[Nets]

^ Example?

[Zyx]

So, related articles claim that the suit was over copyright infringement. In this instance that's just code for anti-semitism and the judge rightfully through the claim out the window:

In dismissing the suit on Monday, Judge Deborah Batts of Federal District Court in Manhattan wrote that the original song’s wholesomeness makes it fair game for “ridicule by parodists seeking to take the wind out of such lofty, magical or pure associations,” according to The A.P.

This merely illustrates that Jews act politically, too. If you wish to make the claim that Jews are apolitical then go for it. Also, if you really care about this Family Guy bit then look at the proceedings of the trial. I don't care that much. Just showing that Jews can react to insults on their religion or ethnicity. I did not know that calling Jews pious was bad . . ..

[Nets]

Note that the lawsuit was filed by the publishing house which owned the song though, not by any Jewish group. So why did you write "Jews" in the link?

[Zyx]

That's the example that came up with Google. I wouldn't be surprised if some research revealed that some Jews were behind the unreasonable lawsuit. Also, it's claimed that Fox's concerns were that of antisemitism, so it is likely that the dialogue surrounding the song related with Jews. Quit protesting.

[Nets]

I wouldn't be surprised if some research revealed that some Jews were behind

Big fucking surprise, you and Qatz think Jews are behind everything.

Which still leaves us with you writing "Jews sue Family Guy for anti-semitic lyrics." for an article about a publishing company suing family guy over copyright infringement.

[Kman]

There is nothing wrong with protesting as such, what is wrong however is killing or threatening to kill someone just because they dont like your religion and that is something which muslims do to a much much greater extent than people from other religions.

Why shouldnt westerners be allowed to call Islam a shitty and evil religion for example? secular or christian westerners are not muslims, they should not be required to follow Islamic laws.

[Kapanda]

Oh please, Kapanda. The Cairo Declaration on Human Rights is evidence enough that Islam is completely incompatible with Western humanism. I have no problem with what they practice in their own countries, but they do not belong in Europe, nor do they seem to be mature enough to even handle living in a secular society with freedom of speech. Their protests at any assault on their religion go well beyond any reasonable action and certainly beyond what their Jewish and Christian peers engage in. It is a fundamental incompatibility, and it is time this was recognized.

But on this particular incident alone. That their Christian or Jewish counterparts don't behave similarly is not reason enough to find their protest unacceptable.

I commend them for their passion in their religion. So long as this is their reaction, protest against an unpleasent move towards their religion, then we should accept them. Whether I find it right or not to react that way, it is within their rights - and they aren't necessarily damaging the fabrics of our society in any way. It is once they denounce their hosts and go as far as calling for the death of their hosts that it should become unacceptable (and of course, anything beyond that as well).

But protesting against something that they're not pleased about... it should be their right, let them do it.

[Godstud]

But protesting against something that they're not pleased about... it should be their right, let them do it.

By all means protest, but at least understand what you are protesting. They obviously aren't aware of the intent of the comic. Those Mulsims that engage in criminal behavior such as computer vandalism, death threats, tend to make the protests less than innocent.

Remember Salman Rushdie who still has a death sentence(Fatwa) on him, over 20 years later, by Muslims who protest his book(1988)?
Hitoshi Igarashi, the Japanese language translator of the book, was stabbed to death on 11 July 1991; Ettore Capriolo, the Italian language translator, was seriously injured in a stabbing the same month; William Nygaard, the publisher in Norway, barely survived an attempted assassination in Oslo in October 1993, and Aziz Nesin, the Turkish language translator, was the intended target in the events that led to the Sivas massacre on 2 July 1993 in Sivas, Turkey which resulted in the deaths of 37 people.
Just your average Muslim protests.

I do agree with free speech and the right to protest, however, Muslims don't seem to know where protesting stops and where criminal acts, censorship and denying freedom of speech, begin. This same thing occurred in Denmark in 2006.

[Kapanda]

But let's not lump them all together.

There was this Turkish hacker who broke the law, and there have been numerous occasions where Muslims showed less tolerance than expected from a citizen. But the Norwegian Muslims did little more than excercise their right - there was the firecracker incident, unfortunately (which is a very negative mark against them), but all in all, I would say they proved to be able as peaceful (even if angry) members of Western society.

[Godstud]

I would say they proved to be able as peaceful (even if angry) members of Western society.

So far... And what exactly are they protesting? Are they protesting the offensive material about Muslims and Jews on the Facebook page of Norway's security police?

I'd wait and see what happens over the next few weeks. Muslims don't seem to respond to retractions or apologies.

[Cartertonian]

Why shouldnt westerners be allowed to call Islam a shitty and evil religion for example?

I say! It's one of those rare occasions when I agree with Kman.

Any belief system, whether religious or political, that lacks the maturity and wisdom to tolerate abuse, is not worthy of consideration.

For example, there are always very small numbers of Christian protesters whenever something appears blasphemous to Christianity, but they are a tiny bunch of complete whackos - even to the overwhelming majority of mainstream, church-going Christians.

The problem with Islam is that whilst the active protesters are still small in number and could thus be dismissed by the hand-wringing apologist, left-liberal lobby, their sentiments attract the approval of a very large number of mainstream Muslims, even if those Muslims would not physically stand alongside the protestors.

So, in summary, someone blasphemes Christ - and a handful of total nutjobs get upset.

Someone blashpemes Mohammed - and the majority of the Muslim world takes offence.

If moderate Islam is sincere in its claims that it does not seek to impose worldwide hegemony and return planet Earth to the Middle Ages, then they need to learn to deal with adverse events such as these.

[GandalfTheGrey]

The intention of the article was to highlight the offensive nature of these online posts. It was not intended as an insult to Islam nor is it illegal for a Norwegian newspaper to publish images of Mohammad.

The newspaper caused offense simply by publishing the caricature of the prophet - regardless of whether or not it was making a sympathetic point. Naturally this seems silly to a lot of people, but that is the religion. You can be as high and mighty as you like about freedom of speech, but just don't expect muslims not to react (overwhelmingly peacefully) when this happens. If newspapers have the right to publish offensive material, then citizens have the right to peacefully protest against it.

Also I have read at least three criticisms of islam that don't even relate to these protests, or European muslims in general. It is not Norwegian muslims who issued the fatwa against Rushdie, and it is not Norwegian muslims who are "threatening to kill someone just because they dont like your religion". Funny how an article about a peaceful protest that should be a celebration of democracy in action, turns into a anti-muslim bash fest.

[governmentcontract]

Nets,

I've noticed that Zyx doesn't read the links he attaches to his posts. He literally does a Google search on a few key words, reads the heading or headline of a link he opens, and then just assumes that he can throw into a thread and that every other participant will be as lazy as he is and not read anything. Even if he does happen to read the link, or parts of it, he will typically ignore important context and make irrelevant points (that are likely incorrect, even as they are irrelevant tangents) in order to detract from the topic at hand. Perhaps you already know this, but if you don't, I'm just giving you a warning. I made the mistake of giving him the benefit of the doubt and assuming he was a well-intentioned poster even thought my e-instincts told me he was a major troll.

[Diligent]

Then what does that make the Jews, who scream 'anti-semite' at every turn.

Equally repugnant.

[War Angel]

Equally repugnant.

I'd say calling someone drawing antisemitic cartoons "antisemite" isn't nearly as bad as gutting him, torching his house and killing his family and general bystanders... but hey, maybe my standards are a bit fucked.

[Godstud]

Funny how an article about a peaceful protest that should be a celebration of democracy in action, turns into a anti-muslim bash fest.

A peaceful protest that sparked crimes as far away as Turkey, against a newspaper? How is that peaceful? Like Cartertonian said, "Someone blashpemes Mohammed - and the majority of the Muslim world takes offence.". This is true and the reason why violence, etc. gets sparked from a 'peaceful protest'. You now just need the Ayatollah to issue a fatwa against the artist, to make the protest complete.

As for the other things not being relative, they most certainly are. They have been the previous 'protests' against things that the Muslim world doesn't like. They've resulted in riots, deaths, death threats, etc. all because Muslims didn't like something written or a cartoon. The protest itself might have been peaceful, but it's the spark for Muslim violence.

Aftenposten first published copies of the cartoons in 2005 but did not join newspapers in many other countries when they reprinted in 2006 some or all of them, citing freedom of expression.
Angry crowds demonstrated across the Muslim world, leaving dozens of people dead in riots and causing damage to Danish embassies and the country's export trade due to boycotts.

That's from the previous cartoon that offended Muslims. It's very relevant.


It was Aamir Sheikh who took the initiative to arrange the meeting. The goal was to find solution to the Muslim problem that arouse after the newspaper printed the Muhammed as a pig cartoon as an illustration for a story. On Friday, 1000 Muslim taxi drivers parked their cars and blocked the traffic in Oslo protesting the printing of the cartoons. They continued their strike on Monday.

Now the imam suggest that he fears the Muslim reaction could, be stronger than when the Muhammed cartoon were printed the first time in 2006 and hundreds of building, embassies and people, were burned and killed over a freeking cartoon.

Yes, this time the might be bigger problems with rioting Muslims. Last time there were organizations and mosques inciting to riots, now there are individual Muslim ready to kill for Allah.

"The situation could get out of Allah's hands, hints the imam.

Sheik said, "anything can happen." Seems like the worst is to come.

[Sephardi]

The original cartoon was drawn by a Jewish woman living in Hebron. She was sentenced by an Israeli court to two years in prison for trying to affix it to an Arab-owned shop front.

What the hell? Jews sentencing other Jews to prison in the Jewish homeland for drawing a picture of a prophet of another religion? This is madness.

[Godstud]

She was sentenced by an Israeli court to two years in prison for trying to affix it to an Arab-owned shop front.

She was trying to incite violence or participating in something that could be construed as a hate crime. Why should her being a Jew make her above the law? Suggesting otherwise is madness.

[astuc]

They are acting like babies. What kind of god needs support from a bunch of whiners. At least they weren't killing anybody. If some one says they want to live in peace you know they are threatening violence. Ban all of those murderous followers of the god of Abraham. They feign offense to show piety.

[Fasces]

Yes, this was a peaceful protest. This does not, however, excuse the fact that such an event should not even be protested. They are literally protesting the practice of freedom of speech by a newspaper editor. If we can allow them the freedom to protest, we ourselves should be allowed to criticize the reasons behind it.

Using political correctness as a tool for censorship is deplorable regardless of whom ever does it. In Europe, however, it is becoming obvious that the Islamic community is using this beyond any reasonable amount. They are insisting that the world accomodate their own needs, wheras extremists in both Christianity and Judaism make no similar insistence. Pork, for example, is as dirty to the Jewish man as the Muslim, but it is the Muslim that demands that a pizza shop, nursing home, or diplomatic summit not only accommodate their own needs, but force such a view on others.

Islam does not belong in Europe, let alone Norway. I do not care that they protested peacefully. There was no reason for protest, and they should not have been in the country to protest to begin with.