Slashdot Mirror
Extremists Warn South Park Creators Over Muhammad In a Bear Suit
An anonymous reader writes "A radical Islamic website is warning the creators of South Park that they could face violent retribution for depicting the Prophet Muhammad in a bear suit during an episode broadcast on Comedy Central last week. RevolutionMuslim.com posted the warning following the 200th episode of Trey Parker and Matt Stone's South Park."
They already had depicted him before in season 10 "Cartoon Wars Part II":
http://images.southparkstudios.com/media/images/504/superbestfriends.gif
I was kind of surprised when I watched the show since they did this right after the danish
Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_cartoons_controversy
What surprised me even more is that I don't recall anybody saying anything back then. Nevertheless, apparently Comedy Central is now refusing to show depiction of Muhammad so it seems the authors decided to masquerade him as a bear.
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkGQmCZjJ0k
Why can't THAT black man be president?!
Allen/Honore 2012
South Park is still on?
More like religion of easily butthurt. When will stupid crap like this end? What modern religion can honestly take itself seriously after issuing threats over the depiction of their "god?"
Al Amrikee said the website is considering a protest against the "disgusting" show, which also depicted the Prophet Muhammad in an episode on July 4, 2001.
I remember that one, I think it opened with a bugs bunny-ish skit depicting Bin Laden in some slapstick comedy.
What I want to know is how Al Amrikee feels about Fox news hosting the image of Muhammad in a bear suit in the article? And how does he feel now that his comment has had the Streisand effect and Foxnews.com is showing it to many more people that don't have access to cable television. Wouldn't he, as part of the distribution channel and medium, be also on said "black lists" he warns of?
My work here is dung.
I find it ironic that the "prophet" Mohammed is treated with more respect and reverence by Muslims who treat human life as superfluous than the "Messiah" Jesus is treated by his followers.
Revelations 3:15-16 calls these followers "lukewarm" and God will spit them out of his mouth on judgement day.
"Modern Religion"? Answered your own question there, sport.
They could have put him in a pedobear costume.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
I also remember some other extremists warning the president of the US and various senators about violent retribution (with gun crosshairs painted over their districts etc) after voting for the health care bill.
I think they actually knew what they could be getting themselves into when they did this. Even though South Park seems "childish", it does do social commentary, and it shows that the authors seem to be paying attention to the world around them. I may not agree with everything they have done, but in my opinion, it's better that they do too much than too little. It's important that someone has the balls to stand up and speak out. And now they dared to touch Muhammad.
That said, have they ever refused to parody or ridicule someone or something? Is there anything that is "sacred" to them?
Muhammad might be sacred to Muslims, and they may be offended by this. But this is exactly why Muhammad needs to be ridiculed even more. Nothing should be above criticism and ridicule, and if some think that they or their symbols are, they should be the target of even more ridicule, until they understand that they will not be able to do anything they please without criticism for their wrongdoings.
Let's hope Matt and Trey won't end up as "martyrs" of free speech, though. We need them around to keep doing what they do.
Clever signature text goes here.
That'll show 'em!
...is to increase the number of targets by several orders of magnitude. No, really, I'm quite serious. If everyone posts or publishes a cartoon simultaneously mocking Mohammed, Jesus, and Moses, there will be no practical way for religious extremists to respond. (Yes, I know there are other religions, but it's the big three monotheist camps that are making most of the trouble.)
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
Part of the plot of the episode was the characters worrying that Muhammad was going to appear in their town. They kept asking "is that okay" in the episode... representations of Muhammad as a stick figure to Muhammad inside a U-Haul prompt worried questions from the characters... eventually the characters opt to place Muhammad in a full-body bear suit so he was not visible.
"is that okay?"
I guess not.
[signature]
Really, who has south park NOT ridiculed in one way or another. Threatening with violence only shows how much more of a tool you can be!
Im ok..
It's a religion of peace, but you know what they say: a few million bad apples spoils the whole bunch.
You'd think that after a few decades of the internets, IRL trolling wouldn't still be so easy.
Islam needs to grow a pair and get over themselves. No one is spared from South Park, hell they kill jesus almost every other episode, they made fun of mormons, they had a voice actor quit because they made fun of scientology. Muslims are no more special than anyone else.
The scary thing is, jihadists firmly believe one day everyone will be muslim, or no one will be muslim (read no one will be alive to have an opinion otherwise)
Their lack of tolerance is terrible, Id wish we could get rid of our dependency on oil to make the middle east unnecessary.
I mean, so far, South Park has lampooned Christ, Budda, etc....and yet none of these groups have threatened them with anything more dangerous than possibly a boycott.
Seriously, what the fuck is with these people? Isn't it time to move into the 21st century with the rest of us?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
This is exactly the reaction that Trey Parker and Matt Stone were looking for.
If you watch the episode, the members of South Park conclude that the only way to _NOT OFFEND_ Muslims is to put him in a bear suit.
Unfortunately, it looks like in the real world, the Muslims are even more crazy than South Park has depicted them to be. It shows exactly how wacko the muslim community is.
It's similar to the Scientology episode...except, they didn't actually get sued by Scientologists. I daresay, that Scientologists are more sane in this regard than Muslims.
...the 200th episode was fucking epic. Easily one of the best South Park episodes ever, even if it was a parody of "rehash" episodes...it was amazing.
Living With a Nerd
Wow, some people take things too far. If you have such a big issue with their show, don't pay any attention to it. If you go murder these guys, you're not going to fear people in to listening to your demands. You'll be polarizing a vast fan base in to never considering your views as anything more than completely fucking crazy.
Religion needs to be mocked, but Islam more so than Christianity. The stronger the reaction to parody and ridicule, the more parody and ridicule is required to smack religion into its rightful subdued state (in society).
Clever signature text goes here.
You could try bashing L Ron Hubbard if you some serious grief.
Ha!
The Howard Stern effect in action.
People watch it cause they love it...people watch it cause they hate it.
Much like everything else in life...if people don't like something they get closer to it so they can complain in greater detail about it.
In the end I feel that you have two choices about group/personal opinions:
1. If you don't like something...be intelligent enough to leave it alone.
OR
2. Become what you don't like.
That's about it.
I mixed up things, they actually depicted him 2001 as TFA says in "super best friends" , but as I stated, I don't recall anybody said anything back then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Best_Friends
"Cartoon Wars Part II" is a different show aired after the danish
Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartoon_Wars_Part_II
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
OK, OK, *Somebody* had to make the joke.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
Though religions are, indeed, full of wonder, some are fuller than others... Religion of Peace in particular... Maybe, it is just because it is so young — over 700 years younger than even Christianity, though.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Muhammad can go suck a big, floppy donkey dick.
Fuck Islamic radicals. Also for good measure, fuck Mohammed.
There is a war going on for your mind.
"Extremists Warn South Park Creators Over Muhammad in a Bear Suit"
What a total wimp-out of a headline. A 'warning' is when the weatherman says 'it looks icy out today, drive slow.' When someone calls upon the nut-jobs of the world to murder you because you pissed off their bronze-age sky fairy, that's inciting violence, an explicit threat. I'm willing to go pretty far in support of free speech, but this is definitely "fire in a crowded theater" material.
"We're the religion of peace, and if you say otherwise, we are going to kill you"!
Mohammad is not a god, but a prophet of God. The difference is significant, but you choose to paint all Muslims with a single brush so that the significance is lost on you is not surprising. All Christians are exactly like Westboro Baptist Church right?
As for why idolatry is wrong, it's a simple idea: the use of images to depict the divine leads to idolatry (ie: The Catholic Church and the Crucifix). Idolatry is bad in that it stifles thought in religious worship while encouraging irrational emotionality.
Wait. The new season of South Park has started? SHIT! Thanks, Muslim homosexuals! I'll be sure to tune in to episode 201 to have a good laugh at your prophet while I'm riding a train on two sweet arab honeys. /calculated for maximum effect
I don't care what religion it is, if I am not a follower of that religion, I am not subject to its rules. Period.
Given that Muhammad's wives were all under 10 I assume it was a pedobear suit?
Islam, true Islam, is extremely peaceful. However like any large faith, it is often perverted by those who seek to use it to gain political power. A perfect example of this is Paul from the Christian faith. A simple skim over the books he wrote even leaves the most ignorant aware of the fact that he did not follow the teachings of Jesus. His books have been altered even more in the centuries since then to suit the political pressures at the time.. some parts were cut out, some were added in.
Any faith can be abused by those who want to get more money, land, power, opposite (or same) sex... Looking at Muslims who would threaten people with death over their depictions of Mohammad and taking that as the width and breadth of Islam is no more absurd then looking at the actions of Westboro Baptist and their "Got hates Gays" protests at fallen soldiers and thinking they are representative of all Christians.
the preceding post was not spell checked... suck it.
Eastern Orthodox Christians do not permit depictions of anyone. Do they throw a fit about cartoons too?
Prediction: The real iPhone killer is going to be sex robots from Japan. Think about it.
What gets me about radical religious types is that they always seem to profess to know what it is their supreme leader wants. Depict their leader in a costume - or even in the flesh - and they hand out a death warrant. Seems to me this is not only hypocritical (i.e., being above their leader by professing to know what it is their leader wants), but also goes to show that their supreme leader is "weak" - IOW, if the supreme leader doesn't like it, wouldn't they have the absolute power to just terminate the accusers without too much hassle?
but thanks to this extremist statement, I'll be watching.
Muhammad can suck my cock.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Too be fair, the terrorists are no more about Islam then Pat Robertson is about Christianity.
Now, I'm not condoning war or murder or terrorism or anything like that, but would it be at all ironic (and hilarious) if this lead to a an American "war on Islam" à la the "war on Canada" in Bigger, Longer & Uncut?
"How dare you portray Muhammad as violent! We shall kill you for that!"
Table-ized A.I.
Its probably because the Bible has a few lessons on Humility.
I just can't help it!
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
dirka dirka jihad?
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
...those peace loving muslims, eh?
I mean, so far, South Park has lampooned Christ, Budda, etc....and yet none of these groups have threatened them with anything more dangerous than possibly a boycott.
I would suggest that they have a talk with a Dharma Master about that.
Old Buddhist saying,
If you see the Buddha on the side of the road, kill him.
To be taken metaphorically, of course.
RIP America
July 4, 1776 - September 11, 2001
If such people are in the US and they don't like what happens in the US they should go live somewhere else.
If such people aren't in the US then they should stay where they are and not visit the US.
People who settle in the US should adopt US values and not try to force their own religious or cultural values upon US citizens.
I guess now it'll be ' Blame Muhammad '
Didn't Yogi used to wear a Muhammad suit to steal picnic baskets?
Table-ized A.I.
When one sets out to do something that is carefully calculated to progressively piss off everyone, it shouldn't come as a huge shock when the plan succeeds so well that a few pissees become violent.
Will tonight ep be a other joke with part 2 be next week?
Meh, I don't think religion is all that bad, when it's viewed simply as part of a cultural background. It's kind of like an Operating System... a little book of code that determines what actions a person should take under a certain situation, what kinds of goals and values they have, etc. that would make them more predictable. It doesn't really matter if the instructions are true or logically sound or whatever, it just matters that people have some code of conduct that they can point to and say "yeah, that's me". With this computer analogy, I can kind of understand why the Middle East doesn't really accept atheism or agnosticism as a religion on visa applications, since that's sort of like saying they are computers without operating systems. (Maybe we could write some sort of codebook of atheism or whatever, more likely some choose-your-own-adventure customized thing tailored to each believer's sensibilities, but that's besides the point.)
I like Neal Stephenson's analogy that organized religion tends to spread like a virus (or maybe more like a botnet in this day and age). People can produce more if they're organized into groups and work together, either through religion or government or military or whatever (yeah I've been watching my son play Spore too much). But that's going to happen no matter what, and it's not a bad thing as long as diversity is preserved so we don't become a monoculture, easily wiped out by a single shared fatal flaw. So back to the internet analogy different religions simply need to be able to network with each other, some are better at networking than others, and all have kooks that try to take over the rest. The kooks just want attention, and the media for the most part dishes it out to them.
...but the thing I want answered in '201' more than anything else is, who really is Cartman's father? What's this about some guy in a bear costume?
No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
What happened to the website ? This is all I get:
It works!
This is the default web page for this server.
The web server software is running but no content has been added, yet.
If they're such extremists what are they doing watching South Park?
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
It seems that the newer the religion is the more extreme the followers are - just the methods are different.
- Scientology sues your pants off for anything that you do that offends them.
- Muslims sends out a fatwa declaring that you are valid prey.
- Catholics - banish you and use your kids for sexual favors.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be working very well, now is it?
All many Muslims seem to be doing is not thinking within their worship, blindly following their 'imam', and acting in an irrational and highly emotional manner (witness the stupidity we are discussing right now...). This is not to say that all Muslims are doing it or most- but there is quite a few that act butthurt regularly over snubs in a manner that should be considered unacceptable by the bulk of the members of your faith. Much as it would be considered unacceptable for Christians to act this way (and while they do, they don't seem to be as prevalent or as problematic as the Muslim equivalent grouping seems to be...).
This is not a threat, but a warning of the reality of what will likely happen to them.
Really? The only reason to give a "warning" like that is to encourage others to do what they want to happen to Matt and Trey.
And +1 for the FOX News link!
Pat Robertson never flew an airplane into a building or blew up a bus full of women and children. The terrorists may not believe what the majority of Muslims believe, but we're still talking about a large number of sects within Islam with millions of completely faithful followers ready, willing, and thrilled to do violence in the name of their god as their belief structure requires.
They're no extremists. A strongly-worded Jihad? Let the ululation begin! (Until our voices get sore, or until I have to get back in time for the Osama bin Laden Variety Hour tv show...)
I'd say you've never even heard of a little country called Ireland...
Which very conveniently are in the Quran as well as it is a "derivative work"
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
The Prophet Mohammed with the Power of Flame http://i39.tinypic.com/m7gj0p.jpg
If they'd PortrayED him as a certain One-legged BEAR, things could've gotten pretty ugly pretty fast, especially given the common age-of-marriage customs when the Prophet was alive here on Earth.
From watching the episode, the entire point of it seemed to be to show the absurdity of a prohibition on any depiction of someone. By making a depiction of Muhammed (PBUH) that involved no image that was recognizably of him, they showed that the prohibition was ridiculous, because it is then a blanket prohibition on any image. I could say that the category icon for this story was a depiction of the Prophet disguised as a white man in glasses with a black rectangle over his mouth - suddenly that would be a prohibited image.
CAVEAT: This line of argument also means that prohibitions on depictions of things that _we_ think shouldn't be allowed are also absurd.
Finally, this is not to say that I think that any image is acceptable, but it must have to do with the objective content (or at least consensus agreement of what the objective content is), rather than what the artist intended it to depict, or what it may have been interpreted as depicting.
Obviously you have not watched this episode. The intent of putting Muhammad in a bear suit was not to mock Muhammad but to criticize the fact that no one is allowed to depict Muhammad at all in his human form. South Park has made fun of just about every celebrity, religious figure, and political leader possible. They regularly make fun of Jesus in a country full of Christians and are not threatened by violence, but simply depicting Muhammad without even showing his human form subjects them to threats on their lives. The social commentary is simply that these people are way too extreme and this reaction is certainly proving them right. This isn't "fire in a crowded theater" material - it is about censorship of discussing fire in general.
and they have learned well. They can intimidate without actually having to do anything. They can intimidate and then allow others to do for them what they cannot or would not do. They can intimidate and now act on it because of ease of travel and even easier time recruiting in the target lands.
They know how to exploit the press. The know how to exploit local laws, if this show was produced in Canada it could be shut down by registering complaint with the government.
Coming into the 21st century isn't their problem, the problem is we refuse to do anything about them because too many have some guilt for actions taking by others generations ago. Or worse, some just have the need to feel superior by showing their restraint and "understanding" which is far more insulting to them.
Comedy Central and South Park chickened out by putting him into a costume.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
But I am a safe target.
Infuriate left and right
To Quote Cartman "AHAHAHA ha ha ahahahaha hahahahah AHAHAH HAHAHAHA AHAHAHAHAH hahahaha. AHAHHAHhahahaha AHHAahahahahaha."
I, for one, welcome our bear costumn wearing overload!?
Pat Robertson never flew an airplane into a building or blew up a bus full of women and children.
No, but radical Catholics fighting the Anglicans certainly have blown up busses.
The terrorists may not believe what the majority of Muslims believe, but we're still talking about a large number of sects within Islam with millions of completely faithful followers ready, willing, and thrilled to do violence in the name of their god as their belief structure requires.
And a huge number of violent christians in the US military who believe they are right to attack muslim countries in the hopes of converting them. It may not be what the majority of christians or people in the US military believe, but there are still plenty of them.
As a Christian I thoroughly enjoyed Dogma. Kevin Smith said he got death threats over the movie. But I believe that people should have freedom of speech. I also think that if your beliefs can't stand up to question or parody, then maybe you need to get some new beliefs.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
When someone calls upon the nut-jobs of the world to murder you because you pissed off their bronze-age sky fairy,
I'm an Atheist myself, but to exactly what "bronze-age sky fairy" are you referring?
The Bronze Age ended more than a millenium before the birth of Muhammad.
If you're going to disparage a religion, at least try to educate yourself minimally about it. Be a responsible Atheist.
Perhaps "medieval sky fairy" would be more appropriate
Death treats? Well what do you expect from a religion that preaches peace, love, and brotherhood?
Supporting World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification
Is that Islam has not undergone a process analogous to the Enlightenment.
Pre-Enlightenment, much of Europe was basically a mass of warring theocracies, split between the Catholic ones and the Protestant ones. Separation of church and state were basically nonexistent, blasphemy laws were on the books(and had real teeth, with limited exceptions[thanks a whole fucking lot Ireland] the ones that remain are just relics at this point). You easily could be, and people were, killed for having the wrong doctrinal positions. Censorship was rampant. Things pretty much sucked.
Thanks to the dedicated(and at times heroic, not a few faced jail, or worse) efforts of various Enlightenment figures, along with a number of political occurrences(the French Revolution had its minuses; but it did have the salubrious effect of annihilating a schlerotic and corrupt divine-right absolutism and replacing it with a secular nation-state. The Glorious Revolution in England was less dramatic; but went rather better. Then, of course, you had the American Revolution, which was absolutely dripping with Enlightenment sentiment[much to the displeasure of today's crop of "America is a Christian Nation founded on the Bible!!! Dominionist nutjobs]).
The Enlightenment was not an easy process. Much blood, sweat, and ink were spilled; but the results helped make the modern west the more-or-less pleasant place it is today. It was basically the death-knell of absolutist theocracy in the west, and the impetus behind the broad introduction of fun concepts like "human rights" and "freedom of religion"(also coffeehouses and atheism, what's not to love?).
The relatively benign forms of Christianity that we think of today are basically creations of the Enlightenment(even among the zealous, things like persecution and warfare between Catholics, protestants, and various sects thereof are basically off the table). It wasn't always that way. Even today, there are reactionary hardliners who would really prefer to roll things back(Rushdooney and the "Reconstructionists", for instance, "Dominionists" more generally, are the main thrust of that in the US, where the hardcore are predominantly fundamentalist protestants. On the European stage, we still have the Catholic church pretending that its "canon law", rather than being simply a set of rules for a private club, somehow takes precedence over Civil Law. Without substantial moderating influences, Abrahamic monotheisms are mean, ugly, primitive, and brutal.
Unfortunately, Islam has not, historically, experienced an analogous process. This doesn't mean that there aren't plenty of more-or-less modern people who are nominally "muslim" in the same way that much of the west is still nominally "christian"; but it does mean that none of the major strains of Islam have been subjected to the radical reduction in power that all the various flavors of Christianity have. For instance, a Christian advocate of theocratic government qualifies as a right-wing nutjob(they exist in surprisingly large numbers, unfortunately; but they still qualify as a fringe position). In large areas of the world, Islamic theocracy(either as a matter of law, or in the form of a state so heavily subservient to religious enthusiasts and Sharia courts that it might as well be) is simply the local form of government.
This is not to say that there is anything intrinsically superior about Christianity. It fought progress tooth-and-nail, every step of the way, during the Enlightenment. To this day, it harbors downright nasty reactionary elements. And, despite protestations to the contrary, most of the noblest aspects of our society exist in spite of rather than because of it. (Fun stuff like "Civil law" and "freedom of conscience" are either classical, or modern derivations from the classical philosophical tradition). However, because Islam has not been subjected to the moderating(some would say "neutering") influence of an Enlightenment, it retains many of the ugly elements that Christianity no longer has the political power or cultural clout to employ.
... and his prophets don't need anyone to defned them either. Especially the dead ones.
Maybe they need the one true God? Theirs seems to be entirely lacking in this area. Not to mention the Prophet, and his inadequacies. Please. He can take care of himself, if needed, eh? Can't? Tough.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
CONTACT US: Phone Number: (212)203-7606
E-Mail: revolutionmuslim (at) gmail (dot) com
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
To be fair a good percentage of those being brought up as Muslims are being taught that it'd be an honor to kill a few infidels like Matt and Trey.
After all, it could have been anybody in that bear suit.
Remember Islam is about 6 centuries younger than Christianity. Read some of the history of Christianity from the 1400's and you will find similar violent reactions of Jesus depicted in any non-sacred way. Jesus was not even portrayed in cinema until 1961's "King of King's".
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
1) so many things to mock, so few episodes a year
2) the number of lint balls in my dryer hose just isn't important enough to mock.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
(Posting anonymous for obvious reasons)
Haven't you heard what the Danes have been going through with the Mohammed Cartoons for years now ? Getting threats from any kind of religious fanatics should be taken seriously. From breaking into cartoonists House's with an Axe trying to murder him and his grandchild to bombing newspaper trucks. Funny is though its not only the fanatics, it is also Muslim lawyers from said countries going after the newspapers and writers here some quick links off the top of my head in english from Denmark.
Somali attacks Mohammed cartoonist http://politiken.dk/newsinenglish/article871593.ece
Cartoon paper was to be truck bombed http://politiken.dk/newsinenglish/article880501.ece
Saudi demand on Mohammed cartoon http://politiken.dk/newsinenglish/article778665.ece
Politiken settles Mohammed cartoon issue http://politiken.dk/newsinenglish/article911102.ece
Pat Robertson never flew an airplane into a building or blew up a bus full of women and children.
You can bet your sweet ass that if Pat Robertson thought driving a bus full of true Christian believers who were willing to be martyrs into an abortion clinic would make him and the people that follow him martyrs and spark a great fundamentalist Christian conversion, he would do it in a fucking heartbeat.
He's smart enough to know that the backlash would destroy the evangelical movement, but don't think for a second that something similar hasn't crossed his mind.
So some blogger says something stupid, and it's suddenly worthy of FOX News coverage?
Gee. THAT's not indicative of anything.
Here's the scoop: Anybody who reacts with indignation against Islam as a result of this story is jumping exactly the way the propagandist sell-outs over at FOX want you to jump. If this describes you, then you are a complete tool. Nice job.
-FL
\o thats mohammed waiving
o/ thats allah waiving back
Did they (South Park creators) already messed up with Jews ? With the Holocaust ? With "anti-semitism" ?
Apparently he didn't start banging her until she was 9.
Source.
Yeah, for once the article understated the headline. A couple of the so-called "editors" could learn from this.
From TFA:
"It's not a threat, but it really is a likely outcome."
But hey, it's Fox news. I'll take some salt with my margarita.
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
Did they have the Muhammad teddy bear in mind when creating this episode?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudanese_teddy_bear_blasphemy_case
Does the bear wear a funny hat?
You're all so fucking retarded. Don't have a nice day, die instead and face the void.
Too bad some people who don't like bear suits are still living in that century.
(If at first you don't succeed, do it different next time!)
You sounded really smart until I realized you didn't know the difference between THEN and THAN...
Who gets to decide what "Christianity" or "Islam" are, or aren't, about?
No true Scotsman...
Muhammad dressed as a lumberjack humping a bear would have been better.
Damping absorbs vibrations. Dampening is caused by moisture.
Christian actually means "Christ like". If you do not behave in a way that is similar to what he said to behave, you are not really Christian. Hence why people like Westboro Baptist and other "anti-whatever" Christian groups are more often Paulians then Christians (though they would never agree to that fact).
the preceding post was not spell checked... suck it.
Alas, like all people who fail to be "really smart", I sometimes create a typo.
They are poking fun at radical Islam, not Catholics! Sheesh!
"Pat Robertson never flew an airplane into a building or blew up a bus full of women and children."
Neither have all the terrorists.
"but we're still talking about a large number of sects within Islam with millions of completely faithful followers ready, willing, and thrilled to do violence in the name of their god as their belief structure requires."
Millions of Islamic terrorists? What do you base that on?
Get the Google cache. No images, but still some fascinating articles. The one about countering the counter terrorism experts displays significant intelligence, the ability to identify their own weaknesses and a very solid understanding how how counter terrorism experts work, and how to weaken the discussion among counter terrorism experts. These aren't run-of-the-mill yahoos with an axe to grind.
http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:S0v4mrD31jYJ:www.revolutionmuslim.com/
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
The terrorists are in it for the money & power too?
There is a war going on for your mind.
Religion needs to be mocked, but Islam more so than Christianity. The stronger the reaction to parody and ridicule, the more parody and ridicule is required to smack religion into its rightful subdued state (in society).
Not to mention that the KKK are all radical Christians, but we wouldn't want them speaking on behalf of the entire faith, now would we?
This brings up a very good example actually. Part of the way that the KKK was taken down, was through public ridicule by the writer Stetson Kennedy, who used mockery (and Superman!) to knock away the wall of secrecy and intimidation that surrounded the organization.
I disagree. Naming rights go to the ones who shout the loudest. It's up to other muslims/christians to retake the name if they want it. As a non-muslim, it's not my problem who is/is not a *real* muslim.
It may not be ideal, but that is how it works in practice. I mean, most communist states we've seen in the past 100 years would probably have had Marx and Engels rolling in their graves.
Comedy Central said the same thing. That why they won't allow Mohammed to be shown: fear of a violent backlash.
Muhammad is no profit. Jesus is our true savior. If you don't like it go blow yourself up.
Obama = Socialism.
but in the end, this hobbles and impoverishes the islamic world, because you have essentially banned freedom of thought in your culture, which is the only means by which social and technological progress occurs. the muslim world has money because they have oil. but the world is moving past oil. eventually, the muslim world will find that oil doesn't pay anymore, and that nothing else in their sphere of influence pays anything either, and they will sink into poverty
a culture is rich when the ideas the culture cherishes are rich. but if your culture values extreme obedience to unquestionable static ideas, you will have a poor culture (unless its artificially propped up by things like natural resources, as is the current situation). either the moderate muslims effectively control and shut up the large number of fundamentalists in their midsts, or the future of the muslim world is poverty and violence. that's the simple truth
there are fundamentalists in every culture and religion, and every culture and religion in the world has a problem with fundamentalist assholes running around insisting on regimented obedience to unquestionable ideas and ready to do violence if no one listens to them. but you are blind and intellectually dishonest if you don't see that the muslim world has a greater than average amount of such fundamentalists. and the key point: they are funded by the petrodollars
therefore, it is the moral duty of the rest of the world to move off of oil as an energy source, in order to drain the well of muslim fundamentalists dry. there is the pollution argument, the national security argument, the limited resources argument, but to me, the most compelling argument for getting off oil is the humanist argument: there is direct connection between using oil and funding muslim fundamentalism in this world. this is the crucial realization everyone must understand: the best way to fight muslim fundamentalism, better than wars, better than idea exchange, better than political maneuvering: move off of oil as a fuel source
stop using oil, on a personal level and a national policy level, every country in the world. or we will all suffer more, in the wider world and the muslim world, due to the braindead fundamentalist assholes running around
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Can you send me the relevant quotes. I know quite a few Xians who aren't so good on the humility. But they sure know where to find all of those anti-gay provisions!
"I guess the moral of the story is, don't paint your airship with rocket fuel." -- Addison Bain
I'd like to see every television show do an episode depicting Prophet Muhammad - then terrorists can just go back to threatening everyone. Problem solved.
The whole time I was watching all I could think was these pedophile child-rapist Muslims think they are morally superior? Something is really F'd up with these people. Killing women and raping children is not a problem, but don't you dare draw a picture.
Did you ever wake up in the morning, with a Zombie Woof behind your eyes? -- FZ
Funny you mention the "move into the 21st century with the rest of us" bit. I've been taking a seminar on terrorism and one (of the many) reasons the middle east and (some of) the Muslims that inhabit it are so prone to violence is because they've had considerably less time to modernize. Europe and America had hundreds of years to turn from an agrarian society into a modern one. The middle eastern world has had considerably less time, and yet they still have access to all the AK-47s they can imagine. The modernization of the western world was not a clean process, but we had a lot of time to do it. Now we expect the same of all these random goat herders, but they don't want to drop their farm and start working in a cubicle and watching comedy central. This isn't the only reason for terrorism, but its something to ponder anyway.
My other thought as soon as I read the summary is, "You idiots. They did this to illustrate how stupid it is to get up in arms over a mere image. The fact that you took the bait and threatened actual violence against the South Park creators shows how backwards and moronic your whole life is. You have failed epically."
Of course, that would sound a bit like flamebait itself, but its pretty much the case. If a poorly drawn bear suit on a cartoon on TV thats merely purported to be "Muhammad" is an issue for you, maybe its time to grow some thicker skin.
WTF?
The Middle East has had more time to modernize than Western Civilization has. They have have no excuse for not being world leaders; the Middle East was at one time the greatest center of learning and science in the world. To say they have not had an opportunity to modernize is bull. They have continued to live in the iron age due to the choices they have made; not a lack of opportunity. And this garbage has persisted even into the current century.
If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
Paraphrasing Ellen Ripley from Aliens: "I say we take off and nuke all islamofacists from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
I think you misunderstood my point. I was criticizing Slashdot / Fox for not calling the threats and calls for violence out as the reckless behavior that they are.
I actually did see the episode, and found it hilarious.
At what point does practice start reflecting on the spirit or theory of a religion?
If you took any one person or one event behind the Spanish Inquisition, it wouldn't reflect on Christianity. But taken together most people say that was in fact the nature of the religion at the time and it has changed since then.
Well right now the nature of Islam is not that good. Why people go out of their way to defend Islam by saying "the TRUE Islam is ..." makes no sense to me. Aren't we all adult enough (on slashdot at least) to know there's no TRUE anything when it comes to politics and religion?
13. Nothing is Sacred.
It's not about TRUE religions it's about the truth. The truth is that most people regardless of religion aren't that bad.
I just love the way they tear into anything that thinks too highly of itself, and brings them down a notch, no matter which religion ....you will get burned by them. I gotta say, it is really great to see their humor knows no bounds,
"dumb,dumb,dumb,dumb....dumb"
I just hope they continue to beat simpsons record for longest running show....many years to go yet though!
I'm just wondering how the fan base of South Park is just now maybe going to be polarized on this issue, or start seeing their views as crazy.
I mean no offense but where have you guys been? Muslims have rioted around the world, killed people, and attempted to kill people, all for insulting their religion. The Danish cartoon riots were *world wide*, it was serious news that nobody could have missed!
Why should Church of Scientology sue at all?
Its reputation is enough for networks to pull the episode on their own - for fear of possibly being sued by Tom Cruise or the CoS.
Receive correction and feedback from others graciously. (Proverbs 10:17, 12:1)
Accept a lowly place. (Proverbs 25:6,7)
Choose to serve others. (Philippians 1:1, 2 Corinthians 4:5, Matthew 23:11)
To name a few.
When people bring up those anti Gay provisions, I bring up
He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. (John 8:7)
as well as some of the more ridiculous ones
You shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shall you mar the corners of your beard.(Leviticus 19:27)
You shall not breed together two kinds of your cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together. (Leviticus 19:19)
So, for every passage they can find on homosexuality I can find another one that they've probably infringed upon.
A Micky Mouse suit would have been better. Then everytime you see Micky Mouse you'd have to try to figure out if it was really Muhammad under there or not.
I am not a Muslim, nor am I religious in any way (personally I find all religions to be backward, generally). That said...
Many posters in this thread have comments about how wacky, insane, stupid, backward, prehistoric, etc. all these Muslims are. Can we at least stop giving insightful mod points to folks providing blanket statements about one of the largest religious community's on earth? Such broad statements about any single large group of people is not intelligent let alone insightful, generally.
Not all Muslims are extremists and not all Muslims care about South Park and what they parody. Many of the blanket comments I've read here are akin to how "black people are" and other discriminatory comments. I am certain most of these comments are not intended to come of discriminatory, but it seems we need a little bit more care in choosing our words in these cases.
Violent Muslim extremists are the ones to be called out here, not the entire Muslim community. Violent Muslim extremists deserve to have parody's of Muhammad shoved up their arse's with their own AK's. Let's at least call out who deserves this kind of rhetoric and not discriminate against 1.57 billion of the world's population.
I'm pretty sure if all Muslim's are violent extremists there won't be much left of any society after Eric Cartman farts and claims Muhammad is speaking through him.
2 cents.
I am Jack's smirking revenge.
This idiotic religious violence has gone on for far too long. Here's what I propose:
Put a "Muhammad" character on every TV show, on every channel
That's right! Make it so you can't watch more than 2 minutes without someone prancing around calling himself Muhammad. Better yet: have it be a lesbian! Make it so ridiculous that only the truly psychotic will be crazy enough to make (and/or execute) threats. Bring them out into the open so we can round them up and rid ourselves of this world-destroying hysteria. Tolerance is a two-way street, and if they can't tolerate our harmless and victimless comedy, well I see no reason why we should tolerate their murderous xenophobia.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
Phew! As long as it was a threat from extremist gingers. Those guys are frikkin' bonkers!
The Daily Show is also childish, though perhaps not on the same scale as South Park. In my opinion, humor is what lets them get the point across in the first place. They always have the brilliant fallback: "What, you mean you took us seriously?" But that doesn't change the fact that their commentary is almost always on point, and needed.
As evidence that TDS is essential commentary, I submit the fact that John Stewart has been a guest (and target) many times on conservative talk shows, that both the Bush and Obama administrations have sent officials to be guests on the show, and that many news anchors take Stewart's criticism seriously. There's a lot of good information on the wiki page.
He was thinking about the Jews.
Very easy to confuse them with Muslims.
Both don't eat pork, both have religious rules that require circumcision, both have roamed the deserts of the Middle East during the creation of their religion... and many other similarities.
Not sure what the hell Jews have with this discussion though (unless it is a Zionist conspiracy as usual).
Fundamentalists who feel that they must kill to defend the image of the All Mighty, who they believe created and will eventually destroy everything, must think their god is a powerless woman in need of defending by men, Why do they mock her so?
It's important to pull Islam's chain. Frequently. Some branches of Islam has a tendency to go off in total nutcase directions, especially in countries where Islam has a big role in government. Even some Moslems think so. Most of the Islamic countries are dysfunctional. Islamic educational systems are a joke; they provide brainwashing, not an education. It's not a money issue; most doctorates issued in Saudi Arabia are in "Islamic Studies".
Religions with no sense of humor are vulnerable to ridicule. South Park is fighting the good fight, and, even though I'm not a Fox News fan, I applaud Fox News for backing them up. We give too much respect to religion. Sometimes, religious practices need a good belly-laugh.
The Catholic Church used to have that kind of power. That was a long time ago. Centuries ago they lost their temporal power, and recently, they've lost their moral authority. There are calls for the Pope to resign over child abuse coverups, people calling for his arrest if he visits Britain, and a group working to deny the Vatican diplomatic recognition. (The US didn't recognize the Vatican until the Reagan administration - Reagan needed Catholic votes.) At this point, nobody is afraid of the Catholic church, except maybe little boys being molested. Islam needs to be taken down a few notches like that.
There's surprising similarity between the nuttier branches of the major Western religions. Extreme-right Christian groups, ultra-orthodox Jews, and militant Islamic mullahs have more in common than any of them do with the rest of the world. They're all into oppressing women, ODing on prayer, dumbing down education, and whining for Government subsidies. (Their leaders also seem to be old guys with beards wearing black, looking like ZZ Top). Laughing at them can only help.
does it advocate violence
They're showing their true colours as the religion of hatred that they are. The worst Christians or Buddhists or Hindus do when someone criticizes their religion is MAYBE a boycott (and Buddhists won't even do that). Muslims start massacring people.
And in answer to ClosedSource: You're only half-right. Terrorists aren't necessarily Muslims, but any Muslim that truly believes his "holy" book, the Koran (or Qu'ran if you must), is probably going to be a terrorist. The Koran features hundreds of passages that exhorts "true believers" to kill, oppress, harass, and destroy anyone who isn't a Muslim. You won't find anything in the Bible telling Christians to kill anyone who isn't a Christian. Some of them might do it anyway, but they're acting outside of the Bible. Also, you will never find any of this stuff in any of Buddha's writings. I don't really know much about Hindu writings, so I can't comment on those - but you still won't find them trying to force everyone to be Hindu.
And that's what's wrong with Islam. 'Nuff said.
Bears don't take kindly to being represented like this, and they can get pretty violent about it too.
Nullius in verba
They should have portrayed him in drag, illegally crossing the Canadian border. That would have been funnier and a twist on how the current incarnation of alQueda has to dress in drag to hide.
Tisha Hayes
It is pre-9/11.
It's important to understand that no matter what they tell others or tell themselves, for just about everyone in an authoritarian position, the main goal becomes to try and retain their power.
The people running various theocracies in the middle east don't care about whether the muslim world is advancing or not, they're personally living large over their own little patch of the world, and that's what matters the most to them. Islam is only important to them in as much as it helps them retain their position. If Islam isn't helping, then they'll use their influence to bend people's perception of it so that it does help.
Incidentally this is why all the fear-mongering about Iran and North Korea (and previously Iraq) is so silly. No matter how much the people running those countries might hate the western world or hate America, they hate the idea of losing power even more. Nuking the US or Israel or somewhere in Europe is pretty much the quickest way they could guarantee to lose their life of luxury.
None of this is particularly specific to the middle east or Islam, or even governments. A great example of a similar mindset is all this mess on Wall Street. As badly as those assholes screwed up everything, the big shots in charge are almost entirely unable to agree to any sort of restrictions on their industry. These people already have more money than they know what to do with, they aren't trying to protect the livelyhood of their employees, and they aren't defending capitalism out of some sort of ideological purpose. They've gotten used to being in positions of such wealth and influence and they don't want to lose that. They would rather burn down the whole economy around them than willingly give up any power.
One time I threw a brick at a duck.
Hey, freaky, death-threatening Muslims, you've got a lot of work ahead of you...
http://www.google.com/images?q=muhammad
Oh, but we must only use tolerant language when referring to these intolerant, medieval, koran-thumping hicks. It would be totally politically-incorrect to make the observation that their oil wealth is about the only thing keeping them from reverting to their former status as smelly nomadic tribesmen roaming the desert and wiping their asses with their left hands.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
The author said, "it's not a threat, but it really is a likely outcome"
IANAL, but IMO this differentiation should be covered by free speech. If you tell someone "if you walk across that highway you'll die", it's not a threat, it's a warning. I realize this case is more extreme and the author probably *wants* the creators of South Park to die, but I don't think a court could make that differentiation because he never said this.
Oh, and I'm sorry if I offended anyone by using the term "nomadic" instead of "the n word."
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Technically, he's the prophet of an Iron Age sky fairy.
As believers in the original Second Amendment to the US Constitution, we believe that when God created America from the corpses of Mammoths and Giant Slugs, He endowed all bears with the rights to be armed.
By depicting an unarmed bear, the most holiest of creatures, as Mohammed, South Park is poking fun at a holy bear.
We demand all followers of Mohammed be set free in the forest, smeared with honey, and that bears armed with chainsaws and shotguns be allowed to eat them all.
Only then will our religious objections be met.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
"All I ever needed to know about Islam, I learned on 9/11."
I often wish it weren't so true =(
Yep. And all the terrorists needed to know about Western ideals and Christianity they learned from some sociopathic nut job. Ignorance is not the way you fight ignorance.
"but this is definitely "fire in a crowded theater" material."
Except that there is actual fire: insults to a billion people.
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
Too be fair, the terrorists are no more about Islam then Pat Robertson is about Christianity.
That's a very nice sophism, unfortunately it underestimates the pragmatic reality that religion is all about social control.
"the terrorists are no more about Islam"
I have doubts that you know this part of my religion very well. Read or listen to the lecture by Imam al-Awlaki, hafidhahu Allah, called "The Dust Will Never Settle Down". It has plenty of theological evidence for terminating offenders of the Prophet, sal Allahu 'alaihi wa sallam, with or without proper Shariah court.
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
Of course they get angry when you make fun of the central node that holds together their whole house of cards of a delusional fantasy world. Because they got nothing else. Nothing better. Which is the reason they turned to religion and to extremism in the first place.
Remember, that this could happen to us as well, if things go further down the drain.
If you want to do something about it, rather than calling them idiots, I recommend helping them so they can help themselves get out of the fantasy world, by instead choosing a reality, that is better. (Instead of the current, worse one.)
I just hope that South Park does not cave in... (The first step to also getting infected.)
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Can we get over it already? All of these "religions" that are violent are obviously a falsehood. Jesus Christ Mohammed WTF Ever. Find a philosophy, and stop acting as if someone from a Bronze-era fable is your basis. The Third Millennium should be about how people got over this BULLSHIT. All of it. We're here, and that's what it is. Pretending violence "is in the name" of any of that is a crock, and indefensible. "Freedom of Religion" is in no way allowable to tread on ANY of my freedoms. Get over it.
... to sign in as "Trey Parker."
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Maybe someone can explain something to me: If if anything that slanders the name of Muhammad is bad, why are seemingly half of the people in that part of the world named Muhammad? Sometimes more than once?
What if hundreds of thousands or even millions of westerners drew and posted online depictions of the prophet Mohammed? Would that finally make the point that secular cultures are not bound by religious law and enjoy the freedom to ignore dogma as desired? Would that finally show them that trying to enforce your religious directives on other cultures is pointless and going to backfire?
Or would the more extremist sects and individuals declare a Fatwa against all those participating? Wouldn't that leave them brutally outnumbered?
Most Muslims are peace-loving. It'd be an interesting experiment. If we could get critical mass on something like this, what sort of numbers could we get?
Anyone interested in helping me start this?
This sig contains a manual self-destruct. Kindly please put your foot through your monitor in 8 seconds.
as a U-Haul truck and a stick figure in the same episode. I don't see what the big deal is... It's a bear suit. Do muslims actually think that Muhammad actually looked like a bear and that people may get confused by it?
The crusades ended over 700 years ago. Since then the Catholic church has changed dramatically. The pope is no longer the ruler of any kind of an empire. In fact, in the US, he is pretty much just a dirty joke. Since the end of the crusades western civilization has gone through the Renaissance, the Reformation, a long series of civil wars, that has all but eliminated the direct influence of organized religion on government. We've gone through the whole experience of the new world and contact with the civilizations of the Americas, Japan, China, India, Africa, Southeast Asia.... the list is too long to write and I appologize to those I missed.
In other words we have changed. We are not the people who carried out the crusades.
In the US we have as a basic concept of law that the government may not interfere with the practice of your religion so long as that practice does not infringe on the rights of other people to live their lives as they see fit. We aren't perfect on holding to that principle. But, it explains why I can be a Buddhist living in Texas who drives past a Mosque on my way to the grocery store. My friends, neighbors, coworkers, and relatives include everything from born again fundamentalist Christians to Wiccans, Hindus, Jews, Muslims, Native Americans, Mormons, and Atheists.
Here in Texas you can celebrate Cinco De Mayo in front of the Alamo. We can watch Anime on December 7th. And on St. Patrick's Day, my Irish relatives can sit down with my Scots Irish (Orangemen all by their ancestory) relatives and all drink a beer and toast Ireland. Not one of them cares about which side their ancestor were on. We're all just Irish on St. Patty's day.
And yet, when I listen to Muslim Clerics and such talking about why they hate us they always talk about something that some people from Europe did some folks from where they live 700 years ago. We aren't the people who did it them. And you are not the people it happened to. What kind of sickness is at the core of a society that keeps a grudge for 700 years?
Of course, that is the problem. The extremist Muslims seem to still be nursing a grudge from 700 years ago. Every heard a European express a grudge against the Mongols 700 years ago? No? Me neither. But, we are dealing with people who use something that happened 700 years ago as justification for killing us.
One last comment: You don't want to piss off every South Park fan in the world. You really don't. Kill South Park and millions of people who don't currently even bother to vote will become your implacable enemies. Blowing up lower Manhattan is one thing. Messing with a favorite TV show, now that is something you do not want to do.
Stonewolf
P.S.
I'm a great great grandson of John D. Lee. (look up "The Mountain Meadow Massacre. And yes, according to my family he did it.) So I understand what religious fanaticism can do to people at a deep personal level. I truly hope that this problem passes into history with no more violence. But, I deeply fear that it will lead to the deaths of millions, if not billions, of people.
"Could happen?"
Have you been living in a closet?
Does Muhammad shit in the woods?
How do they know it's Muhammad in the bear suit? I thought the dude died a long time ago, sho how come he's still walking around? Is he a zombie looking for BRAINS to eat?
Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
As a pro-lifer I really hate those people that go out and kill abortion doctors. The way to protest murder is not with murder of your own.
Also I am against the death penalty for the same reason.
...is for people to understand their own religions!
Muhammad is NOT holy or to be worshiped. He is not supposed to be depicted for the sole reason that he NOT be holy or worshiped. These extremists are taking this the exact opposite that they should.
Disclaimer: I am only targeting some Muslims because they are in the spotlight. Some people in all religions are guilty.
the muslim world does not have oil in general. only a handful of persian gulf countries do.
--- widget evolution: enhanced, plus, super, ultra, extreme, exxxtreme, ultra-extreme,
ROFL!!!! Could these people get any more childish and ridiculous? Upset about a cartoon, let alone angry?!!?! LOL! Whew, I can't stop laughing... ROFLMAO!
Actually your assumptions are turning around on you... Most forms of Islam are as "non-literal" as most forms of Christianity... Hyper-strict interpretation Islam is as much of a sideline in that faith as it is in Jesus's fanclub.
Violence in the Islamic laws frequently parallel those found in the Old Testament, the basis of both Christianity and Judaism. Are their Muslims that feel that those laws still apply? Yes, of course, but there are also Christians and Jews who feel the same about their old laws (just look at how hard it has been to add GLBT protections to the hate-crime laws). Christians have been using the words of Paul (new testament remember) to condone the beating of women, GLBTs, genocide, murder, rape, theft... hell you name it, they did it. Does that mean that Christianity as a whole is about raping and killing? no, you need to look beyond the petty justifications of power hungry megalomaniacs to see the actual basis of the faith itself.
I would be hard pressed to find a faith that has not had a rule perverted to support violence by someone interested in personal gain...
the preceding post was not spell checked... suck it.
Why are these radical muslims watching South Park? I thought watching television was prohibited for them. So by watching South Park they committed heresy and should now kill themselves! Right?
There should be, at minimum, one insulting comment every weak picking on one religious icon or another. Just for the sake of desensitizing people and keeping them from getting so worked up. After a while it will be the same old cornflakes. Besides, theres what? A billion towel heads with the name Mohammad? Why dont the cartoonists just say they are making fun of Mohammad the cab driver.. that would limit it to just 5000 in NYC alone.
how many crimes in the old testament are punished by stoning? makes me wonder how there are any rocks left in the middle east.
the preceding post was not spell checked... suck it.
Too be fair, the terrorists are no more about Islam then Pat Robertson is about Christianity.
Actually, to be fair, the terrorists are AS MUCH about Islam as Pat Robertson is about Christianity.
put their money?
in madrassas and charities all over pakistan
where do the theocrats in iran spend their petrodollars?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
On three different networks, revolutionmuslim.com/ takes us to localhost. Anyone else having issues?
Any religion that adheres to the idea of blind faith, relies on the light of ignorance to lead the blind (to reality) with faith in the ministers who lead the blind.
What if....it was God/Jehovah/Allah/Vishnu/Rama/Grandfather/Grandmother/Flying Spaghetti Monster/Cosmic Bran Muffin that guided the hand of every cartoonist just to see which "FAITH" has the capacity to laugh at themselves...I know, She was only kidding.
The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
On a related note - why do HUMANS think they need to defend GOD?
Because they see themselves as weak and in need of defense, and they cannot help but project their self image onto God.
God is not a weakling. He has no need of defense because He cannot be attacked.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law
Why were you modded up?
An important lesson that the past 10 years or should have taught everyone.
There are no extremist Muslims. They are a figment of George Bush's imagination. They simply do not exist.
That isn't to say that Muslims in general are not offended by blasphemy. They are, and when whipped into a frenzy by the right imam, they are no match for a bunch of cartoonists.
Why do you think blasphemy is illegal in many parts of the world now? Because when it is committed the perpetrators need to be be dealt with harshly. Will the US start beheading blasphemers? Well, when push comes to shove, they might have to. Or face the consequences.
nt
They've misunderstood their own rules. No depictions of their Prophet (or anything much else) specifically to avoid idolatry. (Unlike gory crucifixions, painted icons, golden calves etc.) But if the depictions are merely for fun, and not for worship, surely the distress is less. Their point is precisely that their Prophet is *not* God, so where is the problem?
Sort of, but I think it mostly derives from certain Muslim traditions that either discourage or outright ban visual depictions of any living creature, particularly humans. This is part of the reason the Taliban in Afghanistan blew up those giant statues of Buddha,
That's not true at all. They blew up the Buddha statues because they saw Buddha doing coke in front of children.
Apparently, terrorists use PHP on Windows. Definately a terrifying thought. Get it? ah ah
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/africa/article2971369.ece
Given the notion, however generalizing and racist it is might or be, that belief in religion (unclear where disillusion comes in) is a problem, I suspect that calling 'this' a "the real problem" is missing the point of problems with human relations. Seems fair to state that the 'problem as such' is neither the people or the religion, but foremost the communication of such a problem. So calling 'this' a 'problem' seem more appropriate than calling it 'the real problem'.
"Religion needs to be mocked"
Such a notion is patently wrong in two ways. First that so called 'religion' has a need, the second that so called 'religion' being mocked. It should be obvious that mockery, either leads to two things, comedy or ridicule meant to directly hurt or offend the ones 'feeling mocked'. The problem then is how mockery is meant to be communicated, as a way of relation to other people.
Mockery between friends or even between people of an entire 'people' on tv is one thing, the intention for inciting awkwardness by mockery is another.
Bottom line, even concidering people as stupid, imo it seem obvious that the problem of cultures and racism ought to be the problem of communication.
So, you're saying that Islam is guilty of copyright infringement, eh? Well, then... it's only a matter of time before RIAA bombers take to the skies.
there is no religion that says killing an abortion doctor is ok. Not one.
As a Protestant, I'd say that early Christianity wasn't Catholic, and after it became so, some people protested and branched off. Which is why that event is called the Reformation - saying, "this church has strayed from its roots and must be reformed."
Featuring the god of the sand.
you can see a preview of it on the official site: http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/267117/?tab=featured
However, i think it will be another EP about T&P.
Revolution Muslim is headed by two Jews that are supposedly "converts." Here's an image of one of them holding a sign with the word 'Jews' mispelled with 'Juice.'
http://filipspagnoli.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/muslim-protester1.jpg
You'd think that a Jewish convert would be able to spell 'Jews' properly.
There is some info about the two guys and their connections with the ADL here:
http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/index.php?topic=3427255.0
Some more humerus media of these two Jewish guys:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Do0ryiU8y28&feature=player_embedded#t=4m18s
http://pibillwarner.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/image060.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_IKmlNWItWss/Shmg0QBD2XI/AAAAAAAAAq0/SNaEgLXt1Ow/s320/Yousef+al-Khattab+Revolution+Muslim.jpg
they just don't get it do they?
afaik Muhammad had a 9 year old wife (I don't know for sure, I just heared that)... so having him in a Bear Suit MAY be a reference to Pedobear and I if you put the head of a religion in SUCH a context, you have to expect extreme reactions...
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
CHECK Offend Jews: Season 1Episode 10 "A Jew on Christmas"
CHECK Offend Christians:Public Access Jesus
CHECK Offend Satanists: Satan & Saddam
"You got kicked out of here for being a headstrong rebel, and now you're a whiny little bitch."
CHECK Offend Protestants: Season 4 Episode 11 Hell Director welcomes a group of new arrivals to Hell
CHECK Offend Jehovah's Season 4 Episode 11 Witnesses: Hell Director welcomes a group of new arrivals to Hell.
CHECK Offend Mormons: Season 4 Episode 11
CHECK Offend Buddhist: Season 4 Episode 11
CHECK Offend Scientologists: Season 9 Episode 12"Trapped in the Closet"
CHECK Offend Catholics: Season 9 Episode 14
CHECK Offend Muslims: What took so long Season 10 Episode 3
Is not that Christianity has moved ahead and Islam has remained behind, it's that people in the West moved ahead and left Christianity behind (with all the horrors that the religious fundamentalism, no matter what religion, implies).
And yes, these troglodytes are disgusting.
"It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -- Prof. Dumbledore
but this is definitely "fire in a crowded theater" material.
Wait, what? So does that mean if I tell you I will hurt anyone who mocks soup, you think that no one should be allowed to mock soup? And anyone who does should be punished for inciting violence or something? I mean, why else compare this to "fire in a crowded theater" unless you think someone doing so should be punished?
"I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
I believe the bear costume is a reference to this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7112929.stm
"All I ever needed to know about Islam, I learned on 9/11."
For me, 9/11 was easily written off as a work of a small group of extremist nutjobs. Instead, the outrage against the Muhammad cartoons in the Muslim world was a tipping-point when my earlier light dislike of Islam turned into sheer repulsion. This was no small group, there were raging hordes on the streets in the entire Middle East, burning effigies and torching embassies. All over a few cartoons. Just a little later, there was an Islamic protest against the cartoons by 800 Muslims in the UK, many carrying placards with outright hateful messages such as "behead those who insult Islam", "Liberalism go to Hell" and "Europe, your 9/11 will come". And two years later there were the rage over the Swedish cartoonist Lars Vilks, who had depicted Muhammad as a roundabout dog, which again caused an uproar in the Muslim world, with demands that the Swedish government should apologize and harshly punish the cartoonist, as well as pass laws banning criticism of Islam.
Each time something like this happens, I dislike Islam more and more. As an atheist, I don't really care for any religion, but there is no religion I despise as much as Islam. It would be nice if someone could invent a medical cure against Islam, then we could disperse it in the water mains in the Middle East and Islamic countries.
Rubbish. Fire is physically dangerous, and fear of that danger can cause panic - which is itself dangerous. Insults are not - and don't try to make out that the reactions to them are the same thing.
So it's really more like shouting "you're all poopy-heads" in a crowded theater.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Religons cause more stupid ass violence in this world.
Ya, we kill each other over stupid ass ideas, that no one can prove is real, yet believe it to the point they have no problem killing others for not believing in it.
The problem is, even if you believe in your religon, but don't have the extreme views, your just as guilty. why you ask? because you keep the belief going on.
life on this planet has shown us, many times, that man is stupid and will take his stupid beliefs to the extreme then to admit he was wrong. and religons are teh biggest examples of this.
I see peeps on the corner trying to spread their religon as kin to someone who found a drug and is trying to get all his friends to join in so he doens't feel stupid for doing it alone.
And worse, they think because they found "something else" that everyone else is missing out.
Look people, it's very easy.
There is no god. no jesus, no budda, no mahammad, no purple spaggetti monster, nothing.
We live, and we die.
there isn't any point in our lifes, other then living, breeding, and dying.
The problem is, thats too much for a lot of you to handle. You think you need some rules to govern your behavior in this life, so you believe in crap that doesn't even make a good movie.
Honestly, i think religions were started because some peeps figured out that if everyone didn't think they need to be nice to get to heaven, then everyone would be mean to each other.
Well, dang, religons even screwed that up.
If you need a reason to be nice to people everyday, to treat others with respect, you have worse problems then needing a religon.
What we need is to educate everyone, give everyone in the world the same things, a job, a place to live, food to eat. Then you'll find the misunderstandings might just start to go away.
But with religons being around, they won't. Religons breed ignorance.
Be seeing you...
I think there needs to be an adult film made, something like:
Passion of the Christ on Allah and Co.
Muhammad takes it up the ass from Christ, then Buddha comes all over the both of them, then Shiva shits in Christ's mouth, then Allah does 2 Girls 1 Cup thing with Christ, then Tom Cruise licks everybody's balls, then Ra teabags Zeus, Christ, Allah, Muhammad. Then Poseidon goes golden shower on all of these motherfuckers. Then Muhammad and Christ both eat dog shit and get fucked by a giant horse. Then the Holly Spirit descends on them but gets gang-raped.
Then god and christ and allah and buddha and muhammad start sucking each other cocks in a ring.
Yeah, I think that video would be a hit.
You can't handle the truth.
He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. (John 8:7)
Read the footnotes on that one.
From what I gather, this seems much less like a "don't walk across that highway or you'll die" and a little more like "You messed with us and now we're gonna kill you! Right? I bet someone out there is crazy enough to do it. Just saying someone should. You know?"
Disclaimer: I have not read the full post in context.
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
bombs to those who disagree.
influence to those who agree: the dictators of the middle east.
then you complain that we get upset when you make fun of Muhammad. we're not in the mood.
and you'd be less inclined to make fun if Muslim people actually had control of their political affairs.
--- widget evolution: enhanced, plus, super, ultra, extreme, exxxtreme, ultra-extreme,
Islamic extremists need to realize that Matt Stone and Trey Parker can only orgasm when people are upset about their work...
By threatening to kill them for depicting Muhammad (in a silly way) they are giving Matt and Trey EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANT!
I personally look forward to their upcoming musical about Mormons.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
these guys openly made fun of scientology! They are not afraid of getting killed. If one of the writers was killed there would probably be a show about it the next week.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I propose an impromptu holiday named Muhammad Appreciation Day where we all draw our best portrayals of our bearded pal from the East and place them on the internet. I think I'll draw me giving Muhammad a high-five on the top of a grassy knoll.
If your family were full of brain surgeons, would you be qualified to perform operations?
Why did the submitter see fit to link to coverage on Fox 'News'. I feel dirty now after clicking on the link.
Google News shows that this story is getting coverage on many other, much more reputable, news websites.
Muhammad was a cunt!
There, now they'll have to blow up the whole internet. Threatening bodily harm to somebody for insulting your imaginary friend is absurd and juvenile. Almost as juvenile as referring to one's religious figurehead as a cunt. Tee hee.
when a muslim mass murders, it's the usa's fault
by your logic, every bomb that falls on muslim lands since 9/11 is islam's fault
i don't agree with that logic, i'm merely using your own way of thinking
how about this: the usa shouldn't bomb anyone, and no muslim should mass murder. that's what i think. do you agree?
MY actions are MY fault, and YOUR actions are YOUR fault
but i see too much of this: "the guy who shot up innocents or suicide bombed or drove airplanes into buildings who are from muslim lands: that's your fault"
when you say that your actions are my fault, then what you are saying is that you don't have any responsibility. and when you don't have any responsibility, then yes: the usa is in charge. BECAUSE YOU ABDICATED YOUR RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR OWN ACTIONS WITH YOUR OWN WORDS
and then you, my friend, are the enemy of peace, and the enemy of the teachings of islam. is it that islam teaches you have no responsibility for what happens in your land? does islam teach that muslims have no leadership? i don't believe that. but that's what YOU are saying about islam. you just don't understand the full implications of saying "what i do is your fault"
you take accountability for the actions of muslim fanatics, you clean up house, and then we talk. i take full responsibility for bombs falling on muslim lands. that's how leadership works. now you lead too
until then, until i see some muslims taking responsibility for their own atrocities, until i see someone who takes repsonsibility for what they do by their hand, that emanates from their own land, then there is no talking to you possible, only more death, for both of us. because you won't stand and deliver
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
In France, it produced a bloody revolt which killed anyone suspected of treason. Which at the time could have something as simple as expressing the notion that the Revolution was not quite as good as imagined.
The Enlightenment mentality, or the notion of "progress" continues to serve as a faithful companion of the popular sociopath, the Politician. Surely, surely, your rights are being oppressed in some way; if you're not content with your current station in life, there's someone who will point to those better off than you and insist - that if you just give him absolute power - he'll rectify this horrible situation. If you aren't better off than your parents' generation; if you don't make as much money as you'd like; if -- GOSH! -- you can't afford health care, then there's surely someone richer than you to blame, and in the name of progress, the politician will take it away from THAT person, and promise it to you.
And we have plenty of examples. Hitler and Stalin both played the progress card. The Democrats are playing the progress card in the name of raising taxes and health care costs. Surely, if you don't have what think you deserve, there's someone else to blame. There always is.
And progress must occur! We can't ever, EVER, get there. Sure, we can eliminate racism and sexism and classism and just about every kind of ism there is, but progress must occur. We're always just a little shy of the goal, and with the *right* people in power, it's sure to be just around the corner.
Funny thing is, though, human nature hasn't changed in our entire recorded history. Today, nearly three centuries after the Enlightenment, we still have what is referred euphemistically as the Business Cycle, where every decade or so, about one in ten lose their jobs, and frequently their houses. Granted, they have no fear of the aristocracy, because they can't figure out that, regardless of their so called freedoms, they're still under the thumbs of the rich. But of course, the rich are capitalists, so that makes it okay. Sure, they can *theoretically* free themselves, but only by foregoing most of the amenities in life their colleagues consider essential, including owning their own house.
But hey, it's Progress! Does anyone really care if the promised improvements in standard of living are eternally almost there; if the promised freedoms can be subverted by the Executive Branch if it so much as "has a good faith belief" that something naughty is going on; if the threat of lawsuit prevents anyone but the rich from exercising their rights?
Islam appeals to many people because it contains absolute rules by which to live. This, people can deal with. They know what they can expect; it is binding on rich and poor alike; and it isn't subject to the whims of whomever is in power at the moment - that is, the religion and its interpretations are not subject to the local elected politicians, but to the imams. In the US, the President can wage his own private war; in Iran, only the Ayatollah can. Imagine for a moment if the US had to acquire Vatican approval before shipping troops off to war.
Now this isn't to say that Islamic world doesn't have its share of problems, but it already had its Enlightenment moment prior to the Crusades. During which time it contributed greatly to the world; we have algebra because of Islamic scholars. The next logical step - Calculus, wouldn't occur for another half-millenia. But Islam found the Enlightenment lacking, and returned to its authoritarian roots. The reason why is left as an exercise for the reader, but to understand why is a very illuminating experience.
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
you're agreeing with me
i'm saying american bombs on muslim lands is my fault and i will work to stop it
so are you saying:
1. muslim bombers are my fault?
2. muslim bombers are your fault and you are going to fight the fanatics coming from your lands?
it's in your own best interest: muslim suicide bombers and other muslim fanatics kill more muslims than american bombs and guns by orders of magnitude
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
For Muslims Mohammad isn't "a guy", he is their most sacred prophet.
For this ex-Muslim, that Mohammad is a nutcase.
That Mohammad went hiding in a cave, and when he came out, he told everyone that an angel met him there, and declared to him that he has become the "new prophet".
In modern world, that Mohammad will either be ignored, or thrown into a mental asylum.
I became a Muslim since my parents were Muslims. I was born into Islam.
However I chose to get out of that fanatical cult since I can't fanthom wasting my entire life - the life granted by God himself - following the teachings of a fucking fruitcase.
I know, I know, this message gonna be mod to oblivion, again.
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Well, if it's your religion I believe that you know it better than I do. On the other hand, I think that manipulating scripture by opportunists is a nearly universal phenomenon.
No, it would convince them (the morons protesting South Park, the morons who rioted over the Danish cartoons, and similar people) that all Christians hate Islam and the Prophet and therefore want to kill them. They are convinced that we would be just as angry as they are if someone made really offensive pictures of Jesus. They do not understand our way of life.
I think a better plan might be to give them those offensive pictures of Jesus. Make a million images of Jesus being humiliated, urinate on a few thousand crucifixes, and maybe then they will begin to understand that we are not like them when it comes to religion.
Of course, then we might have to work on the fact a large number of us have no religion at all. That might take a while.
How can you use my intestines as a gift? -Actual Hong Kong subtitle.
...are not Catholic. Neither Eastern Orthodox nor Catholics say this. Eastern Orthodox churches aren't in communion with Rome (though there are some Byzantine Rite Catholic churches that are, such as Melkites) and don't recognize papal authority, regarding modern day papalism as innovation (and therefore extra and external) on the Christian faith. Eastern Orthodox assert that Rome was one of the Christian cities that, regrettably, split off and went its own way.
An earlier silent movie also named King of Kings (1927) also portrayed Jesus. In fact, depictions of Jesus go back as early as 1897, almost in line with the advent of film itself.
Maybe you mean non-sacred depictions? In which case I can only go back as far as 1979 (Life of Brian).
I'm not disagreeing with your main point... just that itty bitty claim. :)
Pet peeve: Profane people propagating perfunctory pedantry.
According to Sun Tsu terrorism is a valid tactic of war (especially if you are at a disadvantage)... And if you look at recent history terrorism (in the original definition) is widely used by all kinds of aggressors and defenders in their wars, some countries to use it the last decades (but are not known for it) are Germany, Israel and the USA for example. Other smaller parties are widely known for using terrorism, hence they are known as 'terrorist'. But because of this people lose focus what terrorism really is. These aren't nut-jobs who love to blow themselves up, these are fighters fighting a losing war and choosing to do so by any extreme means!
And for me, the tipping point (also an atheist, scientific one) it was when I learned that the muslims have joined the effort of the christians in destroying the secular societies in Europe, spreading leaflets against science and so on.
Now, you cannot make me fight because of religion, money, patriotism or any other -ism. But try to take away the secular society (how secular it is by not prosecuting the pedo-priests is another question) and I will meet you with deadly force. I was eager to join any anti-war demonstration in the last decade and I have always accused the west of poring oil in the fire (pun intended) of the christian-muslim antagonism, but now both sides are given the label "destructive, ignorant motherfuckers" and I will gladly fight them all given the chance.
Illustration - recently, there were local elections in the Netherlands. I was not entirely surprised to discover that when it comes to restricting human liberties and removing the excellent "freedom package" TM, that the Dutch enjoy (the best package in the world, you know - gay rights, abortion, euthanasia, soft drugs, legal prostitution) the party of the notorious anti-islamist Gert Wilders (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gert_Wilders) and the Islamic democratic party were in accord. Lovely!
In fact the coffe shops in Amsterdam had a poster dividing the parties that are for and against the coffieshops and the "against" section consisted of:
1. Christian democrats - religious wackos
2. PVV (Wilders) - nazi, xenophobic wackos
3. The "democratic" muslims - religious wackos (isn't it that smoking hash is kind of part of being muslim? I get that impression from movies for Afghanistan and the coffee shops in some districs)
4. The VVD (kind of started as party for the middle class but turned IMO into big business lapdog) - economy wackos. Maybe they are paid by the mafia on this issue because they want the business back in their hands (pure speculation here).
On top of that I realized how much non-secular, knee-jerk the USA and UK are because they were the first to back out and remove the content after the Danish cartoon scandal exploded.
Do you see a trend here, or is it just me....
It's a bear suit. How do they know it's Muhammad?
Because the other characters say it is? So now it's unacceptable to mention Mohammad? What if the narrator is unreliable? Wouldn't the logical position of a devout Muslim be that Muhammad did never and would never wear a bear suit, and so this depiction is NOT Muhammad?
What if two on-screen characters disagree? What if one says "that's Mohammad over there in the bear suit" and the second one says "no it isn't".
Have they "depicted" Mohammad in any readily recognizable fashion whatsoever?
"I love it, apparently some trolling AC subscribed to my newsletter and is reading my every comment and needs to reply to all of them multiple times even. Excellent, next thing I know I have my own TV news station." - by roman_mir (125474) on Tuesday April 20, @10:58AM (#31910300) Homepage
http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1622780&cid=31904240 it would appear that a quote has you shown trolling others, first no less, right in that url I just put up (first of all).
Secondly/also, per my subject-line above: Face the music there in that URL link then.
If you don't then everyone knows your skills & knowledge in the field of computing is shockingly limited, and also that you screwed up badly also by avoiding "facing the music" in that url there.
If you do face the music, then your show's going to have to be a comedy is my guess because it's going to be funny watching you "eat your own words" (flavored with the 'bitter taste of defeat' and worst of all, your defeating yourself no less in your mistakes and your failing to answer up to them also), roman_mir, in that url I put up here.
You are just another dime a dozen "web developer" (that's a joke) and not truly a computer programmer is all.
"Religion was born when the first con man met the first fool." --Mark Twain
I'd like to buy homeland for our 10 million people. http://twitter.com/mahadiga
If you harm anyone from southpark, we'll have to kill a lot of you.
Like an earlier post has stated, the Islamic world/Middle East was not always a cesspool of extremism and terrorism. Before the 1979 Islamic revolution and the creation of Israel, the Middle East was as calm a place as any other.
What happened to the Middle East was the same thing that happened to Africa. Years of colonial control under European nations suddenly evaporated after WWII. As a result, lots of crazy came to the surface and extremists took power.
It's the Western world's own damn fault for creating these terrorists and pirates. We imposed Western ideals onto these cultures by force, and as a result it poisoned them to all of our ideas, not only the bad, but also the good. The lesson they learned is that a small number of men leveraging technology, guns and social propaganda can cower an entire populace by force.
It wasn't even as far back as the 16th century that the Middle East was a center of civilization and refinement. Just before WWI, the Ottoman Empire pretty much owned the place and kept the populace happy and educated. It was comparable to the other European monarchies at the time like Austria, Germany or Russia. What they DID lack was a massive build up of militarization due to the European arms race. Don't forget that most of us were still pretty barbaric in the early 20th century- Western powers had no qualms about throwing machine guns and gunboats around prompted by religious reasoning. Of course, it was politics that motivated the start of WWI...really, that's MUCH more rational...
After WWII, the crop of leaders that took the reigns of Middle Eastern countries were pretty reasonable, UNTIL the West suddenly planted a brand new nation in the middle of one of their holiest cities. Go figure. Even after the Six Day War, only Israel really had to worry about Muslim aggression. And that was from whole countries, not terrorists.
The Iranian revolution was THE catalyst for today's terrorists. The revolutionaries fought against mechanized troops, tanks and planes, the best the CIA could supply the Iranian Sultan and Saddam with. We -taught- them that the proper tactics for defeating modern armies was not through force of arms, but social mobilzation.
The Islamic extremists are simply a more evolved version of what we see in Africa today- demogouges taking advantage of a poor populace and feeding them hatred. The main difference is that they've moved past killing each other, and moved on to killing foreigners. Generally this is how proper nations are made- you stabilize a region by emphasizing a common foreign enemy. In this case, it's 'the evil West"
It's our own ignorance that makes us think that Islam is the root of this problem. It's not. Islam is about as violent as Christianity. They all have their various elements against blasphemy and the like. It's simply the fact that religious leaders in the Islamic communities have MUCH more power. They're petty dictators that have full control over their homelands, and now are moving on to conquer new horizons. Saddams and Castros aren't dangerous because they're content with their little personality cults. These guys are MORE DANGEROUS because they have ambition- they not only have the devotion of their flock, now they're trying to move onto the next country over.
It all goes back to politics. Islam is a vehicle for dictators to make war. These dictators dress up in the robes of clerics and have religious upbringings, but in the end they're the same as Napolean or Saddam, more interested in their own personality cult. When other religious figures threaten them, they are no less ruthless. See the recent Iran elections for evidence.
See, the CIA and the US in general has made a really bad habit of targeting and assassinating leaders. That has been it's modus operandi throughout the Cold War. So these religious leaders have adopted personalities that -transcend- themselves and become part of a religion. Kill them, and they become martyrs. It's the perfect tactic to counter the CIA's headhunting tactics.
so I thought I'd comment on this. 1) RevolutionMuslim.com is as you say a "radical website," although from my understanding the majority of Muslims and Islamic scholars do not agree with the ideas promoted by this website. 2) Every religion/system of beliefs/philosophy etc has extremists willing to violently get their objectives done. 3) According to Islam as interpreted by authentic Islamic scholars, Muslims living in a non-Muslim state must abide by its laws as they have signed an agreement (citizenship, green card, etc.) with the country to do so. The only exception is with laws which require a Muslim to violate the Shariah (Islamic law). (Living in the United States all my life, I haven't found any such laws and am commonly told by Muslim immigrants that practicing Islam in the United States is easier than in some Muslim countries.) 4) Such demands made by salafi-jihadi Muslims are primarily for rhetoric purposes (i.e. to "scare" people) and will most likely have no basis in reality. Of course, that said, I'm not going to be an apologist. The creators of South Park should obviously have more concern and sensitivity towards Muslim sentiments. The members of a pluralistic society should learn to respect one another and not deliberately provoke / intimidate one another. Somehow it seems to me that people only selectively have the Western belief "I can do whatever I want, as long as I don't hurt others." When it comes to insulting Muslims or Islamic beliefs, "freedom of speech" is cried, yet "respect for all people" is forgotten. Muslims often take their way of life more seriously than Christians or Jews. Islam is a complete way of life, not a ritual that's done once a week.
you are blind and dishonest if you do not accept that proportionally, there are a lot more muslim fundamentalist wackjobs than {fill-in-the-blank} fundamentalist wackjobs
the reason why is oil: saudi arabia's wahhabi fundamentalists get lots of money from oil, and this funds madrassas all over the middle east and pakistan. and iran's theocrat's get lots of cash from oil to shore up their insanity too (but is already losing sway with shiite young folk in iran nonetheless)
the best method to drain the pool of muslim fundamentalists in this world is to stop using oil, and thereby stop funding the reactionary kingdom of saudi arabia, stop funding the theocracy of iran
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
nothing is above mockery. if you mock something and that provokes a violent reaction, the one doing the mocking has done a social service: identified dangerous people
anyone who would do violence just because of a word or an image they don't like is a threat to us all, muslim or nonmuslim
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Timothy McVeigh was never very religious, even the people who knew him said so. Terry Nichols didn't convert to Christianity until after his arrest.
David Koresh was very religious, being a cult leader, but he never committed acts of terrorism.
How many Scott Roeder's can you name? But in Iraq one Muslim sect kills someone in another Muslim sect a couple times a week, and it's been that way before Saddam and now it is as bad if not worse after Saddam. How many times a year is there some religious group committing some sort of Jihad against Israelis?
No there is something warped in a small but significant percentage of Muslims. And that sort of behavior is almost unheard of in Christians in modern times. fyi - the IRA was about politics and nationalism, Catholic vs Protestant was played up in the media because that is really the only difference between one Irishman and the next.
(I am an atheist, so I feel I have a somewhat objective view on all of this)
rights DO have responsibilities. and if people don't act responsibly, freedoms disappear
i'm not even talking about government. i'm talking about the natural limits on your freedoms. for example: listen to any music you want, at any volume. but at 3 AM, you are impinging on your neighbor's freedom to get a good sleep
in other words: freedoms exist in tension with other people's freedoms. freedoms don't exist in a vacuum. in reality, plenty of things people call a freedom, actually hurt other people and impinge on THEIR freedoms. such that no evil law, but a NATURAL LIMIT exists on what you are free to do before you wind up hurting other people's freedoms. for example: drive as fast as you want... until you kill someone in a car crash. for example: throw your trash wherever you want... and destroy someone else's ability to enjoy nature. for example: piss wherever you want, until you ruin someone's flowerbeds. for example: take all the drugs you want... until your an addict who can't feed or clothe themselves and society has to take care of you
the problem is that a lot of people have childish conception of what freedom is, and that some of what they consider freedom is actually just a desire to have license to do something that they either knowingly (and don't care) or ignorantly do and hurt other people's freedoms in the process
so every freedom you have requires responsible use, absolutely, every single one
or you will lose your freedoms. not out of government fascism or whatever, but just out of your neighbor being pissed off that HIS freedoms are being crushed (again, not by government but by you ignoring his freedoms) and throwing your stereo out the window because you won't let him get any sleep
this is the truth, and plenty don't understand it, even though it is completely accurate: the biggest defiler and destroyer of your freedoms on this planet is no government, it is actually other people (specifically, irresponsible people). everyone reading these words have had their freedoms trampled on BY OTHER PEOPLE, to a larger extent than any other violation and transgression against them by any government, ever. almost on a daily basis, irresponsible people limit your freedoms, in big ways and small ways. the freest nation on this earth is the nation with the LARGEST NUMBER OF RESPONSIBLE PEOPLE, no matter what the government is like
so i don't understand why you think "rights have to be balanced with responsibilites" is some sort of waffle
when in reality that statement is one of the most truthful things you can say about freedom conceptually
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
If they had watched the entire episode, they'd feel a bit silly that what they're freaking out about was actually Santa Claus in a bear suit.
Talk about needing an excuse =/
- Barry Goldwater
It was Actually Santa Clause in a bear costume pretending to be Muhammad.
From the Roman Empire to the Middle Ages the world did not modernize much. True, most of the modernization in that period was done in the Islamic sphere, even as Europe actually slid backwards - but it was little compared to the change that has happened since the late 1400s when Johannes Gutenberg invented his press.
The Gutenberg Press was the internet of its age. Sure, it was Net .01 - a far cry from the world-spanning information exchange we have now - but it was the driving force of European modernization. It allowed ideas to be exchanged and compared and criticized in ways that had never happened before. There were plenty of church reformers before Martin Luther, but Luther had the printing press and that made all the difference.
Europe has had the printing press for over 500 years now, but much of the Islamic world has not. Europe had religious wars for two centuries - but that was a long time ago. Europeans and their descendants have had time for cultural changes to happen slowly, to allow people to gradually come to terms with new ideas - the Islamic world has not.
Even so, MOST Muslims have adapted well. I've talked to Muslims in or from many countries, and most are peaceful and civilized.
Naturally, this idiocy about threatening Matt and Trey offends me - and the absurdity of these imbeciles thinking that they are needed to defend their god because presumably he cannot defend himself - well, it beggars belief. Such ideas need to die a well-deserved death.
That said, we should be careful not to tar all Muslims with this brush. Many of THEM are offended by such nonsense too, and from what I have seen online, Muslim youth around the world are busy using the internet to try to close that modernity gap. They ARE modernizing at a speed that is lovely to behold, but we shouldn't expect it to happen with smooth perfection or unerring grace.
In fact, almost as jarring to me is the way that I have seen some Muslims trying to signal their modernity by latching on to western luxury brands, as if spending one's money on over-priced goods will signal anything other than that one is a sucker. Still, I have seen similar attempts to claim modernity by proxy in Christian, Hindu, and Buddhist cultures that were slow to modernize, where the people have a cargo cult type of understanding of what it means to be modern, mistaking one form of modernity for its substance.
The cargo cults have died out. The generation that came after the cargo cults look at their parents and wonder how they thought those things - but they have had the advantage of growing up in a modern world. They did not grow up in a stone-age culture only to be introduced suddenly to technology that appeared magical. The Islamic world will adapt too, will be better for it, and will even, I think, better understand what their prophet attempted to teach them.
Food for thought. A bear suit? Interesting choice. A male bear is called a boar and a female bear is called a sow. In other words pigs. Pork. A food Muslims just adore.
Does this go back to the ten commandments thing of not worshiping a graven image?
Shouldn't Muslims only concern themselves with other Muslims who create, or view, such images? After all, other religions are infidels anyway.
We have constitutional free speech rights for very good reasons. When a bunch of arab fucks scream and yell and scare a tv company into not showing free speech protected comedy then things have gone very wrong and it's time that we remove those arabs and send them back to their own countries. I saw the interview of that muslim hate guy on the news the other day (cnn was it?) and he mentions that he's hoping to live in a truly muslim world (he wants to convert all of the world into such a place). That being the case, then he can just head back to the muslim countries where such customs are supported instead of trying to change our customs here to suit him. That's how it works. If you don't want to be here, then get the fuck out. The 'when in Rome' saying holds true wherever you go. I never liked the new terrorism laws much but if they'll help put this guy into some secret prison somewhere far away for the rest of his life then that would benefit all of us. Either stop fucking around with my constitutional privileges in my own country or get the fuck out! None of us who's ancestors fought and died for the constitution we live by need your bullshit in our country. I now firmly believe that mr. koran was an evil, evil idiotic asshole of a person. Why in the hell would you want to follow some hate monger from centuries ago anyway? That makes YOU an idiot.
No, the religion doesn't have a need. Society has a need to keep religion subdued.
Clever signature text goes here.
I guess it's easy to miss major news that isn't in your regular rounds of stuff one attends to. Better late than never I guess.