They seem to think that murdering Vilks was something justified -- indeed, called for -- by Islam. And once again, no "moderates" have come forward to explain how they're getting the Religion of Peace™ all wrong. And so the cycle endlessly repeats. An update on this story. "Brothers jailed for Vilks arson attack," from The Local, July 15 (thanks to Fjordman):
The two brothers accused of fire-bombing the home of Swedish Muhammad cartoonist Lars Vilks, have been imprisoned, with the older brother being served a three year sentence and the younger two years.The brothers, from Landskrona in the south of Sweden, faced charges of arson at Helsingborg district court, a crime that carries a penalty of 2-8 years imprisonment.
The prosecutor had sought a six year sentence for the elder brother, a 21-year-old, and four years for his 19-year-old younger brother.
As the court trial opened last Wednesday the 21-year-old defendant described Lars Vilks as "God's enemy, he is the Prophet's enemy, he is the Muslims' enemy."
"He is Islam's greatest enemy right now," he added.
The news agency did not give the brothers' names, but the Expressen tabloid has identified them as Mentor and Mensur Alija, aged 21 and 19.
Vilks has faced numerous death threats and a suspected assassination plot since his drawing of the Muslim prophet with the body of a dog was first published by Swedish regional daily Nerikes Allehanda in 2007 to illustrate an editorial on the importance of freedom of expression.
The drawing by Vilks prompted protests by Muslims in the town of Örebro, west of Stockholm, where the newspaper is based, while Egypt, Iran and Pakistan made formal complaints.
An Al-Qaeda front organisation then offered $100,000 to anyone who murdered Vilks - with a $50,000 bonus if his throat was slit - and $50,000 for the death of Nerikes Allehanda editor-in-chief Ulf Johansson....
The slit throat bonus comes from the Qur'an's directive to "strike at the necks" of the unbelievers (47:4; cf. 8:12).
As the court trial opened last Wednesday the 21-year-old defendant described Lars Vilks as "God's enemy, he is the Prophet's enemy, he is the Muslims' enemy."
Errata sheet:
As the court trial opened last Wednesday the 21-year-old defendant described Lars Vilks as "allah's enemy (since allah isn't God, is it?), he is the prophet's enemy (allah = mahound, mentioning "the prophet" and "allah" in the same sentence is like saying "I want my sandwich with bacon, I want my sandwich with bacon"), he is the muslims' enemy."
There. A hell of a lot better, isn't it?
Nobody can really explain that "smite the unbelievers at the neck" business. Seems a little out of place in a "religion of peace". Of course, Islam does not mean peace, it means "submit" or "surrender". Are you supposed to surrender before or after the necking smiting?
My God, Robert, from the opening sentence I thought they had succeeded!
I accept your sentence in the conditional sense in which is was offered.
Bless Vilks.
How to turn this around now. How to ask moderate Muslims if in fact Vilks is or is not an enemy of Allah and, if not, on what do these young men base their wrath?
Sorry, meant to write "neck smiting".
The comment section below the article is very worthy reading as well :-).
Tjeez, I thought did I miss something, did they really kill him.
I wonder what we would do if there were shrines around from Hitler? Would we let the Nazi party, who unfortunately still exist, hold big ceremonies? Or would we say, you have caused enough violence and killed enough all over the world, we will destroy your sanctions.
Time for the Worship places of Mohamed to be wiped of the place of the earth. Enough raping, killing and hate spread all over the world in the name of this so-called Prophet.
When will their be a stop put on it and by whom?
As long as their still educated people who believe in this, does the rest of the world have to suffer, because of these people?
No body has the right to force a Religion on you.
Keep it in your own private lives.
In the name of so many Gods, so many have gotten killed or gave their lives.
To me total Insanity. People who do not have the word LOGIC in their vocabulary.
So the killing and maiming and threatening keeps on going.
JW readers, a "Motoonist" here, drew the bastard twice, at least, I'll be on KFI radio Sun. night, 9-10pm West coast time, discussing The Infidel/Pigman, Islam, Jihad, Mohammad, etc. so tune in if you can, thanks.
The two brothers accused of fire-bombing the home of Swedish Muhammad cartoonist Lars Vilks, have been imprisoned, with the older brother being served a three year sentence and the younger two years.
As the court trial opened last Wednesday the 21-year-old defendant described Lars Vilks as "God's enemy, he is the Prophet's enemy, he is the Muslims' enemy."
...............
Must be those "moderate" Kosovar Muslims you hear so much about.
"since allah isn't God, is it?"
"Allah" in Arabic = "God" in English. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah
The Devil's false prophet Muhammad hijacked the Jewish/Christian concept of Allah/God as the only true God, creator of the universe. Muhammad then proceeded to put the Devil's words in Allah's/God's mouth as he founded Islam. In that process, Muhammad divinized the Devil, and demonized Allah/God.
But Allah/God is not responsible for the fact that Muhammad put the Devil's words in Allah's/God's "mouth" in founding Islam. Allah/God is not responsible for all the murders, rape, and deceit committed by fanatical/brainwashed Muslims in Allah's/God's name.
Who, then, is responsible for all those demonic acts of murder, rape, and deceit? You can blame Muhammad. You can blame the Devil. You can blame Islam. And you must blame the fanatical Muslims that committed those evil acts.
But do not blame Allah/God as Allah/God is not responsible for those evil acts by fanatical Muslims simply because the false prophet Muhammad put the Devil's words in Allah's/God's mouth as is apparent in Islam.
allah is NOT the God of the Bible ...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
allah, the moon god:
Muhammad was raised in the religion of the Moon-god Allah. But he went one step further than his fellow pagan Arabs. While they believed that Allah, i.e. the Moon-god, was the greatest of all gods and the supreme deity in a pantheon of deities, Muhammad decided that Allah was not only the greatest god but the only god.
In effect he said, "Look, you already believe that the Moon-god Allah is the greatest of all gods. All I want you to do is to accept that the idea that he is the only god. I am not taking away the Allah you already worship. I am only taking away his wife and his daughters and all the other gods." This is seen from the fact that the first point of the Muslim creed is not, "Allah is great" but "Allah is the greatest," i.e., he is the greatest among the gods. Why would Muhammad say that Allah is the "greatest" except in a polytheistic context? The Arabic word is used to contrast the greater from the lesser. That this is true is seen from the fact that the pagan Arabs never accused Muhammad of preaching a different Allah than the one they already worshipped. This "Allah" was the Moon-god according to the archeological evidence. Muhammad thus attempted to have it both ways. To the pagans, he said that he still believed in the Moon-god Allah. To the Jews and the Christians, he said that Allah was their God too. But both the Jews and the Christians knew better and that is why they rejected his god Allah as a false god.
Excerpt:
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/moongod.htm
This is an excellent exposition of a muslim mind. A muslim thinks of in a certain way. This is defined generally by the accepted (accepted by the muslim's that is) islamic construct.
The Islamic construct is based on the mythical utterings of Mohammed recorded as Allah's words in Quran, as Mohammed words in the hadiths and finally as accepted interpretation of Mohammeds words by the schools of Islamic jusrispudence.
The issues arises for rest humanity due to the above 3 islamic constructs being frozen in time between 705 to 950 AD. Thus a muslims thinks and acts like an arab who was living sometimes between 705 to 950 AD.
The preceding paragraph offcourse only applies to "good muslims" (like the brothers in Roberts post). Luckily for rest of the world and humanity at large majority of muslims are "bad muslims" who do not follow the above construct. As soon a "bad muslim" follows the islamic construct he or she becomes a "good muslim" and thus a dnager to civilized world.
So regretfully this story/post about the "good muslim" brothers is correct in as far as it is read through the prism of islamic construct and therefore sadening for those of us who consider ourselves human.
And in 2 / 3 year when they come out ?
What no attempted murder? The only reason it failed is because some of the fuel in the molotov cocktail inadvertantly spilled out and caught fire on whichever one of them.
If somebody takes a shot at a suicidal someone before they jump into a train it's still attempted murder..
Lock 'em up for life. Whatever happened to "setting examples" "setting a trend" "keeping with tradition" "setting a deterrant" "upholding the law" "rooting them out" "cleaning house" "everything in it's place and a place for everything" "Keep the Faith" "Be Good" ..So much for nuthin',too much for laws.
Islam cannot withstand even the slightest hint of ridicule, and Muslims know it. Mockery will destroy Islam far more effectively than rational argument, to which primitive, pre-rational Islam is relatively impervious.
If I recall correctly, from earlier reports here and elsewhere, this particular attempt would have failed, even had the house caught fire as planned and burnt to the ground; for Mr Vilks was out that night, all night, at his girlfriend's place; he only found out about the attempting firing of his own place, in the morning.
The article posted here - if you click on the link provided and read it all - mentions Vilks' being out: "The artist was not at home at the time."
Amen to that... If only those black-cube worshippers could use their brains before that inevitable time of irreversible atrophy comes to think about that...
I'm not quite clear on the details, but as I think I understand my doctor today, he said there is such a thing as a proctallahcologist, and that though he's Muslim I shouldn't worry unless he has both hands on my shoulders at the same time. I'm getting a bad feeling about this. My doctor says it's not a pretty picture, which makes me think this is something about Mohammed cartoons.
living stone sez:
"But do not blame Allah/God as Allah/God is not responsible for those evil acts by fanatical Muslims simply because the false prophet Muhammad put the Devil's words in Allah's/God's mouth as is apparent in Islam."
As I recall...Muhammad claimed to have received "Allah's" words through the angel Jibril.....He then reportedly inspired his followers to follow the instructions received..Muslims then, as they do today, believe Muhammads words to be Allah's words, not the Devils words.... Fanatical Muslims committing evil acts are simply following the words from Allah, as given to Muhammad as recorded by Muhammad and his followers in a book called the Qur'an.....Muslims quote passages from the Qur'an as justification for the evil acts they do...The association between Allah, Muhammad, and the fanatical Muslims doing evil acts is easily established...Maybe Allah, in fact, may be the Devil...
They didn't know that though..The intent was there..Glad you're up..Wellington must be on holiday..hope so..I'm not a lawyer..I remember that Law 101 hypothetical tho..They're negating the islamic implication..Death was the intent..It even makes it more so that he,and his granddaughter,weren't home..Not to mention the outlandish BBQ BS..It's the (now)very old. "Well at least they got something". Fourty-years and fourty nights..
Thanks for all your posts DD..all-ways good..ttyl
DDA!
Ethoman
I went to the original article and read the comments as you suggested. I see what you mean.
I think the worms are beginning to turn, in Europe.
All you kids out there..islam is just the greetest,besstest,most generousest,dumb-assest "religion":ha! eekslam,eerieslum,jerkslum,slurslam,sleerieslum,smokescreenslam,samamamadabadoobieslam,tookokieslam,projectaslam,mommyslam,daddyslammommyslamrealhardslam,sisterdiehardslam,sisterdiefornothinslam,killfornothingslam,slam-I-slam,slam-you-slam,slam-me-slam,I-slam-I-slam,slamdeslam,
The government of Sweden should now ask the Muslims -- not collectively but individually - in Sweden if they denounce the attempt to kill Lars Vilks and all such uses of violence against critics of Islam.
If an individual is unwilling to do so, that individual is unfit to live in Sweden, and incapable of fitting in to Swedish society, its laws and customs, and should be expelled.
If Sweden does not yet have a law that will make that possible, such a law should be introduced. The political elites will scream, as they are screaming in the Netherlands at the phenomenon of Geert Wilders, but too bad -- reality is breaking in, and it is time for them to be replaced.
But Hugh, wouldn't the Muslims merely lie, and say that they denounce the attempted murder of Lars Vilks, and such uses of violence against critics of Islam ?
I think that your idea would only be effective against a few high profile Muslims, at best.
If an individual is unwilling to do so, that individual is unfit to live in Sweden, and incapable of fitting in to Swedish society, its laws and customs, and should be expelled.
With all respect Hugh, it is not realistic.
If the Swedish, or British government can’t expel a convicted terrorist to Pakistan out of concern for his safety it is much less likely they would expel a non-terrorist and expose him and his family to the inconveniences connected with living in the third world country. The Left, and unfortunately not only the left, mob would have crucified such government for most extreme violation of fundamental human rights.
Sweden does not yet have a law that will make that possible, such a law should be introduced.
It is more likely that the Swedish government is removed forcibly than that it would introduce such a law.
"He is Islam's greatest enemy right now"
Right now.
islam always has enemies.
It's how paranoid psychosis functions.
islam = death
It does not matter what anyone calls God unless he intends to do harm over it...Allah, and the God of the bible are similar in one aspect only...It is claimed by both that God/Allah is the ultimate God of the Universe...This idea is beyond description...It is I AM THAT I AM taking a nap...it just 'is'...Existence is Existence...The Idea of Allah and the God of the Bible are the same, splits off as soon as descriptions are made, and books are written...If Allah and YHVH are the same, God is schizophrenic...For instance...Allah say's he has no son, while YHVH says 'this is my son and I am proud of him'...
Either this is two different gods talking or the one God is confused...There are lots of inconsistencies like that between the Bible and the Quran...This is what prompts many western readers of the Quran to say...'God wrote that'?
'No way'!!....
Those two criminals are Albanian moslems from Kosovo and I would bet they tried to do this, actually for just the money.
They may profess to be really devout so when they get to prison they get the benefits of moslem "protection" and special kid glove care that ALL moslems in jail get. You fresh fruit, 5 daily time outs from work for prayers, easy jobs ETC.
$$$$, running drugs and guns and transporting women and children for the sex trade is what those types of people from Kosovo are all about.
Hugh
"The government of Sweden should now ask the Muslims -- not collectively but individually - in Sweden if they denounce the attempt to kill Lars Vilks and all such uses of violence against critics of Islam."
I like your approach Hugh and I so hope some political parties will evolve to it. AND attract a lot of voters.
Necessary for a political party evolving to this strategy: - respect for ex-Muslims and Islam-critics at least as high as respect for Muslims that PCMC-people and politicians now show. A much better balanced respect for Muslims AND Islam-critics, who after all are in favor of free democratic societies. Let media and politicians at least listen carefully to BOTH sides. Not to do so can now be called "prejudice against, discrimination of "ex-Muslims + Islam-critics", unreasoable hate against them.
Then the recognition of the incompatibility of parts of Islamic doctrine and parts of Muslims with secular democratic laws, values and interests. I deliberately say parts in order to counter the inevitable "do not tar all Muslims with the same brush" coming from the PCMC's.
And I counter that also with: Fine, I won't, but don't you presume to "tar all Muslims with a white brush" either. Don't you demand from wary citizens to unconditionally trust all Muslims and their friends, when there is now so much knowledge and evidence of the dictatorial goals of so many Islamic texts, so many Islamic leaders and minions.
Once the recognition of incompatibility between parts of Islam and Muslims and secular democracy's laws, values, interests is clearly put, it becomes possible to hold Muslims more and more accountable, to ask them about:
1. Their primary loyalties, when Islamic and Democratic laws, values and interests conflict.
2. their unity or division, considering that Muslims always denounce their unity with so-called "radical Muslims" when it suits them, when these commit atrocious acts of oppression and terrorism. But at other times rejoice about the growth of Islam and in their protesting behavior overwhelmingly and uncritically choose the Islamic side against the secular democratic side.
Sure, Muslims would lie, but once a decision and responsibility for loyalty is ASKED then they can honestly confess being against secular democracy and be treated accordingly or say their primary loyalty is to secular democracy when it is in contradiction with Islam. In that case they can be held accountable for their subsequent behavior in many ways. Including many more legal ways, for instance with laws about treason and sedition, laws that are not used much now.
In very carefully worded and conditioned ways I think Muslims in future can be discriminated against because of their openly admitted religion, because the dictatorial supremacist aspects are getting ever better known in future. And it helps when Muslims pledge their first and foremost loyalty to Democracy but their choice of religion still makes them low on trustworthyness.
"While they believed that Allah, i.e. the Moon-god, was the greatest of all gods and the supreme deity in a pantheon of deities, Muhammad decided that Allah was not only the greatest god but the only god."
According to your argument, Muhammad taught that Allah is the Moon-God.
This is plainly false. Muhammad did not teach that Allah is the Moon-God. This is not what is taught by Islam. This is not what Muslims believe.
I've also read the moon-god article you've linked to. Its argument is rather flawed. Just because some ancient Arabs regarded the moon as "allah" (that is, "god"), this does not make the term "allah" the proper name of the moon. And this is the logic and argument of the moon-god article, which arrives at the rather false conclusion that Muslims worship the Moon-God, (which is basically the earth's moon) whom they call "Allah". This is plainly false.
The fact of the matter is that Jewish Arabs and Christian Arabs refer to their God as "Allah" even before Muhammad came along and founded Islam. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah
Would you say then that Jewish Arabs and Christian Arabs are mistaken for referring to their God as "Allah" when they've been doing this even before Muhammad came along and founded Islam?
allah is NOT the God of the Bible. PERIOD.
Another examination of this truth can be found here:
http://www.kingmessiahproject.com/is_allah_not_God.html
Excerpt below:
Muslims believe that there is no other God besides Allah and that he is the God of the universe. They claim that not only is he their God, but that he is the God of the Jews, the Christians and everyone else. When examining the profile of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and comparing it with Allah’s profile, there are a number of distinct differences between them that can only result in one conclusion: These profiles simply do not match! Allah is NOT the God of the Bible!
The Islamic faith, through the teachings of Muhammad, asserts that Allah is God and attempt to place him within the confines of the Holy Scriptures. When the Bible contradicts their teachings, they allege that it is flawed, has been tampered with, and has many errors. They further claim that the Koran, through the teachings of their prophet Muhammad, corrects them. However, it has already been established that Muhammad was both a false prophet and teacher. Therefore, Islam’s allegations are unsupported, baseless and without merit.
There are a number of major differences between the God of the Bible and Allah. This chapter will focus upon five reasons why they are not the same. According to the Holy Scriptures, the God of the Bible is the one true God while Allah is a false god.
Additionally ....
While the Holy Scriptures continue to stress that the only way to eternal salvation is through Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, the Koran, through the written words of Mohammed, teaches that Allah will destroy anyone who believes that he has a son. The applicable Sura from the Koran and the written words of Mohammed follow:
The Immunity
Sura 9.30 “And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!”
With respect to the begotten Son issue, Allah cannot be the God of the Bible. The Scriptures are blatantly clear that God has a begotten Son and that His Son is the only way to salvation. Meanwhile, the Koran teaches that Allah does not have a son and that those who believe that he does will be destroyed. Therefore, Allah is NOT the God of the Bible!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Your argument is profoundly weak, Living Stone. Don't make me laugh ...Wikipedia? ahaha!!