muslims are attacking and killing Christians and non Muslims and the Muslims attack because the Christians and Non Muslims refuse to submit to Islam and/or refuse to become Dhimmis...One could deduce that Muslims are religious terrorists...
Gerbil Tea should try harder to defend his religion, so far , Gerbil Tea has failed to prove anything about Islam that would show it is a "Religion of Peace".
Agreed. Yes, Parker and Stone can lampoon Jesus and they can lampoon Mohammed. If you don't like it, don't watch.
The lampooning of Jesus is my least favorite of their satire, but Thank God Jesus we live in a culture where anything and everything can be mocked and ridiculed without repercussions. Otherwise, we'd be living in a totalitarian Islamic theocracy.
And yes, Parker and Stone are "damned funny." Last night I watched the "Gooback" "Immigrants from the Future" episode - LOL! "They took our jobs" (spoken in Southern "redneck" twang). Hilarious.
In a really sad world, South Park makes me laugh. In a really sad world, Muslims and Islam make me sick to my stomach.
You choose.
That someone has to bring in the KKK as an example of "Christian Terrorism" shows how desperate they are to find examples. It's like citing McVeigh as an example, whom we all know was an atheist and whose actions had nothing whatsoever to do with Christianity.
And, right - KKK has nothing to do with Christianity, but everything to do with race.
The Moslem doesn't have a leg to stand on. What else is new?
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/04/19/security-brief-radical-islamic-web-site-takes-on-south-park/
This is one comment i really liked:
Islam is a religion of peace...and it's lunatic followers will hunt you down and kill you if you say it isn't.
Posted by: frak
You know, I came within a centimeter of naming on of my rats "Mohammed". Then I looked into his bright, lively eyes, stroked his soft fur, and felt him tickling my ear with his whiskers. I just couldn't do it.
I named him Caesar, as I already had a "Brutus". (They're both very gentle, but they're big.)
Bears, especially those of the Teddy variety, have my sympathies.
The people on 4chan already took care of that site.
http://boards.4chan.org/b/res/218841066
Hesperado, as usual, you make good points (this time, about the writers of South Park). But though the points made are good, making them now seems a little like hitting an ally when he's down. No matter. It's your business what you should or shouldn't say, and I don't mean to stick my nose into that.
dumbledoresarmy, thank you.
Show me the "one time only"....where is it?
I'll be waiting...
islam is a lie and
Truth is killing it.
Here's the problem/problems I have with islam.
Your prophet was a pedophile. No doubt about that.
He enjoyed sucking on the tongues of young boys and girls.
He had sex with a corpse. (Necro-curious?)
He liked to have men lick his chest.
He greatly enjoyed cutting peoples heads off. Obsessed would be a better word.
He calls for the death of an entire people and his followers still work toward that end. I'm on that list as an Infidel.
There have been of 15,000 terrorist attacks in the name of your false prophet since 9/11.
How many terrorist attacks can you point to by any other religious group in that time?
Your "religion" is nothing more than a totalitarian form of government in the guise of a religion. Nothing more. Admit it. Many muslims I have debated on this point have admitted as much.
In short, the killing machine that mo (Piss Be Upon Him) created to benefit himself and a few of his closer friends, is still killing in his dead name and needs to die.
Death to islam. Free the muslims of their slavery to a dead child rapist. Slavery cannot be tolerated to exist by free men and women and that's all that islam is.
For me there is no room for debate regarding islam. It's creator was a scumbag POS who needed killing. It matters not one whit what interpretations there are of the koran or the hadiths or any of the rest of that crap.
Any religion that tolerates thighing, the sodomizing of babies must die. Any religion that condones sex with animals is sick to the core and must cease to exist.
muslims must be set free of this cult of Blood and Death and unlimited sex in "paradise".
No islam...Know Peace.
Know islam...throw up!
islam is a lie and
Truth is killing it.
In Gerbil Teas reponse to Traeh he sez:
"I had a response to traeh's epic and then my browser crashed.
Here's the meat of it.
1.) You make it sound like all of the jurists of all four madhabs are for a death penalty. You can take this up with ibn Tamiyyah and other BIG names who said the exact opposite. ......."
Well, OK...here' some of what they said.....
"According to Maliki jurist Ibn Abi Zayd al Qayrawani (d. 996), “Jihad is a Divine institution. Its performance by certain individuals may dispense others from it. We Malikis maintain that it is preferable not to begin hostilities with the enemy before having invited the latter to embrace the religion of Allah except where the enemy attacks first. They have either the alternative of converting to Islam or paying the poll tax (jizya), short of which war is declared against them.”
Hanbali jurist Ibn Tamiyyah (d. 1328) also supports the jihad: “Since lawful warfare is essentially jihad and since its aim is that the religion is God's entirely and God's word is uppermost, therefore according to all Muslims, those who stand in the way of this aim must be fought.”
as you can see, the same old Muslim standards...convert now.or be a dhimmi and pay up...or die...
Sounds pretty much like the same death threats Muslims are saying today....
Bears, especially those of the Teddy variety, have my sympathies.
I too have a love of bears. There's a thousand pound Grizzly that lives within a quarter mile of my cabin. I've watched him grow from around 300 pounds to his present size.
As long as he eats fish and Moose and not me or my dogs...
Gerbil Tea asks Traeh:
"
4.) Various aya from Surah 9. Fantastic. Here's a question for you, are you a Meccan polytheist? NO?!?!?! Then you have nothing to fear because that surah deals SPECIFICALLY with that. Do you really believe this is a commandment to fight people for all time? Cut at their necks and smite their finger tips? This is the middle ages, an armored man is weak at those points. "
Well, Glad you asked about the commandent to fight people for all time...
Well, according to a modern day Muslim Organization CAIR...Honest Ibe Hooper and company put out some neat stuff..
"Here is how they actually appear in the literature that groups like CAIR are pushing:
Sura (8:55) - Surely the vilest of animals in Allah's sight are those who disbelieve
Sura (48:29) - Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves
Sura (9:30) - And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah... Allah (Himself) fights against them. How perverse are they!
Sura (8:12) - I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them
Sura (9:123) - O you who believe! Fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness
Sura (5:33) - The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement
These verses come from five different places in the Qur’an. There are dozens of others scattered throughout that advocate violence in open-ended fashion. There are hundreds more that speak of hatred and hell toward Christians, Jews, and other non-believers. (Is it any wonder that the Muslim world is split largely between those who tacitly support Islamic terror and those who do nothing about it?)
Very few of these verses are bound by historical context within the text of the Qur’an, and any appeal to external sources for mitigation would apply also to the tiny handful of verses that are used (disingenuously) to promote Islam as being loving and tolerant. More importantly, there is a far greater number of violent verses than ones of tolerance, and most were “revealed” later, thus abrogating the handful of earlier ones.
And yet, this is the book that CAIR wants people to read! This is what CAIR considers to be holy text, even to the extent that an exact replica of the Qur’an (grammatical errors and all) is said to be on a table in heaven guarded by angels.
So, the next time you hear CAIR smugly accusing its critics of “hate speech,” just remember what the organization's agenda really is:
They don’t mind hate speech directed at non-Muslims. In fact, they promote it.
They don't mind religious minorities being denied rights that Muslims have in Muslims societies. In fact, they plug fatwas and religious literature that encourage discrimination.
They don't even mind the vast amount of terrorism in the name of Islam. In fact, they refuse to acknowledge or denounce more than 99% of it, including the on-going genocide against black Africans by Arabs.
The language of civil rights and tolerance is merely a tool of convenience for prominent Muslim organizations in the West to advance the cause of Islamic supremacy. A true civil rights organization, however, is concerned about rights for all people, regardless of race or religion, and this is something that Islam has never been able to produce... and probably never will...
At least according to our Qur’an!"
Gerbil Tea, you can't have it both ways. As far as we can tell, the Jews and Christians consider their holy texts as inspired by God, but not literally dictated, immutable for all time, presumably until the end time, like Islam teaches, at least that's what we are told by many other Muslims.
If the verses about fighting unbelievers are only to be seen in their historic setting than that teaching loses it's validity. What you Muslims say to us, you really must advocate this in the Ummah, for the large-scale acceptance and implementation of this would mean a much-needed reform.
It is so unfair of you to pretend that what you say is the official Islamic standpoint, when we are abundantly informed that it is not the standpoint of many, many Muslims, many of them in high authority in Islamic countries, in past and present.
You must make your choice, if this is what you really believe, you must SECEDE clearly from the literalists, the immutable-word-of-God-doctrine. How else can we trust you?
You know, I came within a centimeter of naming on of my rats "Mohammed". Then I looked into his bright, lively eyes, stroked his soft fur, and felt him tickling my ear with his whiskers. I just couldn't do it.
I named him Caesar, as I already had a "Brutus". (They're both very gentle, but they're big.)
Bears, especially those of the Teddy variety, have my sympathies at being so rudely used.
You point, AI, to the key to destroying Islam-----destroy Mohammed. Send this control freak, sexual pervert, enthralled with death and power fraud to his proper place in history and you end the great pain in the ass to all the world which is Islam. Terminate Mohammed and you kill the bogus religion he founded. Overdue, don't you think?
I am just very disappointed that I was cruelly overlooked and not invited to make a guest appearance on South Park!
...hahaha! :)
lmao, well you know what they say....any publicity is good publicity MB!
Islam has declared war on freedom of expression. What are you going to do about it?
Mohammed murdered all his critics.
Islamists imitate Mohammed.
Islam is against freedom.
They want us to submit to them.
They are supremacists.
What are you going to do about it?
Gerbiltea says: 'The reasoning is sound, it has the potential for causing violence against the Jewish people. Should such protections also be used for religions? There is a very real danger to some religious communities from those hostile to their belief systems...'
Moslems are nowhere threatened, but paranoid everywhere. Paranoia is built into Islam. Criticism of Islam (submission) means people are not submitting. That means Moslems are obliged to use violence to force and coerce them to submit.
This is authentic, normative Islam, a supremacist political movement and death cult.
Actually the KKK was all about politics. The Democrats created the KKK to keep Blacks in line by practicing all forms of voter intimidation.
Overdue, don't you think?
Not yes but HELL YES!
Wassamatta Hamster Soup?
Did I piss you off? Or do you see the futility of defending the pedophile prophet?
Without the threat of Death for not joining and the threat of Death for leaving islam, you would have very little company in your head banging rituals.
islam is a series of filthy
lies and Truth is killing it.
http://newstime.co.nz/2010/pat-condell-what-i-know-about-islam.html
Islam can only use the spread fear and death threats to the ones who tells the truth about the pedophile mass murderer Muhhammad.
The quote on the Twitter account of Zachary (Abu Talhah al-Amrike) Chesser is "May Allah kill Matt Stone and Trey Parker and burn them in Hell for all eternity. They insult our prophets Muhammad, Jesus, and Moses..."
This, together with the reference to the assassination of van Gogh, about which the assassin quoted Quran 9:14, suggests that by "may Allah kill," what this "al-Amrike" means is effectively 'may Muslims kill'. That's because the Quran says that when Muslims kill the infidels in jihad, it is actually Allah who is doing the killing (8:17). The Quran orders Muslims outright to kill the non-Muslims who and thus "Allah will punish them at your hands" (9:12-14, also see 9:52). But al-Amrike is using a message that will mean one thing to Muslims who know this, and something else to infidels who do not know this.
Another factor is that a Muslim declaring, in this manner that some person has insulted Muhammad is tantamount to a death threat against that person. A similar thing can be said about declaring someone an apostate. An Italian judge ruled that declaring someone an apostate from Islam is tantamount to making a death threat against them. Perhaps we need to pursue implementing legislation that would allow the criminal prosecution and punishment of anyone accusing someone else of having insulted Muhammad when the evidence suggests the accuser intends the accused be targeted. With or without such legislation, it remains empirically true that anyone accused of insulting Muhammad is at an increased risk of being killed, due to the fact that some Muslims take the blasphemy penalty very seriously and believe they can take it upon themselves to carry it out.
If we don't have some kind of legislation and enforcement to deal punitively with accusations of "insulting Muhammad/Islam" or of "apostasy," the freedom of expression in our societies will continue to suffer, threatening lives and our democratic system as a whole.
I'm changing my online photo to the Muhammed-bear!
It's ironic how people (Muslim extremists)who are against
free speech use the right of freedom of speech to suppress
the freedom of speech of others.
South Park has lampooned Jesus,Buddha and icons of other
religions,without ever being threatened;but Islam,being the "peaceful religion" it is,is full of followers who think it is their duty to kill people for an perceived
slight to their "prophet."
The "wages of cowardice", excellent article here: http://www.islamist-watch.org/blog/2010/04/bear-suit-muhammad-and-the-wages-of-cowardice
. .Bingo Demsci.