This would be quite funny if the islamopsychotics didn't vent their Koranic enthusiam upon defenceless nonMuslims in the timehonoured tradition of the Islamic mob bully with any excuse to grind their axes.

It gets to the sateg where you expect all Muslims to be mouth frothing, ranting lunatics wearing placards covered in blodcurdling threats and screaming Allah Akbar.

Maybe in the future when their opinions as well as their feelings are totally ignored by all nonMuslims who have finally had enough (a la Peter Finch), we will have the basis for an entertaining cartoon series (?South Islamohell)

Posted by: MisIslamist at October 8, 2006 7:47 AM

Hmmm...the magic sentence:

‘A state system should be able to control its citizens. It is very regretful that provocation is repeating itself without the (Danish) government doing anything,’ Sembiring said

Really? The state should CONTROL it's citizens. Overseers to ensure they are not doodling or god forbit making Mo pictures. Another fundamental worlds apart difference in the mindset, which won't be reconciled by finesse.

Gotta run...the controllers are coming and I shouldn't be typing this blasphemy

/sarcasm off

Posted by: anathema at October 8, 2006 8:31 AM

Well, leave it to the Muslims to prove the point of the satire.

Posted by: Kepha at October 8, 2006 8:48 AM

Here's another passage from that article in the Gulf Times (quoted earlier today): "Islam does not acknowledge territorial boundaries, national or popular relations, and nationalities, as these lead to separation and differentiation among people. There is no nationality for the Muslim except Islam. According to Islam, all mankind are Allah’s bondsmen, and the whole earth belongs to Allah (not to any nation or a certain country), thus, the Muslim is authorised to migrate wherever he likes as long as he has committed himself to the Laws of Allah."

The quotation means that the people who stoned that schoolgirl in Lyon for eating on Ramadan did not violate French law, because there is no such thing.

The last sentence of the above quote means that a Muslim must not recognize immigration laws in infidel countries. Allah gives him the right to come here, because American law, insofar as it differs from shari'a, is null and void.

Every detail in that speech printed in the Gulf Times supports the argument that Muslims should be prohibited from immigrating to non-Muslim countries, because they cannot be both good citizens of those countries and good Muslims. And since it follows that their oaths of allegiance, when they're naturalized, are false, they're legally subject to deportation even after they've become citizens, if they behave as true Muslims are enjoined to behave.

Posted by: Frieda at October 8, 2006 9:01 AM

In other words:

You don't wanna be a Dane traveling around Mohammedan countries these days...

Frieda: Sounds like an interesting article. could you post the link again?

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at October 8, 2006 9:14 AM

Sheik yer'mami: Scroll up to the first item posted this morning: "Holy war (Jihad) is only a means to propagate truth and mercy among people"--it has the link to Gulf Times. The thing is worth reading in toto.

Posted by: Frieda at October 8, 2006 9:43 AM

‘In Islam, death is the penalty for insulting the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), visually through a caricature or verbally, except if the doer regrets his deed and promises not to repeat it,’ said Fausan Al Ansori, a spokesman for the hardline Indonesian Muhajehdin Council.

He added: ‘Danish authorities should think seriously, are they going to defend, in the name of human rights, one or two of its citizens who clearly insulted the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), and sacrifice its relations with the Islamic world?’...

Were it not so deadly, I would laugh at the hypocrisy of those who object to Western values being promoted in Muslim countries, but who refuse to allow those same values to practiced in Western countries.
Is this guy saying that "human rights" are a pretext, that honoring, Muhammad, a man who ate, drank and excavated just like every human ever born before or since, takes precedence?
Why is the West worried about "sacrificing its relations with the Islamic world"?
How about telling the Islamic world: Islamic laws don't apply here. This is not the land of Islam. Religion is personal, not public. Our people have the right to express their own views in public. They have the right to offend you. You have that same right. When in Denmark, do as the Danes do. When in the West, do as Westerners do. If you can't do that, then please stay home. If you come here and use your religion to intimidate Westerners, we'll show you just how Islamized we have become: by blowing up the Grand Mosque. You'll see how many of your values we have taken as our own when we destroy Mecca for you. (Given how much of the Islamic heritage in Arabia has already been destroyed by the Wahhabists, we're simply finishing the job you started.)
Just as laws agsinst murder don't necessarily apply when saving your own life, our principles shouldn't preclude saving our civilization.

Posted by: PMK at October 8, 2006 9:56 AM

"The video, filmed in August, was made by members of the far-right Danish People’s Party.

Here is a link to the Danish People's Party Web Site:

http://www.danskfolkeparti.dk/sw/frontend/show.asp?parent=3293

Why is this party considered 'far right'? It explicitly advocates religious freedom, protective environmental policy, democratic government, and high educational standards. I guess it has to do with emphasis on secure borders, perserving Danish cultural heritage, rejection of the EU and government support for the National Church (which does not limit freedoms on other religions).

If this is 'far-right', then how would one characterize groups and politicians who advocate prohibitions on religious criticism and violent intimidation as a legitimate response to criticism and satire?

Posted by: JTF at October 8, 2006 10:49 AM

"Danish authorities should think seriously, are they going to defend, in the name of human rights, one or two of its citizens who clearly insulted the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), and sacrifice its relations with the Islamic world?"

How does one insult a dead person? Mohammed is dead; whether he is in heaven or hell does not matter to me. He can't hear. Let's understand one thing. These cartoons and other satirical productions insult the followers of the Perfect Man. The Perfect Man ain't so perfect; he died, didn't he? It is just an excuse to exert Muslim influence. A nation's strength or its self perception of that strength can be judged by how the leaders react to the demands of Muslims. If Danes show their color by apologizing or censuring the satirists, Muslims are another step closer to their goal.

Posted by: Pelayo at October 8, 2006 12:49 PM

Re: ‘I cannot accept this. Denmark should give attention to this because no matter what, the country also bears responsibility over the actions of its citizens,’

From my recollection of Bat Yeor's book "The Dhimmi", collective responsibility is a concept that was employed at times to force the dhimmi communities to police themselves. Out of fear of punishment, the dhimmi communities would suppress the behavior of individuals that might lead to collective punishment. Let's hope the government of Denmark does not cave in.

Posted by: Dhimmisoftheworldunite at October 8, 2006 3:49 PM

I don't understand why anyone would want to attack such a great man as Mo. He must be great because his demented mind produced by far and away the longest lasting totalitarian philosophy the world has ever seen-1400 years and counting.
Not only that but in his lifetime he did so many wonderful things for people. Really, we should all be ashamed of the Danes.

They should make an official statement telling the Islamaniacs to take a hike.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at October 8, 2006 3:58 PM

Man these guys are easy to bait. Keep it up, you crazy Danes!

Posted by: TheVoiceofTruth at October 8, 2006 5:02 PM

its citizens who clearly insulted the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), and sacrifice its relations with the Islamic world?"

How does one insult a dead person? Mohammed is dead; whether he is in heaven or hell does not matter to me. He can't hear. Let's understand one thing. These cartoons and other satirical productions insult the followers of the Perfect Man. The Perfect Man ain't so perfect; he died, didn't he? It is just an excuse to exert Muslim influence.

this sounds very true muslims claim both mohammad ( pigs fonicate with him) and christ lets look at the two in muslim terms
muslims claim mohammad was the perfect man
well this perfect man had tons of female sex slaves he attacked and robbed his nabiors ,he was a pedifle with a 9 year old wife AND THIS IS A MUSLIMS IDIA OF A PERFECT MAN
is it ant wounder they are still rapeing and killing
but on the other hand christ was a profit to the muslims as well
he was a carpender and rabie its roumored that he had a lover in marry madnalain a woman in her 20s he did not raid and steal and did not use a made up cult to enrich himself
and he tauht a leason of peace were mohammad taught one of war if youdid not join his cult
and christ taugt that children were gods gift to be loved and protected not screwd like mohammad was doing to certain 9 yearld girl
so whowas the perfect man its sure not mohammad

Posted by: islamakapigeaters at October 8, 2006 5:27 PM

Absolutely right, Pelayo. Mohammed has been dead for over a thousand years, and to talk of insulting him is completely ridiculous.

It's a pity his nasty cult didn't die with him, though...

Posted by: Aardvark at October 8, 2006 5:44 PM

Frieda said

they're legally subject to deportation even after they've become citizens, if they behave as true Muslims are enjoined to behave.

I agree with you. Apparently the West has not yet had enough, it's going to take more and bigger jihadist attacks for the message to get through. But it will get through. And what you say will happen, not because you or I or other "far right wingers" (what a joke, some of us are lifelong liberals) are pushing for it, but because it just will; it will happen spontaneously all across the West. It has to, it doesn't matter how much the West would prefer to appease or ignore or run or plead. It will happen, not by our choice, but by theirs. The alternative is that we will all become Muslims, that the world will exist as a global Caliphate, and I don't see that as a realistic possibility. Whether they like it or not, we are simply too different from them, and there comes a line that we will not allow ourselves to cross, or be forced to cross. What you say will happen.

Posted by: special_guest at October 8, 2006 6:28 PM

ISLAMSFORLOSERS said

I don't understand why anyone would want to attack such a great man as Mo

I still think the best way to stop jihad is not dropping h-bombs liberally throughout the ME (though who knows where this all will lead if we keep dillydallying). It is simply to educate. The best salvo we could fire would be to make a feature film on the life of Mohammad, using Robert's book as a foundation, but since his book is based on original Islamic scriptures and not his own opinion, the movie would also be based wholly on the Qur'an and hadith and surah. No embellishment is necessary. Just use the original words of Mohammad and his followers as much as possible.

Just show the world, who is this man, and what did he do with his life, and what did he teach? It would mean the end of Islam. Period.

Posted by: special_guest at October 8, 2006 6:41 PM

The indonesian muslims are funny.
First they chop the heads of innocent christian schoolgirls. No outrage.

Then they get angry over some cartoons. Probably Islam inflicts some kind of permanent brain-damage.
I wish they would put themselves in our place and think ho can we see any good in Islam. We Europeans see only evil.

Posted by: rocky at October 8, 2006 10:37 PM