Slashdot Mirror
Thousands of Muslims Protest 'Age of Mockery' At Google's London Headquarters
cold fjord writes "A large protest planned by as many as 800 imams was held today at Google's London headquarters to protest the video, 'The Innocence of Muslims,' which is available on Google's subsidiary YouTube. There may have been as many as 10,000 protesters in what is said to be the first of several planned protests. From the story: 'Speeches by more than a dozen imams . . . urged Muslims to honor the name of the Prophet and not to back down in the face of Google's continuing reluctance to act, and were met with passionate cries of "God is Great" and "Mohammad is the Prophet of God" in Arabic. . . One of the speakers. . . told The Daily Telegraph: "Terrorism is not just people who kill human bodies, but who kill human feelings as well. The makers of this film have terrorized 1.6 billion people." A YouTube spokesperson said: "We work hard to create a community everyone can enjoy and which also enables people to express different opinions. "This can be a challenge because what's OK in one country can be offensive elsewhere. This video — which is widely available on the Web — is clearly within our guidelines and so will stay on YouTube."'"
It's not like TV stations are slipping this video in amongst their shows and commercials to trick you into watching it. If you don't like it, don't watch it, and stop trying to force your religious views on others.
"Terrorism is not just people who kill human bodies, but who kill human feelings as well. The makers of this film have terrorised 1.6 billion people."
Well, even by the post-9/11-everyone's-a-terrorist definitions, I don't see that but, very well, I'll play your game. Your redefinition of the word terrorist in the English language has killed my human feeling of respect for the English language. I have in my hand a piece of paper written in Crayola crayon that I believe to contain a 4,000 year old text defining English as a sacred language. You see I was drunk one night and I accidentally channeled Zoroaster who is like, way older than Muhammad. And you have killed that spirit inside me. Also, your call for censorship completely kills my internal spirit that there is hope for humanity -- one of the greatest of human feelings. As such you sir are a terrorist by your own definition of the word, enjoy your imminent self-incarceration.
"Organisations like Google are key players and have to take responsibility for civility. You can't just say it doesn't matter that it's freedom of speech. It's anarchy."
Let me guess, you get to define the words "civility" and "anarchy"? Yeah, I get it, some parts of your religion are only compatible if there's one bearded male telling everyone else what to do. It's 2012, you better suppress that shit or you're gonna have a bad time.
My work here is dung.
Mohammad walks into a bar. The explosion kills 9 and injures 23 others. Allah Akbar.
My Next video will be "The Thin Skin of Muslims".
This goes for all peoples, including muslims: Refuse to be Terrorized!
You're not terrorized by anything unless you choose to be.
Protest videos of "unbelievers" being beheaded?
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
They'll use their freedom of speech to say that others shouldn't have it. Lovely!
This is idiotic. Again, I am not one of these "LOLZ! Look at the RELIGION OF PEACE" people around here, but this is where one says that if they don't like what was said that they should make their own video and refute it. Currently too man MAINSTREAM Muslims want my Internet to be censored to THEIR tastes. It needs to be a given a BIG FAT NO.
Terrorism is not just people who kill human bodies, but who kill human feelings as well.
I find this extremely offensive, not only because they're trying to control what other humans can think, but also because they dare to compare the mental outrage at an idea to the physical killing and torture of humans. These things are not even remotely comparable except at a philosophical level.
...
After calming down a bit, it seems evident to me that these people are simply unable to cope with the cognitive dissonance that their one true belief may not be so true after all.
It's your belief; deal with it yourself. Don't expect everyone else to change their lives because you can't handle opposing thoughts.
I appreciate google's for their stance in not taking down this video. I won't be watching it, heard enough about it to know it's dumb. Muslims are upset? Like other religious people have had to learn, not everyone in life believes what they believe. They need to get past their upsetness over the video, it's just one angry guy's creation. Protest all you want in non -violent, non-hurtful ways, we should all have that right.
Then you will be more than happy to set the example by going back to your ancestral homelands to deal with all of the imams who preach hate and violence.
And to my fellow Americans, if you make any attempt to form a moral equivocation between what they preach about religious minorities (terms that are lifted often literally out of Nazi propaganda) and preaching against gay marriage and other weak sauce like that, then you are rightly regarded as a fellow traveler with these censorious cretins by every liberty-loving American.
Maybe I missed it but I don't recall 800 imams congregating in London to protest about the shooting of a fourteen-year old girl by Taleban psychopaths.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malala_Yousafzai
No, I'm the real messiah!
You're not the messiah, you're a very naughty boy!
They're using the freedom of speech to complain about the freedom of speech.
No wonder they're being ridiculed.
To do something right, you often have to roll up your sleeves and get busy.
Why didn't they protest the taliban for trying to kill a 14 year old girl?
Why didn't they protest when a Christian girl was set up and charged with blasphemy? And that imam who set her up is now free on bail, why aren't they angry about that?
Sorry their silly protest has no credibility, they didn't protest when it really mattered.
Our modern societies are composed of thousands of cultures, ethnic groups, religions, sub-cultures and cults.
Anything you do will offend someone.
It's unlikely people are going to learn to live without being offended either. In this uncertain world, values and beliefs are sometimes all we have.
And so the conflict will continue, renewing itself constantly.
Wikionary is handy for a definition of -ism : Ultimately from either Ancient Greek (-ismos), a suffix that forms abstract nouns of action, state, condition, doctrine; from stem of verbs in (-izein) (whence English -ize), or from the related suffix Ancient Greek (-isma), which more specifically expressed a finished act or thing done.
Therefore terrorism would be a noun that describes a finished act of terrorizing. Or, the completed act of creating terror.
Terror can be defined as intense fright, fear or dread.
What the film The Innocence of Muslims did was to lampoon, ridicule and belittle the actions of the founder of Islam and the beliefs of its followers. There is a difference.
Conflating one with the other does the worst disservice to the people in the world who live in fear and dread because of the violent reactions of others who disagree with or disapprove of them in one way or another.
Saying "You're ugly and your mother dresses you funny" is not the same at all as saying "you will wear what I tell you to wear or I will murder your family, just like I murdered that other family".
Trying to equate the two is more offensive than that stupid video.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
Because I think these folks need to learn about certain effects.
If they really wanted to get it pulled from YouTube they should just send Google a DMCA takedown notice claiming the chanting or other noises made by any Muslims in the video is copyrighted.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
On one hand, so long as they are peacefully protesting and not advocating violence against people until the video is removed, then they are well within their rights. No, you don't have a right to not be offended, but if you are offended you have the right to peacefully protest the offending material.
On the other hand, despite their protests being valid, they don't get to redefine the English language. If you offending someone, that doesn't make you a terrorist. If it did then we'd have to pretty much classify everyone as terrorists, since I'm sure everyone at least once in their lives says something that would offend at least one person. Terrorism is making people afraid to exercise their rights and/or stand up to the terrorists for fear of being harmed. Nobody is afraid of protesting against this video. Granted, I haven't watched the video, but from what I've heard it in no way makes threats against people who would disagree with it. It just makes a claim which offends some people. So they can go ahead and protest against it. That's their right. They can make websites decrying it and countering any points the video attempts to make. So long as they do it peacefully and not by threatening the lives of anyone involved, I'll support their right to protest whether or not I agree with their viewpoint.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
With their demostration - if it was peaceful.
And they should be allowed to demonstrate. Such is a fundamental of this society.
But its not lost on me, nor should it be lost on_anyone_else - that their demostrate and represent everything that would unhinge that democracy, and its many hard fought battles. No, you don't get to silence opposition to your 7th century religion, and its crimes. No , you don't get to stifle and limit freedom of expression, just because it challeneges your religion. No, you don't get to impose your 7th century barbarism by trying to be a 5th column. The removal of religion from state took many decades in this society. Efforts to swing your religious desires into politics, and then into religious dictatorship are obvious, and must not be allowed to succeed. Ever.
'Submission' as muslims is your right. If you wish to be so fucking stupid and submit to this garbage - thats a personal choice you can take as you wish. But I *never* submitted to it, and I will not be submitted to it, not even by proxy, not by PR, not by propaganda, and not by 3000 idiots with stupid beards, pygamas, and/or Ninja outfits and retarted stupid idiocy whining outside of Youtube/Google buildings.
This is a secular state. If you do not like it, please feel free to go and live in one of the now many islamic shithole states that plaster this globe. But here is the fun part. Most of you live here because you did not like it there very much. Thats a freedom you very much have as much as standing round outside of a google building offending me deeply.
Oh, sorry, I should not mock your ability to be deeply offended every 5 minutes by everyone and everything. But I did. Whoops.
We`re all equal
as any teenage girl is.
The simple fact of their protest is this, Google won't kill them or their families for protesting Google's actions or inaction.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
One of the things that many people don't realize is that the period of Christian dominance, crusades, inquisitions, etc. was not really about religion per say. It was Politics. The Church was a potent political entity that at times had veto power over issues such as the selection of monarchies and laws. And the atrocities that were carried out were not really due to one's religious beliefs, but more to make political statements and control people. (The Crusades used religion as a pretext, but they were purely geopolitical conflicts.) Martin Luther heralded the decline of the Church as a political force along with the printing press, which allowed the average man (eventually) to read the Bible for himself.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
When people claim to be a representative of god we don't hold them to the norms of the day - they should be showing us the true morality of their god. In the words of Stephen Fry (on a different religion and about slavery, but it's the same point): "what is the point of the Catholic Church if it says we couldn't know better because nobody else did, then what are you for?" - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGFS_hkHfCc
Sure if he's just an average man for his time we can't really expect him to do anything but what is normal for his time. However, that also means he has no special claim on morality or wisdom so we have no reason to accept any of his religious and moral claims.
I just wanted to take a second out of my day, to say thank you to Google. To anyone who works there, who can influence Google, who knows an employee - please pass on my personal thanks for this staunch defence of free speech, in the face of what is probably the single most intimidating anti-free-speech group and protest the world has seen in my lifetime.
What you are doing is very worthy - and really stands to highlight the "Do No Evil" motto that Google is famous for, but that some people have (rightly or wrongly) started to bring into question recently.
Media providers must take their place in the defence of free speech - in the days of investigative journalism they actually tended to be more aggressive about this - and Youtube and other similar providers are absolutely vital in allowing the discourse and social interaction that we need as a community to grow and become better people.
Thank You,
This protest may be peaceful, but it's far from civil. It's a protest against free speech rights for non-Muslims. It deserves all the mockery we can heap upon it.
---don't make me break out my red pen.
Terrorism is not just people who kill human bodies, but who kill human feelings as well. The makers of this film have terrorised 1.6 billion people.
What a disingenuous bunch of crap. Someone questions their invisible friend and they call it terrorism? Hurt feelings are the same as killing innocent people?Someone who would say something like that has the emotional maturity of a 4 year old. I can handle someone criticizing my beliefs but apparently all the followers of islam are so emotionally fragile that they can be traumatized by a book or a comic. Pathetic.
"Terrorism is not just people who kill human bodies, but who kill human feelings as well. The makers of this film have terrorised 1.6 billion people."
If one's feelings are so delicate and fragile as to be killed by an impersonal video then the feelings need to be strengthened. Is the Muslim religion so weak that simply ridiculing it will ram it? I don't think so. Radical Muslims that riot and kill people over a video do no service to their religion. It only shows how intolerant man can be toward their fellow man. It shows how some Muslims are easily swayed by imams who are more interested in their own power than the good of their religion.
I am not usually one to use the word "terrorism" but lets apply "killing feelings" level to some aspects of radical terrorism.
"Women shall not go to schools on pain of death or disfigurement" Terrorizing half the population
"Convert or die". Terrorizing all non-Muslims.
"Leave Islam and Die" Terrorizing all Muslims.
By their standards they are terrorizing everyone in the world.
Also in London, a 14 year old girl fighting for her life after a Muslim put a bullet in her brain because she wanted to go school.
Lets count the number of British Imams condemning the Muslims who attacked her, lets count the number marching on the streets in protest.
What more needs to be said.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
No, I'm the Messiah, and so is my wife
And how many people exactly they killed over that film? None? Oh, maybe that's why Christian extremists are not painted as killers.
"Terrorism is not just people who kill human bodies, but who kill human feelings as well. The makers of this film have terrorised 1.6 billion people."
Fuck you, and anybody who thinks like you, pal. Terrorism puts people in fear for their lives by murdering and brutally attacking others. The makers of this film have created a bunch of racist garbage, yes, but they in no way put anybody in fear of danger. The danger comes from people like you, who scream about how freedom of speech doesn't apply to this film because it's "anarchy", because it's not "civil", because it's "blasphemous". Freedom of speech requires that all those qualities be protected. And if you believe your religion allows you to contemplate violence for words alone, you need to take a damn hard look at your religion, and then the rest of the world, because we've left the Dark Ages - you don't get to declare a holy right to commit violence against those who called you stupid anymore.
So, you are saying that Jews are not the subject of jokes in the west? They are and the greatest jokes are told by Jews themselves, they take the piss out of themselves and their religion for a long time, it is one of the defining qualities of Jews in the west.
And if you want a good anti-catholic joke, look no further then catholics, they know a ton and will happily tell them, they too have plenty of self-ridicule or do you REALLY think any Catholic out there doesn't find it hilarious that beavers count as fish?
Protestants laugh about themselves too you just don't see it because they are to stoic to move face muscles.
There have been countless movies made taking the total piss out of religion and the number of deaths because of them is very very low (I can't say for certain nobody has been killed over movies like Life of Brian).
You do know that the simple joke of Moses coming down the mountain (a Jew) and dropping 5 of the 15 commandments would have Muslims (when someone dials-a-riot) up on arms if it was about Mohammad?
There is a large difference between ridiculling even belitteling a group of people and incitement to hatred. Anti-semitism doesn't say Moses raped goats, it says Jews are sub-human. Saying Mohammed is a pedo isn't saying Arabs are sub-human.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
And more recently, a 14 year old girl is shot in the head by the Taliban for daring to campaign for women's rights (where else, but in Pakistan).
Dear self proclaimed 'peaceful' Muslims, where the fuck were you during these episodes orchestrated by your co-religionists in the name of your wonderful religion? Where were the masses of allegedly moderate Muslims protesting at the gates of the embassies of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia for aiding and funding these terror groups?
What? The ENTIRE NATION OF PAKISTAN took a day of prayers in response to this episode. There were protests against it across Pakistan. Prayer leaders condemned the attacks. Schools were closed. Rallies against the attacks were held in all the major cities. I don't know how you missed that.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-19913201
That's a door that can swing BOTH ways Mr Nasar. Do be careful what you wish for and have yourself a nice day sir...
"Dance like nobody's watching"
I went and looked up "The Last Temptation of Christ" on Wikipedia. The 1988 Scorsese movie drew protests by 600 offended Christians in California. Adjusted for inflation, that's about 800 London Imams. And it wasn't on youtube. The point being that people claiming to represent all Muslims or all Christians don't deserve the ink. This is more about the disintegration of journalism than an attack on Islam or a serious threat to freedom of speech.
"The Last Temptation of Christ's eponymous final sequence depicts the crucified Jesus—tempted by what turns out to be Satan in the form of a beautiful, androgynous child—experiencing a dream or alternative reality where he comes down from the cross, marries Mary Magdalene (and later Mary and Martha), and lives out his life as a full mortal man...."
"Because of these radical departures from the gospel narratives—and especially a brief scene wherein Jesus and Mary Magdalene consummate their marriage—several Christian fundamentalist groups organized vocal protests and boycotts of the film prior to and upon its release. One protest, organized by a religious Californian radio station, gathered 600 protesters to picket the headquarters of Universal Studios' parent company MCA;[5] one of the protestors dressed as MCA's Chairman Lew Wasserman and pretended to drive nails through Jesus' hands into a wooden cross.[4] Bill Bright of Campus Crusade for Christ offered to buy the film's negative from Universal in order to destroy it.[5] The protests were effective in convincing several theater chains not to screen the film;[5] one of those chains, General Cinemas, later apologized to Scorsese for doing so.[4]
In some countries, including Turkey, Mexico, Chile, and Argentina, the film was banned or censored for several years. As of July 2010, the movie continues to be banned in Chile, the Philippines and Singapore.[6]
Gently reply
How many were killed over that movie?
Well?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
whereas it was normal politics for the time and culture... how ignorant.
Actually, it was anything but normal for the time and culture.
Records from Ancient Israel, Greece, Cartage (former Phoenicians, who originated north of Israel) and Rome all indicate that getting married at age 12 for a girl was considered very young across the Mediterranean. The whole area -- courtesy of Greek and Phoenician colonists, Alexander the Great and later the Roman Empire -- formed a broad cultural unit spanning from the Atlantic to Ethiopia and Mesopotamia. Mecca was, in the 7th century, at the limit of this cultural unit: it was an important trading outpost on the camel route to current Yemen, which supplied Europe with Incense, and it had significant Christian and Jewish communities.
Consequently, there is little if any evidence that anyone in the area would consider it normal to wed a 6-year old or to shag a 9-year old. On the contrary, cultures in areas some might call "backward" today would suggest that the earliest appropriate marriage age for a girl then, before, or later, be it Mecca, in the middle of the desert, or anywhere else, broke down to whether a girl is of breeding age or not.
A showdown between free speech and Muslim sensitivities about their prophet is well under way. One side is going to have to give eventually.
Historically, in the Western world, something like this - the posting of the 95 thesis - led to hundreds of years of war and revolution before people decided that imposing their religious dogma on others is a futile quest.
The Nepali calendar is currently in 2069, which explains their ongoing moon colonisation and widespread use of quantum computers to solve protein folding problems and cure cancer. Nice argument, well done.
Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
Maybe if they spent just as much effort to organize and protest against the Taliban and fundamentalist Islam, then it would be easier to dismiss such videos in the first place.
Anyone who has listened to or read Sam Harris knows that Islam has some very basic problems at the core of its doctrine that its present-day followers have overwhelmingly failed to address. To speak up about this is not to be Islamophobic. It's to state factual aspects of a religion that is not, despite claims from its moderate adherents, the "religion of peace." Because if it were peaceful, THESE PEOPLE WOULDN'T BE PROTESTING GOOGLE. They'd be doing everything in their power to excommunicate and weed out all the extremist mullahs and imams that call for death for apostasy, and violent jihad. The fact that we see protests against Western freedoms rather than Islamic oppression tells you everything you need to know. Moderates cannot just keep repeating "but we're peaceful and we're offended!" It's YOUR religion to claim, so CLAIM it. But don't go around to non-Muslims and pretend as if you're doing your duty, because the fight is not with us. It's with the extremists in your midst that threaten to pull your religion in THEIR direction. Unless, of course, you moderates agree with them, in which case you're not really moderate at all, and it's all just an act.
Someone, somewhere, every day, protests somewhere in London about something.
Every Wednesday for years, motorcyclists gathered by the thousands on London streets to protest about the parking facilities for them in Central London (an inherently over-populated and over-crowded place where you will NEVER park sensibly). Nobody really cared.
This might have made the telegraph but I've seen no mention of it in any other media. Hell, the BBC has next-to-no news on it today and it's not on their website.
And, literally, every single day some group will protest in London. Hell, we have areas of London parks SET ASIDE for people to soap-box from and protest, it's that common. What did make the news today? Two girls handcuffing themselves in St Paul's Cathedral at protest of the churches support for the banks that brought the economic crisis.
Any mention of Muslim protest? None.
It's a non-story. Really. And, more importantly, 99% of the Muslim people in the capital (let alone the country or the world) might be condemning such protests for all I know.
People will literally protest about anything in London (and even come to London to protest, not realising that it makes your issue seem small in comparison to all the other protests that commuters have to walk through every day), from the devolution of Scotland to the petrol prices to the way that someone looked at them last Thursday. It means nothing.
You want my attention to this issue that offends you? Start negotiating, not dictating.
These Muslims really need to get caught up on how the Western world has been working. Do they really think that the 'Age of Mockery' was started a few years ago? Pretty much the entire history of editorial cartoons (at least 300 years now), has been full of mocking. Probably even started in London. It's a perfectly fine and healthy part of society. Ever since the Enlightenment society has been doing this. These protestors are effectively protesting the idea that people can express opinions, which is kind of hypocritical given that they're free to protest it.
Perhaps that's equally important -- those demonstrations are made by individuals using their own moral compasses and NOT being told what to do by their Islamic leaders.
Coming down on Malala's side isn't exactly brain surgery, but if this is any sign of a Pakistani surge in secularism and thinking for one's own self, I'll take it!!!
From hell's heart I fstab at /dev/hdc
Slavery was normal in the past. Women without rights was normal in the past. Little boys "serving" soldiers was normal in the past. Killing someone for allowing herself to be raped was normal in the past.
Trolling much?
Please read the following carefully:
Firstly, if you (or another AC, I have no means to differentiate among you) are going to deride Mohammad for acting in ways considered normal at the time, you should deride EVERYBODY that adhered to, or even tacitly supported, those customs. Singling out a single person just because he happened to get famous is disingenuous.
Secondly, while I agree that, on the aggregate, things are much improved nowadays, some things are getting worse.
Mass warrantless surveillance in supposedly free democratic countries was not normal in the past. Neither were the criminalization of sexting, or "harming of virtual children". Getting irradiated or fondled in airports was not normal in the past. And don't get me started about extra-judicial killings and "renditions", Gitmo, Goldman-Sachs, etc.
Thirdly, there is no reason to assume that morals and ethics have reached their pinnacle and will not continue to change in the future. So, in several hundred years, should you be considered the scum of the earth just because during your lifetime you have acted according to the prevailing norms?
Now, in light of these three statements, would you care to clarify what exactly is your point?
greatest jokes are told by Jews themselves
The self-deprecating jewish joke theme is actually due to the fact that at one point the jewish rulers of... somewhere... decided they wanted to be a little fascist and tried to outlaw jokes. Specifically, street performers telling jokes in town square.
There was this one guy who... well, wasn't very funny because all his jokes were dark and depressing. He was allowed to continue becase it didn't clash with the official state culture.
That went on for a little while, people migrated, and culture spread.
Before that point, jewish humor included all the typical fart-jokes and lewd innuendo that everyone else has, without the trend of putting themselves down.
If you don't want to be mocked, don't be ridiculous.
So, you are saying that Jews are not the subject of jokes in the west?
No .. I'm saying that the intolerance of anti-Jewish propaganda is so ensconced in in western views that we have a special word for it and there is a very low tolerance for such activities. Why are Jews so special[1] that that they need their own term to describe attacks on them, where as other groups do not have an equivalent term?
But it seems in the present climate that insulting muslims is deemed OK and any objection to that is repulsed with cries of "Free speech!"
Anti-semitism doesn't say Moses raped goats
What do you think would happen to someone who set up a sign outside a synagogue in the US that said "Moses raped goats"? Do you think that calling it "Free speech" would protect them from abuse/being castigate in the media etc? Or people would not see that as anti semitic? (personally I think they'd be beaten to a pulp ASAP before anyone considered any rights)
[1] I say this in an academic sense and not as an attack, but I bet I get people incensed for me even asking that question.
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
It seems Muslims, like a lot of Americans, don't understand what terrorism is. Terrorism isn't hurting someone's feelings. It isn't some lone gunman going on a rampage. Terrorism is an organized violent movement, targeting civilians, in order to intimidate the population into affecting desired policies.
There's a lot of moral equivalency being thrown around. Those assholes have a lot of audacity taking to the streets in protest considering that Malala Yousafzai was shot for speaking out against extremists. They can't bitch about hurt feelings or the even West in that case. That was a Pakistani girl speaking up about local problems. But then I suppose they'll blame "liberal" Western influences.
I'm reminded of how a lot of these guys keep dredging up ancient history, the Crusades, to justify their aggression towards the West. What relevancy does that have to anyone? Europeans have long since moved on. The West can't be blamed for violence that occurred 800 years. Nevermind that both sides in the Crusades were equally belligerent and it could be argued that Muslims started it all. Middle East had profoundly influential centers of learning until Muslim aggressors showed up and decimated it all, no thanks to evil Europeans.
By all standards we have more to be upset about than they do.
Just look at Abu Hamza was able to do: preach violence hatred in the biggest mosque in London for 5 years. Did Muslims ever stop him? No. He was stopped by the police.
Muslims have no moral grounds on which to complain about anything said about Islam because of their inaction relating to Abu Hamza
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
The title really should read "thousands of fundamentalist Muslims." Christian fundamentalists are constantly boycotting and protesting this or that in an effort to punish companies for not loving their version of Jesus enough, but we would never generalize them as the ~3/4 of Americans that self-identify as Christians. The idiots protesting Google over a Youtube video are culturally stuck in the past and refuse to accept that the world is changing, just like Christian conservatives.
Actually, I wrote my thesis on life experience.
And how many things did the christians burn? How many people did they kill? Oh that's right, nothing and no one.
Also free speech as I define it only truly exists in the US so I'm not interested on what other countries did.
wake up and find out that you are the eyes of the world.
I won't argue against that. But with freedom we must have a sense of responsibility. Does the consumption of this media drive the creation of it? I have no idea, to be honest. I can say that the witch hunt for the people who possess child porn seems misguided and downright scary sometimes. I don't think we should demonize people like that for the possession of any kind of media. The last thing we need is a bogey man to scare us into forfeiting our basic rights.
I will say that while I personally find it extremely unappealing, I can't take issue with software-rendered or hand drawn/painted depictions of child pornography. In that case, the solution really is to just avoid it.
No .. I'm saying that the intolerance of anti-Jewish propaganda is so ensconced in in western views that we have a special word for it and there is a very low tolerance for such activities. Why are Jews so special[1] that that they need their own term to describe attacks on them, where as other groups do not have an equivalent term?
I believe this has only been the case since circa 1945. The fact that this kind of event could even happen in modern times so disgusted and shocked Europe and the West that there was a huge backlash against it. Before that, mild to moderate antisemitism was somewhat pervasive in western culture.
But it seems in the present climate that insulting muslims is deemed OK and any objection to that is repulsed with cries of "Free speech!"
This isn't true. There is usually heavy criticism of extreme anti-Muslim activities. I will admit that (unfortunately) anti-Muslim sentiment sits pretty high (especially in the US) right now, primarily due to the actions of some extremists.
He is a revered figure in Tamil Nadu. He is credited with bringing printing press to the region, compiling the first dictionary, the first thesaurus, first compedium of numbered collections (like four directions, four seasons, seven notes, five senses, etc), and the rhyming dictionary. He also wrote hymns in Tamil. Wrote extensively about the mores and customs of the land to help the other missionaries who would follow him.
Whatever happened to the satire of Hindu swamis? It lives on. Still very much in the circulation. I heard most of those stories from my grandma as bed time stories. A culture that is so self assured and so self confident it was able to laugh at a good joke. It is not a surprise, despite his great literary achievements and reverence, in his core mission of religious conversion, he hardly made a dent. Less than 1% of the Tamils converted to Christianity in his times. Even now Christian population is just 2 or 3 % in Tamil Nadu.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
And several thousand innocent people died in the previous ones mentioned. However, because they were almost down to a man and woman "infidels," they didn't garner anywhere near the sympathy this one shooting got. A Muslim girl was attacked by a Muslim extremist. That is why they could muster a normal level of outrage over this.
IFF what has been said about peaceful Muslims and Islam being a peaceful religion were actually true, there would be swift and brutal action taken against the violent attacks on religious minorities in Muslim lands, the funding of terrorism, etc. Muslim jurists would be teaching that "it is the duty of all good Muslims to offer no peace, no sanctuary, no protection to those who kill innocents in the name of Islam."
The Imam's would be better served to teach their followers how to live peacefully in their adopted countries.. and teach that their prophet cannot be "injured" by the actions of non-Muslims.. and that their culture and religion will be most injured by violence and poverty that their over-reactions create. If they want respect, they need to earn it by acting decently towards their fellow human beings. If they can't act peacefully, they should organize mass self-deportation to their Holy Land in the middle east.
In Rome act like Romans (tm).
In UK you have to follow UK laws, just like you have to follow Moroccan laws while in Morocco.
It doesn't depend upon your nationality or beliefs, or anything else. It depends on your current location.
If you dislike the UK laws, then you are allowed to move to another country.
If you cannot move, then you have to undergo the situation, as long as it's compliant with the local laws.
If you don't like all this, then remember that almost anything you'll see in the so-called "western countries" are modeled like this.
Glad to let you know.
Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
"Terrorism is not just people who kill human bodies, but who kill human feelings as well. The makers of this film have terrorised 1.6 billion people."
Wrong. True terrorism involves stripping the victims of their choice. They have no choice but to be terrorized. Nobody in the West sat down with guns to your heads and forced you to watch the video. As with most things, you have a choice to be offended or not, to watch, or not. Stop being stupid, don't watch it, and don't be offended. Pretty simple.
Most of us in the U.S. grew up with the old line about sticks and stones, and learned at an early age that being thin skinned only lead to more offense from those shelling it out. We don't have a right to not be offended. How you deal with being offended is the difference between being mature, and being childish.
That said, we do have rights to free speech, and if some jackass wants to make a movie, or put a sign outside a synagogue, his right to do so needs to be protected. But, we have every right to disagree, and point to the jackass an laugh...and no right to physically retaliate.
Just another day in Paradise
I think the shift was even more recent than WWII. If you look at US society in the 50s, antisemitism was just as common as other forms of racism and bigotry. At least, that's what I can gather from popular portrayals of the era, especially in the south. Maybe somebody who lived through that time could share some insight. Any octogenarians here on Slashdot?
It was talked about in the cited article - not exactly zero. Let's not pretend one group of people is inherently more enlightened than another, if given similar upbringing and circumstances.
There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.