"On the same day, MIM floor leader Akbaruddin Owaisi had filed a complaint against Taslima Nasreen, alleging that she had hurt the sentiments of Muslim community with her writings and speeches against Islam, including Holy Prophet Mohammed.""

....I would say Muslim terrorist activity in many parts of the world have given proof that Islam is violent and unworthy to be called a religion....

...ban Muslim Immigration...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at August 13, 2007 8:08 AM

‘STOP THE ISLAMIFICATION OF EUROPE’ DEMONSTRATION (11th SEPT)

Freddy Thielmans, Mayor of Brussels, has banned a demonstration which was scheduled to take place on Tuesday 11th September at 1pm outside the building of the European Parliament to protest against the relentless ‘Islamification of Europe’. The organisers are now mounting a formal legal challenge to the Mayor’s right to take this action.

Until this matter is properly resolved they cannot endorse or accept any responsibility for any protest made by any individual or group of individuals.

However the Mayor of Brussels has no power to prevent tourists from visiting his city. Visitors to this website might like to consult ‘sioe.wordpress.com’ to gain helpful information about visitor amenities and tourist attractions in Brussels.

Posted by: LondonBorn&Bred at August 13, 2007 8:09 AM

Muslims get so upset about having their poor widdle feelings hurt. Boohoo.

Most of us learned in kindergarten to suck it up and get on with it.
What makes them so special?

Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at August 13, 2007 8:59 AM

Isn't this exactly like the case at Pace University in NYC? Except that in NYC, the student has already been arrested for hurting Muslim feelings.

I wonder: My feelings get hurt from time to time. For instance, I am gay (and Jewish). Can I file harrassment and hate charges against any minister or (cough, imam) who speaks against people like me?

Posted by: Seymour Paine at August 13, 2007 9:00 AM

I'm traumatized and terrified about Islam. Not only since 9/11, but since long before. Ever since I spent time in the ME and Asia and saw all the things that Muslims do to themselves and to others.

Who is going to protect people like us and our feelings and sensitivities? Looks like 'human rights' have become a one way street...

Last night I ran into another liberal who gave me the 'too-horrible-to-contemplate' speech, straight from the Jack Straw playbook. A true believer who is adamant that Muslims will be exposed to western values and shed their belief-system, which demands they subjugate and enslave us, never mind the terror and the outbreeding...

Guess I need counselling and sensitivity training now, any suggestions?

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at August 13, 2007 9:12 AM

Hurt feelings?? I want to sue...In fact, I should file charges. Six or eight a day, I could make it pay to wear my feelings on my sleeve. Yep, for a few million bucks, my feelings could get really, really, hurt. A few easily hurt people could keep the 'Hurt Feelings Court' tied up for years, rendering it useless.

Posted by: duh_swami at August 13, 2007 9:14 AM

Assalamau Laikum all,

Freedom, liberty, democracy.
These lofty ideals provide the engine for empowering the individual and that's just dandy...I'm all for them.

There is however one ideal missing from these to make it work....Allah T'alla SWT.

This needs to be central to all themes ...Allah SWT does not stop you from expressing yourself.

You have air to breathe, food to eat....but by critizing Alla (and the followers) SWT it is like polluting these lofty ideals...they break....they become polluted.

Write books by all means ...but write about the greatness of Allah SWT, write about your love for Allah SWT...teach all how to become better slaves of Allah SWT...

There is peace to be had...please don't spoil it.

Posted by: Naseem at August 13, 2007 9:20 AM

The quickest road to peace this century is to ban Muslim immigration.

Posted by: jay at August 13, 2007 9:25 AM

"This needs to be central to all themes ...Allah SWT does not stop you from expressing yourself. "

...unless you say the wrong thing, then you are stopped dead....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at August 13, 2007 9:26 AM

Isn't that always the case in Muslim countries where free speech is attacked or limited?

Posted by: The Resistance at August 13, 2007 9:36 AM

"There is peace to be had...please don't spoil it."

No, Naseem, there will never be peace from the descendents of Ishmael. The real Holy Book says this: "Behold, said he (the angel), thou (Hagar) art with child, and thou shalt bring forth a son: and thou shalt call his name Ishmael, because the Lord has heard your affliction. He shall be a wild man: his hand will be against all men, and all men's hands against him: and he shall pitch his tents over against all his brethern." (As Mo's followers did when they pitched their mosque over the Temple ruins.)Gen. 16:11-12 Note the word brethern. Islamists even fight Islamists.

Posted by: Dina at August 13, 2007 9:52 AM

Freedom, liberty, democracy. These lofty ideals provide the engine for empowering the individual and that's just dandy...I'm all for them.

You have air to breathe, food to eat....but by critizing Alla (and the followers) SWT it is like polluting these lofty ideals...they break....they become polluted.

...teach all how to become better slaves of Allah SWT...

Naseem and all other Muslim readers:

Freedom, liberty and democracy are the protection of 'the will of the people'.

Allah's commands are the 'will of Allah'. (the will to power of Mohammed, actually.)They are utterly opposite and incompatible. These two things place authority in opposite places - one removed from earthly life and the other the result of earthly life.

Being a slave means you have no liberty or freedom. You're not a 'person' with the means to vote or to control your own future. To do so requires an individual conscience, which is denied to a piece of property.

Naseem and the rest of the Muslim readers - please go to this essay to see why Allah's commands can't be obeyed in a nation with principles like those found in the US Constitution and its admendments.

http://a-plague-on-both-houses.blogspot.com/2007/06/one-cannot-serve-two-masters.html

A person cannot simultaneously believe and act on the principles of Islamic law and commit to the ideas and found in the Constitution. To each other they are like matter and anti-matter. They are the antithesis - the contradiction - of each other.

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at August 13, 2007 10:04 AM

Yesterday the mass reading from St. Paul's letter echoed the Torah. God's message to Abraham was "YOUR INHERITANCE WILL BE THROUGH ISAAC." Not Ishmael.

When the Bible spoke of a great nation that would be headed by Ishmael (actually meaning Beaudoin), the original text used the same word--GREAT--to describe the flood (deluge).

Great meaning "large," not wonderful. As in, you have a great wart on your nose. it is large, not wonderful.

Posted by: CapitalistGig at August 13, 2007 10:45 AM

Allah must be driven back into his cage, the door locked and the key thrown down some bottomless pit.

THEN, we MIGHT get some peace...

Posted by: duh_swami at August 13, 2007 10:50 AM

A person cannot simultaneously believe and act on the principles of Islamic law and commit to the ideas and found in the Constitution. To each other they are like matter and anti-matter. They are the antithesis - the contradiction - of each other.

Isn't India a democracy? How is it that the world's largest democracy is stifling the free expression of its citizens?

What kind of constitution does India have and what good is it?

Posted by: PMK at August 13, 2007 10:54 AM

We have a democracy in the US yet the truth is often stifled. Burn flag, check. Crucifix in urine, check. Image of Mary, smeared with feces, check.

Koran in crapper, arrest made.

Posted by: CapitalistGig at August 13, 2007 11:02 AM

This past Saturday night at my parish church, because my parish priest was on summer vacation and a visiting priest from a missonary order of priests and religious speak about the missionary work for the RC Church in Asia, and in Church in the Philipines in a particular way in his homily. Touch upon quite a bit on the Islamic religion and its growing population as the "fastest growing religion". Went into population stats and so forth. The homily I thought had a lot to be desired, just talking about the Catholic Church in Asia and not about the boom in the Christian faith in the global south. Made one mistake about country with the largest Muslim population, saying it is Nigeria and not Indonesia.

What gaved me confort though is the fact that the second reading from Hebrews and spoke about God's special covenant relationship with Abraham and Sarah. In other words God's promise being kept by blessing Abraham and Sarah with a son, Issac.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at August 13, 2007 11:33 AM

All we can do is pray and hope.

Posted by: Desi at August 13, 2007 11:48 AM

"We have a democracy in the US yet the truth is often stifled."

Posted by: CapitalistGig

And sometimes the truth is lost to the masses.

If we were a true "democracy", Al Gore would have been the president of the U.S. in 2000.

This country is a Republic, and it was built that way from the beginning, check it out for yourself.

The truth is out there, you just have to know where to find it. A challenge is posted.

Posted by: Islofob IS-1 at August 13, 2007 11:58 AM

"Freedom, liberty, democracy.
These lofty ideals provide the engine for empowering the individual and that's just dandy...I'm all for them.

There is however one ideal missing from these to make it work....Allah T'alla SWT"

This sounds like Islamic logic. Everything turned upside down.

You can have the lofty ideals of Freedom, liberty, democracy, just so long as you don't dare have Freedom, liberty, democracy

Posted by: rational at August 13, 2007 12:08 PM

"This country is a Republic""

......it is a fact that is forgotten by the American public and most of its politicians....most cannot tell you the difference between a republic and a democracy....

...democracy is nothing more than mob rule....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at August 13, 2007 12:14 PM

"It is a fact that is forgotten by the American public and most of its politicians....most cannot tell you the difference between a republic and a democracy....

...democracy is nothing more than mob rule...."

Posted by: exsgtbrown

Indeed. And we forget at our own peril..

Posted by: Islofob IS-1 at August 13, 2007 12:25 PM

We delude ourselves if we think the charrges against Taslima Nasreen are something we in the U.S. need never worry about happening to us.

Nasreen is being charged for a hate crime. In case no one's noticed, we have hate crime laws in the U.S., and it's only a matter of time before they're used against us just as they're being used against Taslima Nasreen. When we allowed these laws to be legislated in our country we established the principle that government has the authority to punish you us thinking and expressing unapproved thoughts.

And if anyone thinks these laws will be used to protect us against Islamic hate, they'd better think again. They'll be used to protect Muslim hate, and punish any critism of that hate.

We gave them a tool to use against us, and frankly, were going to get what we asked for.

Posted by: rational at August 13, 2007 12:31 PM

It's high time for Hindu men to stand up. If not for their women, then at least for themselves.

Nobody want to get wet up to their elbows in human blood, but we're give no choice. The continued silence of Hindustan on this mess is, well, disgraceful.

Another worldwide mess for white man to pick up? Maybe Tennyson was right. The cowardice of others is such a burden.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at August 13, 2007 12:41 PM

Isn't India a democracy? How is it that the world's largest democracy is stifling the free expression of its citizens?

What kind of constitution does India have and what good is it?

India is a liberal democracy which has a long tradition of free speech. However, the socialist nature of the Indian state - thanks to fools like Jawaharlal Nehru - forces certain "reasonable restrictions" on free speech. Nobody knows what these "reasonable restrictions" are. The "reasonable restrictions" which are stated in the Constitution of India are vague and are interpreted in different ways by different people.

For example, no reasonable restrictions apply to a Muslim artist who paints Hindu godesses in the nude and in the most grotesque positions or Jesus Christ on the cross pissing into a toilet. However, these reasonable restrictions are put to immediate effect to things which "hurt the sentiments" of Muslims and Christians.

India was the first country in the world to ban Salman Rushdie's Satanic Verses. The Communist government in West Bengal has banned Taslima Nasreen's Lajja. This is an irony... because the Indian Left consider themselves the ultimate champions of democracy and free speech. Of course, when it comes to Muslim sentiments, all restrictions on free speech are justified. Likewise, in 2006, Christians in state of Andhra Pradesh demanded a ban on the showing of The Da Vinci Code (you may find this surprising since no Christian nation had done such a thing!) Fortunately, the court struck down the ban.

The media too, which keeps giving lessons to India's Hindu majority on free speech, keeps silent when such restrictions are put in place. When Hindu extremists roughed up an artist who drew Godess Durga in the nude and piss Christ, the media went berserk making laughable wild predictions of a collapse of Indian democracy and the onset of "Hindu fascism." However, not a SINGLE Indian newspaper had the BALLS to either publish the Danish cartoons or take the side of the Danish cartoonists.

There are extremist Hindu groups also which threaten free speech in the country. Though there are no good and bad extremists, Hindu extremism can be understood in a context - it is largely a reactive response to the Muslims' long history of fanaticism in the Indian subcontinent.

India's restrictions of free speech can be attributed largely to socialism and pathological dhimmitude. Both of them must go!

Posted by: Atlantean at August 13, 2007 12:48 PM

In addition to the above, I'd also like to mention that Sita Ram Goel (you might've heard about him around here at JW), India's equivalent of Robert Spencer (a much older one), has been a special target for the socialist and dhimmi free speech arbiters in India. FIVE, a whole goddamn FIVE, of his books have been banned by the Indian state as they were found to be "hurting Muslim sentiments."

There are countless others who had to bow before the Indian state's dhimmitude.

Posted by: Atlantean at August 13, 2007 12:59 PM

And if I were in India, could I file charges against people who hurt my sentiments?

...sure, as long as you were a Muslim.

Of course, then you could file ANYWHERE in the world. Even in Montana, Israel, Russia, Australia, New Zealand, etc.

luv,

kj

fanorollins@yahoo.com

Posted by: kj at August 13, 2007 1:01 PM

I want to file a complaint every time a koran is published, for offending my Christian sentiments.

Given the amount of passages that advocate my murder for being a non-believer I think I have a pretty good case.

Except I would probably be arrested for a hate crime for even suggesting that muslims offend me just by their very existence.

Posted by: walterc at August 13, 2007 3:00 PM

Islofob Is-1

America is a democratically organized republic- A true democracy is a street fight. All can vote to elect those who actually represent us. OK. I qualified my statement.

How does this change my point? How do some freely malign, slander, and libel in the U.S. while others are jailed for it? What is art? A naked chocolate Jesus figure with enlarged genitals? Or a quran full of buckshot? Which is protected? Which art form will your congressman (uh, I mean person-don't want you to go OT again)
go to the mat or the house floor defending?

Posted by: CapitalistGig at August 13, 2007 3:08 PM

BTW Islofab, Al Gore lost because of the electoral college. And thanks, rational, for pointing out all this hysteria over clarifying a democratic republic by some nit pickers makes no difference if we (or India's citizens) don't have the freedom to read what we want.

Posted by: CapitalistGig at August 13, 2007 3:18 PM

Free speech is under assault on JW too...don't kid yourselves; it's under assault everywhere anyone has the ability to stifle opinion. It wasn't good enough to ban my ID's on this site but they took to blocking my IP addresses. Too funny...ever wonder why the number of posts seems to be decreasing and only sympathetic to the JW point of view? Keep banning id's and alternate ideas; at least you still have about 15 posters that visit the site daily for their rant. Good job hypocrites! Posting at 4:42pm EST...wonder how long before the post is removed and I'm yet again blocked!

Posted by: postersbeware at August 13, 2007 4:43 PM

How can you tell an immigrant from an invader? An immigrant chooses to come to America seeking to take part in and get their share of the freedom individual rights and prosperity that we offer. The invader chooses to come here and steal our share of freedom, individual rights and prosperity for themselves. These thieves come from various heritages and regions some of them even work for us, allegedly. Savage radio free speech under attack by SF stupervisors,
http://www.homestead.com/prosites-prs/
Gotta stand up for Savage, like him or not he has been battling the anti free speech Gestapo for as long as I can remember. United we stand.

Posted by: tgusa at August 13, 2007 6:48 PM

Guess I need counselling and sensitivity training now, any suggestions?
Posted by: sheik yer'mami

My advice: Go to the shooting range and carry some pictures of SOWdi sheiks and AchIchbinEinNazi to practice on..

I know that would work for me!

Arafart and Nasrallah pics might also be good.

Oh, I got another one: Rage Boy!

I'd LOVE to fire a nice few rounds at him [in effigy, of course :-)] from a brand-new Glock!

Posted by: Allahfanculo at August 13, 2007 6:53 PM

There is peace to be had...please don't spoil it.
Posted by: Naseem

..said the spider to the fly...

peace in our Time.. said Chamberlain.

NO F*CKING WAY! said Churchill!!
Nazeem.. we on Jihawatch second the emotion i ya catch my drift.. we don't want your filthy alla around us! We don't want to support your mahometan lunatic hordes with our labor! so get LOST y'all!!

Posted by: Allahfanculo at August 13, 2007 7:06 PM

"...In case no one's noticed, we have hate crime laws in the U.S., and it's only a matter of time before they're used against us just as they're being used against Taslima Nasreen..." Posted by: rational

I used to think hate crime laws were a good thing. Well, I certainly was wrong about that!

But we can use the law, too. That's where we have to be smart about these things. Know what the laws are and don't break them. Fight using means and methods that will stand up in court. And get organized or join an organization: there is strength in numbers!

We all mention "Piss Christ", etc., but my questions are:
1) Did hate crime laws exist at the time;
2) If yes, did anyone lodge a hate crimes complaint; and
3) If so, what exactly happened to the complaint?

My brother is a brilliant strategist. He used to quote "The Art of War" a lot, so I bought a copy, but I couldn't get interested in it at the time. I've been thinking lately that I'll have to pick up a copy again and read it this time.

The next time a Muslim group tries to enshrine any part of sharia law (including outlawing insulting religion) in one of our countries, we all must join an organization and fight it. That's how we can prevent Taslima Nasreen's situation from becoming ours.

Posted by: Josephine at August 13, 2007 7:30 PM

While I think it's terrible that someone as wonderful as Taslima Nasreen is hurt, her trauma demonstrates to a wide audience the violent and totalitarian nature of Islam.
Who was it that said, "You can silence me but you cannot convert me" ?

Posted by: jewdog at August 13, 2007 9:23 PM

Slightly OT, but story about an Indian and censorship in Minneapolis:
Watching the Simpsons with my kids tonight, the one where Homer, Grandpa, Flanders and Apu go to Canada to by cheap drugs. Flanders gives hot coffee to Apu, who in an effort to cool his burned palate begins to uvulate. Flanders trying to be helpful wraps a wet towel around his head. Apu continues to uvulate, and just before the Border Patrol arrests them, the screen goes to the picture of the Columbia Studios logo. Fifteen seconds and a scene later, the show resumes. I did call the station, and asked for an explanatory call back on what I consider censorship. I won't hold my breath while I wait for that call. Dang, I always liked that scene.

Posted by: Shakey_Premise at August 13, 2007 9:42 PM

"India is a liberal democracy which has a long tradition of free speech. However, the socialist nature of the Indian state - thanks to fools like Jawaharlal Nehru - forces certain "reasonable restrictions" on free speech."
Posted by: Atlantean

The socialist nature is leached into a democratic state, such as India, and this is happening here as well. By understanding this, and correcting the course, we can better avoid
a fall into a pure socialist state. It gets worse quickly after that point.

Islam is not a religion of peace, and we are not a democracy. The truth will help keep us free.

Posted by: Islofob IS-1 at August 13, 2007 11:16 PM

Art is enshrined in the U.S. and a lot of it is federally funded. This could work very well for the exposers of islam.

I envision an entire display, complete with quranic verses for each painting, photo, whatever: beheadings, hands cut off, children blown up.

Let America see the real islam. I would call the exhibit The Religion of Piece, by Piece, by Piece. And if muslims didn't like it, or attacked it, I would call for their arrests, because this is art and this is America. We protect filthy trash in this country, and that is what an exhibit of islam is about.

Posted by: CapitalistGig at August 13, 2007 11:29 PM

Josephine,

Good post, but actually my preference is to get rid of hate crime laws altogether. As long as they're on the books, and we accept them as being normal in our society, we concede to government the right to decide who's a hater, and who's not, who's expressing legitimate concerns, worthy of protection, and who's expressing hatful thoughts, and, therefore, worthy of prosecution.

As you can well surmise, hate crime laws will always be enforced selectively. It will always depend on the subjective opinion of a prosecutor or judge whether your thoughts should be protected or punished.

Your suggestion that we "Know what the laws are and don't break them" won't work. These laws are so broad natured, that you'll never know what they mean until some judge tells you in the court room.

Besides, we in America, shouldn't be forced to watch what we say or think in order to be in compliance with laws that are designed to punish thoughts. "Thoughts", good or bad, should never be subject to regulation in any society -- especially in a democratic society.

In a free society, the hate monger should be perfectly free to express his hate, and others should be free to preach against hate. Both sides should be free to debate their beliefs with one another without fear that they'll be punished for their beliefs.

Many of our most fundamental American principles have been eroded in this country. Perhaps the most cherished of those principles is expressed by a quote from Voltaire -- and one we've all heard: "I might not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." Todays America operates on the principle that "If I don't agree with what you say, I'll have you prosecuted under a hate crime law."

You judge which is the better motto to live by. As for me, get rid of all these obcene laws, and get back to the principles this country always stood for.

Another quote worth mentioning, by Patrick Henry: "give me liberty or give me death." I don't think this generation of Americans has the slightest idea of what he was talking about, but they might understand, "Give me severly limited liberty, so as not to offend anyone."

Posted by: rational at August 13, 2007 11:33 PM

rational -- Yeah, me and my bad memory, LOL. I was going to mention working towards ending hate speech laws as well but then I got distracted.

Good point and I'm glad you brought it up. I agree with you.

Maybe it's because I'm Canadian but I didn't grow up with this statement: "I might not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."

I think I've only heard Americans quote it.

Hmmm, I'm going to think about this one some more. What exactly does the Canadian constitution say about freedom of expression? (I'll look it up tomorrow.)

Posted by: Josephine at August 13, 2007 11:45 PM

...FREE speech is not the only thing under Muslim attack in India....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at August 14, 2007 7:38 AM