February 24, 2008 (KHARTOUM) — The Sudanese president Omar Hassan Al-Bashir ordered today that no Danish diplomat be received in the country as well as expelling Danish humanitarian organizations and boycotting Danish goods.
This is so utterly silly.
Okay so let’s see. First, a Danish newspaper prints a bunch of cartoons depicting the Prophet (which is nothing new). Next thing we know, Islamists mobilize anger and all hell breaks lose, to the point of making you wonder whether these guys actually worship God or his Prophet. Fast forward more than a year later, and some Muslim nuts get caught in Denmark plotting to kill the cartoonist, to which the response is a symbolic middle finger in the form of a cartoon republication.
1) The Danish media is independent, I repeat, independent (something we can hardly understand given the, oh, so very wonderful fact that we’re super democratic). The government can’t do jack about it, unless it wants to seriously piss off Danish citizens of course.
2) Danish humanitarian organizations operating in Sudan, who by the way are helping people there, can’t control what newspapers in Denmark publish. Yeah, so instead of thanking them for what they do, let’s kick them out. Evil Zionist Scandinavians!
3) Did I mention that Danish media is independent?
Gosh, whatever.
Sudan’s president has in the past used the issue of the cartoons as an excuse to reject Scandinavian peacekeepers in Darfur.
Oh my, like I am sooo surprised, oh, like totally!
Can someone please hand me a dead smelly fish I can smack my face with?
SudaneseThinker
SudaneseThinker
{ 55 comments… read them below or add one }
How nice, Islamist brownie point collection. What’s next, boycotting anything British?
And what a convenient pretext for throwing yet another spoke into the planned peacekeeping force, as well as getting rid of “inconvenient” aid groups that report all those nasty things.
After all, the mere presence of aid groups implies a problem, doesn’t it? No aid groups, no problem. Simple logic.
*hands Drima a dead smelly fish*
By the same logic, this fish is not smelly. You must simply clean off the flies and worms, put in a couple of nose-plugs, and eat it.
“a symbolic middle finger in the form of a cartoon republication.” Now if you’re a staunch defender of the honor of the Prophet (pbuh) you MIGHT see it as such. Could it be just news ? Like there were 12 cartoons originally, and headline reads “POLICE FOIL PLOT TO KILL CARTOONIST” and we’re like “which cartoon ? which cartoonist ? oh, that cartoon …..
This is nothing to do with anything outside our little insignificant infidel country.. but I’m preaching to the choir here.
I hold no grudge against ANY Sudanese person, I shake my head at the government, tho’ , wondering if they could use a WMD (weapon of mass diversion)
Glad you noticed, ya Drima, I’d better make a post about it too.
sorry about that….Let me add, if there are any angry Sudanese around here, I’d be happy to discuss this.
“making you wonder whether these guys actually worship God or his Prophet”
Precisely.
You know why Abrahamic religions condemn idolatry?
It’s because it’s easily done and humans are drawn to the practice.
“And what a convenient pretext for throwing yet another spoke into the planned peacekeeping force, as well as getting rid of “inconvenient” aid groups that report all those nasty things.”
Spot on Roman. You’ve been following the news closely I guess. These guys HATE the fact that there are aid groups on the ground. Because that means a problem exists. They’re always on the look out for any screw ups by aid agencies so they can have an excuse to kick them out.
It’s mind boggling how they’d prefer to see their own people die, except that in their mind they probably don’t see Darfurians as their “own” people - just a bunch of others from different tribes.
What are the three key differences between a successful and a failure?
1. Brave vs. Coward
2. Praise vs. Criticize
3. Hard working, passionate, and high responsibility vs.Easy money/income!!!
My much loved Saying “Talking is the easiest thing an individual can do” is gifted to u.
Look what we have here, a lovely specimen of the typical conspiracy theorist?
Let me guess, there’s nothing bad happening in Darfur right? Wait better still, you’re a fan of the Sudanese government’s policies?
If you actually have something useful to say then go ahead and argue against the points I’ve mentioned because you’re more than welcome to, but I guess since you’re incapable of that you go trolling around trying to make yourself feel better. Whatever it is, have fun representing the exact thing you speak of.
Oh and thanks for the gift. Much appreciated. Next time come up with something dirty. I know you can.
i love it.. muslims boycotting denmark.. hmm.. ok.. so now they cant buy danish bacon carlsberg or tuborg..
that’ll change a lot..
I could never boycott all things Danish. I owe the happiness of my childhood to Lego(TM)
I STILL have my Lego sets in my room and I’m a grown 21 year old guy but I don’t give a damn. I’ll probably take them with me to the grave.
Hi all
No one is going to tell us, what to do or think. It’s a free country, and the muslims just have to live with it! (I have nothing against muslims, but i will not accept voilence…) I’m sorry about my language and spelling…Im just from denmark, you know
Lego’s great. My old pirate cove set is still alive, minus a few replaceable pieces.
Danish politicians are considering holding back money for developmentprojects and aidprojects in Sudan (around 100 million $ budget until end 2009). They will try to secure aid for Darfur though.
And it will be difficult for Sudan to become a member of WTO when Sudan has an official policy of boycotting another country.
In Denmark the risk of an escalating boycott in the Middle East is estimated to be 50%. It will hurt individual companies hard but the national economy is too strong to be effected.
I hope they don’t ban the pastries at Ozone
LOL Rob, you really like Ozone don’t you. I’m not surprised anyway, there are only a few better options.
Oh, and by the way, here we go again. Government-backed protests in Khartoum involving thousands!
And the government’s real reason for fanning the flames?
“Al-Bashir’s Islamist government has frequently used perceived insults to Muhammad to rally support for the regime and opposition to international pressure to accept U.N. peacekeepers in Sudan. He has barred peacekeepers from Sweden and Norway from a U.N.-African force in the Darfur region because papers in those countries ran similar cartoons in the past.”
Oh, sooo surprising!
again the double standard
when America occupied Iraq and killed much more than Saddam did ,they said that they came to free iraq.
when 1000 palestinians r killed everday in their own homes by israel ,israel r defending themselves.
when Denmark publish a cartoond epicting our beloved prophet(PBUH) then it is opinion expression freedom.
don’t u get it ,we r the weaker part here..we have no rights.
i agree with the sudanese president in not recieving Danish diplomat and the boycotting Danish goods. it is the least we can do (for sorry)
Salam safaa,
“don’t u get it ,we r the weaker part here..we have no rights.”
No, I don’t get it and neither do I believe in playing the victim. I disagree with boycotting Danish goods even though I disagree with the publication of the mocking cartoons. Like I said, Danish media is *independent*. Plus, you might want to check the kind of cartoons *we* draw of others. I support neither.
You speak as if there is a major conspiracy out there to destroy us. There isn’t.
No Muslim on the earth has the right to say or perform an act that offend Jessus “PBOH” or Moses. on other hand, No one has the right offend the Prophet of mercy Mohamed “SAWS”.
For those who think the boycott is pointless and waste of time, I would say this is what Musilim have told to do. Here is the Hadith (Mohamed Saying: من راء منكم منكرا فليغيره بيده فان لم يستطع فبلسانه فان لم يستطع فبقلبه وذلك اضعف الايمان). translated, If you see something shady or dishonest, try to change it forcibly, if you can’t, then change it through speech, and if can’t then sliently refuse it.
(Book #61, Hadith #577):-
Narrated ‘Ali: I heard the Prophet saying, “In the last days (of the world) there will appear young people with foolish thoughts and ideas. They will give good talks, but they will go out of Islam as an arrow goes out of its game, their Faith will not exceed their throats. So, wherever you find them, kill them, for there will be a reward for their killers on the Day of Resurrection.” don’t worry i am not gonna do it
AN ADVICE ” Thinks before you act, otherwise change your blog DNS….”
Drima: “Let me guess, there’s nothing bad happening in Darfur right? Wait better still, you’re a fan of the Sudanese government’s policies?”
Ponder: “I am only a fan of the greatest prophet Mohamed (PBAH).
Drima: “I guess since you’re incapable of that you go trolling around trying to make yourself feel better. Whatever it is, have fun representing the exact thing you speak of.”
Ponder: Isn’t a public blog? and don’t i have the right to speak loud what i believe even though it sound ridiculous and unconfortable to you “If I don’t have the freedom to disbelieve…..!!!”? (Freedom of speech is ma ….).
Sudanese Ponder, first of all, very nice work with the veiled threats. All they serve to highlight is your character.
You seem like a typical Wahhabi-influenced Islamist, cherry picking hadith from here and there, and shoving it into people’s faces as a method of intimidation, as you simultaneously attempt to build legitimacy in the eyes of gullible Muslims by painting yourself as someone who is fighting for the faith.
Good try. But not good enough.
1-
“من راء منكم منكرا فليغيره بيده فان لم يستطع فبلسانه فان لم يستطع فبقلبه وذلك اضعف الايمان).
translated, If you see something shady or dishonest, try to change it forcibly, if you can’t, then change it through speech, and if can’t then sliently refuse it.”
Erm, no, your translation is not correct. You got “forcibly” wrong, it’s supposed to be “hand”.
But basically you say you want to change things right? Good, so always keep in mind this: many, if not most Danes did not support the publication of the mocking cartoons. The boycott you speak of is collective punishment. Instead I am for a more effective boycott - one targeted against companies that advertise in the offending newspapers. Furthermore, *change* can be applied and approached differently.
When the cartoon crisis first erupted, one group burned flags and went on a violent rampage (in which Muslims died). A second group called for boycotts and engaged in aggressive rhetoric. A third group led by Amr Khaled WENT to Denmark to engage people there in dialogue.
The change I choose and believe in is mainly that of the the third group. I’m guessing you admire the first and second. As for boycotts, like I said, I’m all for the right strategic kind.
2-
Now let’s get to that wonderful hadith which you cherry picked and completely de-contextualized.
“(Book #61, Hadith #577):-
Narrated ‘Ali: I heard the Prophet saying, “In the last days (of the world) there will appear young people with foolish thoughts and ideas. They will give good talks, but they will go out of Islam as an arrow goes out of its game, their Faith will not exceed their throats. So, wherever you find them, kill them, for there will be a reward for their killers on the Day of Resurrection.”
Cool, so I guess Amr Khaled is a smart talker too right? Yeah, he’s surely got to be one of those retards who give good talks and should be killed. How dare he go to Denmark for dialogue? He should have made angry rants and burned flags instead.
The hadith you have here is a little ambiguous and has been translated differently in English. Even in Arabic, it’s exact meaning and interpretation is disputed by Muslim scholars.
Here is another which is similar:
“Volume 9, Book 84, Number 64:
Narrated ‘Ali:
Whenever I tell you a narration from Allah’s Apostle, by Allah, I would rather fall down from the sky than ascribe a false statement to him, but if I tell you something between me and you (not a Hadith) then it was indeed a trick (i.e., I may say things just to cheat my enemy). No doubt I heard Allah’s Apostle saying, “During the last days there will appear some young foolish people who will say the best words but their faith will not go beyond their throats (i.e. they will have no faith) and will go out from (leave) their religion as an arrow goes out of the game. So, where-ever you find them, kill them, for who-ever kills them shall have reward on the Day of Resurrection.”
Notice, how it says during the last days only. There is no “(of the world)” like your hadith contains. An interpretation I am familiar with is that the words “last days” referred back to those days in which the Muslim community was fighting.
Some people pretended to embrace Islam so that they could infiltrate the Muslim community and conspire against it. The context was one of war - the last days of it. And hence an order was made to kill them. After all, this was a time of *war*.
Capiche? Or should I go on? Learn to add hadiths into their proper contexts and learn about the circumstances in which they were said.
3-
“Isn’t a public blog? and don’t i have the right to speak loud what i believe even though it sound ridiculous and unconfortable to you”
It’s not just a public blog. It’s *my* blog and the only reason I’m allowing to speak your mind is because I’m waiting in the hope that you’ll say something of value. If I wanted I can delete your comments and block your IP address right now.
Clearly you haven’t got a clue about what freedom of speech is and how it functions in public arenas and private ones.
If you want to present arguments and disagree with me, you’re more than welcome even if you’ll just end up disagreeing with me 24/7. Speak your mind. I won’t delete a single comment. Making threats and personal insults all the time is a completely different thing altogether.
Salam.
“again the double standard when America occupied Iraq and killed much more than Saddam did ,they said that they came to free iraq.”
Feel free to ask the Kurds and Shiites about that.
Either way, the Americans did not “kill much more than Saddam did”.
The entire conflict has so far cost fewer lives than Saddam’s rule, per year. And that includes the majority of deaths caused by Arab terrorists and not Americans.
Are you a Muslim? If so, why do you lie?
“when 1000 palestinians r killed everday in their own homes by israel ,israel r defending themselves.”
Again, a lie. Israel does not kill “1000 palestinians everyday”. In fact, Israel has, in 50 years, not killed as many “Palestinians” as Jordan and a few thousand in total.
It’s self defence not because of the numbers or because it is Israel but because “Palestinians” do indeed attack Israel (and vote for parties that want war).
You will also not find many “Palestinian” homes attacked by Israel except those used by terrorists. Why not tell them to stuff it and go somewhere else?
“when Denmark publish a cartoond epicting our beloved prophet(PBUH) then it is opinion expression freedom.”
It is.
“don’t u get it ,we r the weaker part here..we have no rights.”
So where is the double standard? What exactly are the Danes doing that they won’t allow you to do?
I have heard about anti-Semitic cartoons in Arab newspapers. They are FAR WORSE than anything the Danes said about Muhammed.
Is there a double standard? There is, but it’s YOUR double standard, not a Danish double standard.
Feel free to apologise for your lies about Iraq and Israel and we can be friends.
P.S.: “Palestinians” have a higher standard of living than Egyptians and Jordanians and a lower child mortality rate. Being “oppressed” by the Israelis is, when considering the regimes that oppress their neighbours, the best thing that could have happened to them.
“No Muslim on the earth has the right to say or perform an act that offend Jesus “PBOH” or Moses.”
Not true. You can draw as many cartoons of Jesus and Moses as you like. Thousands have been published.
Jesus and Moses don’t offend easily.
Nor is there any need to write a meaningless acronym after the name of Jesus.
“Jesus and Moses don’t offend easily.”
I like Moses jokes.
By acting violently to the cartoons actually proofs what the cartoonists is trying to say when putting a bomb on mohammeds head.
Now in the Netherlands with this Wilders guy making a movie about islam because he believes it’s a fascist thing, the taliban is threatening to try more to attack the dutch soldiers in afghanistan.
Again. The point given - even not yet given - has been confirmed by the acts of exactly these muslims who are being critized for their immoral behaviour.
http://www.grinningplanet.com/2005/03-15/religious-best-seller-copyright4.gif
http://toonrefugee.com/images/moses.jpg
http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/mba/lowres/mban1257l.jpg
http://www.shepherdsingles.com/home/212/212/images/Moses%20cartoon.bmp
http://blog.case.edu/singham/2007/01/18/moses.jpg
http://seemikedraw.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/young-moses.jpg
http://ealing.humanists.net/Bilds/B47im14.gif
OH THE HORROR!!!
and btw, this one is from that anti-semitic cartoon contest as a joke to the iranian holocaustcartoons:
http://www.danieldrezner.com/archives/moses.jpg
btw
http://www.israellycool.com/cartoon%20mohammed.gif
Suzanne,
Drima featured the same cartoon on this blog a week ago. He knows.
“By acting violently to the cartoons actually proofs what the cartoonists is trying to say when putting a bomb on mohammeds head.”
They say it is an insult to Muhammed to make a connection between Islam and bombs.
I agree.
But it was Khomeini who did that, not Danish cartoonists.
Ponder: “No Muslim on the earth has the right to say or perform an act that offend Jessus “PBOH” or Moses.
- and just how do you know what does ,or does not, offend Jesus and Moses ? Jesus is all about love, I can’t imagine him burning flags. And Moses, I am yet to meet a Jew with no sense of humor.
That leaves us:
“on other hand, No one has the right offend the Prophet of mercy Mohamed “SAWS”.
I guess it’s YOU who was offended, not the Prophet. But that’s ok, we can talk about it. Just don’t hate me, or my country, or my government, or Arla, or Lego for something that was done by a newspaper.
“and just how do you know what does ,or does not, offend Jesus and Moses?”
Oh, he can speak for prophets. Didn’t you know?
” Jesus is all about love, I can’t imagine him burning flags.”
Maybe his version does?
“And Moses, I am yet to meet a Jew with no sense of humor.”
Actually, Moses was known for known for his lack of a sense of humour. He also had big feet and walked through the forests of Oregon where he is occasionally spotted by easily-impressed Americans.
(No, wait, that is bigfoot… Moses had a great sense of humour.)
As for the cartoons, I am sure our friend lives in an Arab country. Once he finds an anti-Semitic cartoon he can have all the offended fun he wants when he complains to the Arab publishers about them insulting the prophet Moses.
@andrew, it was the latest cartoon of many about moses, but that post got set into moderation due to the many links. Hopefully Drima will accept it
Accepted. Now let’s play nice guys. No need to fan the flames. Some people are just under the illusion that they’re righteous holy warriors who must fight others, the way they see fit.
What, do you think the Moses cartoons might offend?
As we have been told, they might offend Muslims (although I doubt it since I have seen worse cartoons in Arab newspapers).
They don’t offend me.
“Is this available in paperback?”
A bit boring unless it was meant to point out the irony that even though so many today think that religion is wrong and unimportant that particular book is still, after 3000 years, a best seller.
“OK. But they are not gonna like it.”
The idea of Moses talking back to G-d. That’s very Jewish. There are many jokes about Jews not shutting up even when talking to the all-mighty.
“Thou shalt not shoot the messenger.”
Boring.
“Moses, stop it!”
Funny, but primitive.
“Moses parting his hair”
Funny in the Far Side context.
“Young Moses”
Cheeky!
“It’s just a first draft…”
This one is brilliant. One has to realise that those words are probably the result of Moses arguing with the all-mighty for some time. This is again that Jews don’t shut up thing we are noticing here again and again.
“من راء منكم منكرا فليغيره بيده ”
- The correct translation is “whoever sees among them badness, should undo it with his hand”
Without having any Shar7 aviable, i as an arab teached in classic arabic would understand “hand” as meaning acts.
That is who ever witness bad acts should undo it with his acts.
And please, guys, quit saying that defending our Prophet (saws) is worship. Astaghferollah. Worship is for Allah t.t only! But a muslim should at any time DEFEND the honour of the noble Prophet (saws) - who is the best of all creations and the posessor of the perfect akhlaq. That does in NO WAY mean worship, perhaps unless you see the world as black/white.
Saying this has no basis in the shari3a, and actually that rhetoric (that honouring the Prophet by visiting his grave etc.) is idol worship, came around only with the Wahabi movement, who you guys oppose so much.
I would like to add:
That the honor of our Prophet (saw) is so central in Islam that Allah (swt) and his Angels are sending blessings upon him, that you have to love the Prophet (saw) more than your family and your own self.
As Shaykh Sayid Al-Habib Ali Al-Jifri of Tarim (May Allah preserve him and let us benefit from him) said in one of his excellent speeches:
“We should be like the woman of the Ansar, that when her whole family was killed with the Prophet (saw) in one single battle, and the men returned from the battle, she went out and said:
What has befallen the Messenger of Allah?
And the people said: You father has been killed in the battle.
And she said: All praise to Allah who have honored me with his martyrdom, but was have befallen the Messenger of Allah?
And the men said: You brother have been killed.
And the said: May Allah accept his efforts. What happended to the Prophet?
And they said: You uncle have been killed.
And she said: Woe to you! I said: WHAT HAVE BEFALLEN THE MESSENGER OF ALLAH?
And they said: He is in a good state, just as you wish.
And when the Prophet pbuh entered the city, she kneeled and grapped a portion of his garment and said:
Every calamity lest in you is NOTHING in reality, O Messenger of Allah!”
This is how much the holy messenger of Allah ta3ala mean to the Muslim, and be aware that whoever accuses the noble Muslims of Shirk have accused them of disbelief, and whoever accuses a muslim of disbelief is a disbeliever himself.
“And please, guys, quit saying that defending our Prophet (saws) is worship.”
Nobody here said that defending Muhammed is worship.
It’s the violent protests based on the extreme love many claim to have for him that borders on idolatry.
There is no “defence” involved when it comes to the cartoons as the cartoons do not (and cannot) attack Muhammed.
But to see an attack on fundamentalist Islam (and that is what the cartoons were) as an attack on Muhammed, that, I’m afraid, is a form of idolatry.
It’s not the act of defending Muhammed, it’s the belief that the cartoons are directed at him. The first is not idolatry, the second clearly is.
“This is how much the holy messenger of Allah ta3ala mean to the Muslim,”
That’s scary. How is that different from idol worship?
“and be aware that whoever accuses the noble Muslims of Shirk have accused them of disbelief, and whoever accuses a muslim of disbelief is a disbeliever himself.”
Says who?
“This is how much the holy messenger of Allah ta3ala mean to the Muslim”
I’m sorry but this sounds like worshipping to me when you regard the well-being of a (so-called) messenger more important then the lifes of 10 family members together.
three family members i meant
“I’m sorry but this sounds like worshipping to me when you regard the well-being of a (so-called) messenger more important”
That’s why he specifically added that accusing them of such would disqualify one as a believer.
That way he has an “argument” against your doubt.
The fact is that it looks to me like idolatry too.
And NOONE who disagrees with that has any authority to tell me that I am wrong. (I am using the same method here, to demonstrate.)
“It’s the violent protests based on the extreme love many claim to have for him that borders on idolatry.
There is no “defence” involved when it comes to the cartoons as the cartoons do not (and cannot) attack Muhammed.”
- When one spread false romours on ones family, one will get upset and defend them, so what about the Prophet (saw) who is more beloved to the Muslim than his family?
One of the cartoonists explicitly stated that “all he did was drawing a child molester and a murderer”, how is that not an attack?
“But to see an attack on fundamentalist Islam (and that is what the cartoons were) as an attack on Muhammed, that, I’m afraid, is a form of idolatry.
It’s not the act of defending Muhammed, it’s the belief that the cartoons are directed at him. The first is not idolatry, the second clearly is.”
- That is not idolatry, as idolatry includes WORSHIPPING, that is just a matter of interpretation.
“That’s scary. How is that different from idol worship?”
- It is different in Islam because it is not WORSHIPPING Muhammad (saw), it is worshipping ALLAH (TT) by practicing the religion that he orders us to follow. You should know that the arguments you use now was invented by the Salafists who you oppose yourself, and it is not a part of traditional Islam.
“Says who?”
- The Prophet (saw) - if one accuses a Muslim of disbelief, then he is a himself a disbeliever.
“And NOONE who disagrees with that has any authority to tell me that I am wrong. (I am using the same method here, to demonstrate.)”
- The difference is that i base my arguments on Islam rather than my own mind. I say that those who disagree with me on this lacks Islamic-based arguments, they base their arguments on their own minds, rather than what Allah (tt) have revealed.
“I’m sorry but this sounds like worshipping to me when you regard the well-being of a (so-called) messenger more important then the lifes of 10 family members together.”
- It is worshipping Allah (tt) because it is following his commands only, not worship on the Prophet (saws) because whatever status the Prophet (saws) have, it is nothing but something that Allah (tt) have granted him.
So to add further:
I can provide islamic references for all of what i’ve mentioned about the status of the Prophet (saw).
And of course, Islam is the religion of Tawhid, and whatever is from Islam cannot be Shirk (idolatry).
So if one interprets Islam as idolatry, then it is oneself that is wrong and not Islam, for Allah (tt) explicitly states that he is ONE and that none is worth worshipping except Allah (tt).
Honoring the Prophet (saws) is nothing but obeying the command of Allah (tt), for Allah (tt) says:
“Allah and his Angels are showering blessings upon the Prophet - o ye who believe, shower blessings upon him and salute him with (the greatest of) salutations”
Allahuma sally 3ala Muhamad.
Also keep in mind that the Prophet (saw) is the intercessor for mankind, as even Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab attests in his Kitab al-Tawhid.
Ahmad: “One of the cartoonists explicitly stated that “all he did was drawing a child molester and a murderer”, how is that not an attack?”
I don’t recall any of the cartoonists from the original article (which I read in my own language) making that statement. And even so, it’s an opinion, which may or may not be logical by his own standards.
If I call Jesus a “revolutionary, communist hippie” or something, it is just my opinion, not an attack on any Christian.
But back to the bomb-in-turban: it is not, CANNOT BE a portrait: bombs weren’t invented in the days of the Prophet. It’s a symbolic statement “some Muslims use the teachings of the Prophet to justify blowing stuff up” . So yes,it is an attack on explosive jihadys, but they are so very few, right ? nothing for the rest of you to get offended about.
@Ahmad
You write:
“One of the cartoonists explicitly stated that “all he did was drawing a child molester and a murderer””
I have followed the debate on the cartoons, since I saw them in the paper the day, they were originally published. I interpreted the cartoon figuring Muhammed with a bomb as a question: “Is this Islam?” I found the question relevant based on an increasing number of attemps at censorship involving violence by people calling themselves muslims. So the cartoon was part of a local, relevant, public debate. A debate that invited everyone (including muslims) to participate.
So Ahmad , you might have a psychological need for seeing the cartoonist as some monster. But I can correct that misunderstanding: He is not a monster, and he is not against muslims in general. What he opposes is the use of violence.
From his own mouth: “the prophet wearing a bomb turban with a lit fuse attracted particular attention. What I wanted to say with my cartoon was that many people exploit the prophet to legitimize terror”.
The same goes for the other cartoonist.
Peace.
Halalhippie:
Dear friend.
“I don’t recall any of the cartoonists from the original article (which I read in my own language) making that statement. And even so, it’s an opinion, which may or may not be logical by his own standards. ”
- He stated that later on. Do you want danish references? How is this:
ekstra bladet 13. februar 2008
side 6
His opinion is that he was drawing a child molester and a murderer - which i believe is clear from the way he portrait the Sahaba (ra), as bloodthirsty arab bedouins, who want to kill for any reason.
I do not doubt this. That is insulting towards our religion.
“If I call Jesus a “revolutionary, communist hippie” or something, it is just my opinion, not an attack on any Christian.”
- If you refer to him as a “retarded idiot”, then i would actually call that an insult towards CHRISTIANITY.
“But back to the bomb-in-turban: it is not, CANNOT BE a portrait: bombs weren’t invented in the days of the Prophet. It’s a symbolic statement “some Muslims use the teachings of the Prophet to justify blowing stuff up” . So yes,it is an attack on explosive jihadys, but they are so very few, right ? nothing for the rest of you to get offended about.”
- The question was actually to draw the Prophet (saw) as they thaught that he looked like, and as they see him: I see his later statement as nothing but an apology.
I have nothing against mockery of Muslims but i have something against mockery of Islam.
However this is no justification for what actually happended DURING the cartoon controversy.
“I have followed the debate on the cartoons, since I saw them in the paper the day, they were originally published. I interpreted the cartoon figuring Muhammed with a bomb as a question: “Is this Islam?” I found the question relevant based on an increasing number of attemps at censorship involving violence by people calling themselves muslims. So the cartoon was part of a local, relevant, public debate. A debate that invited everyone (including muslims) to participate.”
- The article explicitly state that every religion should be able to accept “hån, spot og latterliggørelse”, and as such, why cannot the cartoon be such?
Drawing the Prophet (saw) in this way do only signalize to a muslim that you are mocking the Prophet (saw), not the terrorists.
“So Ahmad , you might have a psychological need for seeing the cartoonist as some monster. But I can correct that misunderstanding: He is not a monster, and he is not against muslims in general. What he opposes is the use of violence.”
- Why would i want to do that? I would actually prefer NOT to view this cartoons as insultning, but i cannot help feeling that they do.
One of the other cartoonists said what he said, and i have demonstrated that in my reply to Halalhippie. That is insulting. No doubt about that. Whats in it for you to keep denying that?
“From his own mouth: “the prophet wearing a bomb turban with a lit fuse attracted particular attention. What I wanted to say with my cartoon was that many people exploit the prophet to legitimize terror”.
The same goes for the other cartoonist.”
- The other cartoonist see the Prophet (saw) as a child molester and as a murderer, NOT that he is used to justify murder and child molestry. So no, the same do not go out.
I as an arab muslim living in Denmark, have NO reason to keep on making trouble about this. It does no good to anyone. But still i view them as insulting towards muslims, and you should accept that instead of keeping the mentality that “the muslims are stupid and do not understand our cartoons”, perhaps we understand them but STILL find them offensive. Okay? But still: If one offends me and refure to apologize, i would not boycot all companies from his country, burn his flag and so forth… That does only harm, no good for nobody.
For Ahmad:
I said:
“I’m sorry but this sounds like worshipping to me when you regard the well-being of a (so-called) messenger more important then the lifes of 10 family members together.”
You said:
- It is worshipping Allah (tt) because it is following his commands only, not worship on the Prophet (saws) because whatever status the Prophet (saws) have, it is nothing but something that Allah (tt) have granted him.
How is this meant to be an example of worshipping Allah? The woman says that Allah took care of the death (fine) but was more concerned about the well-being of Mohammed than her family members. I do not see how this shows that the woman is worshipping Allah. On the contrary.
Btw, what does (tt) mean?
And is the word Allah a name for an entity or an entity on its own?
“I have nothing against mockery of Muslims but i have something against mockery of Islam.”
That is exactly the wrong way around. Mocking individual Muslims (or people of any religion or none) is unkind and should be avoided. The exceptions are those such as politicians or religious leaders who stand up and claim to be something special.
But criticism and mockery of ideas and beliefs, including Islam, is absolutely necessary if we are to progress. All ideas must open to question. Many ideas which a lot of people believe in are absurd.
“How is this meant to be an example of worshipping Allah? The woman says that Allah took care of the death (fine) but was more concerned about the well-being of Mohammed than her family members. I do not see how this shows that the woman is worshipping Allah. On the contrary.”
That is doing what Allah (swt) ordered us to do:
“The Prophet are closer to the believers that their own selves, and his wives are their mothers”
33:6
So of course holding the Prophet (saaws) closer to ones heart than oneself, is NOTHING but obeying the command of Allah and that is worship.
So this is how she is worshipping Allah.
“But criticism and mockery of ideas and beliefs, including Islam, is absolutely necessary if we are to progress. All ideas must open to question. Many ideas which a lot of people believe in are absurd.”
- All ideas must be upon to question = Mockery is okay? If the only way you can question a religion is by mocking it, then you have a serious problem man.
Ahmad: thanks for your kind and understanding reply.
“ekstra bladet 13. februar 2008″ I get it, I thought you were referring to the original article.
“His opinion is that he was drawing a child molester and a murderer -” well, he obviously has a distorted image of the Prophet, Islam and Muslims. And he’s not the only one. Maybe he can wise up, I certainly have. I know a lot more about the Prophet now than I did then, but still I can only wiev him as a historical figure (of great importance, yes, but) I cannot “hold the Prophet (saaws) closer to ones heart than oneself.”
And historical figures can be questioned, drawn even ridiculed; NOBODY is above reproach.
Abdulaziz:”- All ideas must be upon to question = Mockery is okay? If the only way you can question a religion is by mocking it, then you have a serious problem man.”
Yes, yes, yes, and yes. If ideas cannot be denied, satirized, seen in historical context and mercilessly criticized, how can we ever understand them ?
In Denmark we make caricatures of our PM looking like a caveman, it’s not a big deal to mock religion.
Sorry if this sounds brutal and insensitive, “we” just don’t know the Prophet as “you” do”.
Drima:
“You seem like a typical Wahhabi-influenced Islamist”
I doubt you know the true meaning of the Wahhabi… “Think before you act Sudanesethinker”
“many, if not most Danes did not support the publication of the mocking cartoons”
It seems like you have a figure representing the actual rate of those Danes that anti-publication, but assuming what you are saying is true, they should have had some reactions against those offensive actions. We Muslims that support the Boycott have no problem with Danes as a nation, we are only trying to stop whoever offending our prophet.
Let me ad, if all muslim boycott all Danes products for only one month, all will bow on their Knees for the sake of truth, but…
The Hadith “In the last days…” is righly translated, so you have no point to argue on this since you are not a muslim scholar.
“Notice, how it says during the last days only”
How did you know the last days are yet far, can you plz tell me the exact date of judgement so i can get ready for it! are Drima or Astrologer!!
“It’s not just a public blog. It’s *my* blog and the only reason I’m allowing to speak your mind is because I’m waiting in the hope that you’ll say something of value. If I wanted I can delete your comments and block your IP address right now.”
I thought you understand english as i do. public here means is for every body to views it “you blog”, reads its contents and gives his/her thoughs opinions. if you want to allow certain visitors, you can easily extend its features and give different privilege to different users.
what is valuable to you may not be valuable to others.
delete it if you can, and remember “you blog can be accessed from any Terminal that have net connection”
Overall, This clearly proves that what you say is truely against what you believe. I advice you change your blog USP to something else.
Dear brother, I doubt you will believe “If I don’t have the freedom to ……….” I hope i am wrong.
This question for you, go and get the answer, God willing it drives your beleive to the right path.
What were the reasons behind “Khaibar Battle”?
DON COX:
you can do whatever you want, but we muslims we do what Islam is telling us, and Islam tells us not to make a joke about any prophet or offend them by any act.
“Nor is there any need to write a meaningless acronym after the name of Jesus.
” what is meaningless to you might be meaningfull to others”
God bless
“I get it, I thought you were referring to the original article.
“His opinion is that he was drawing a child molester and a murderer -” well, he obviously has a distorted image of the Prophet, Islam and Muslims. And he’s not the only one. Maybe he can wise up, I certainly have. I know a lot more about the Prophet now than I did then, but still I can only wiev him as a historical figure (of great importance, yes, but) I cannot “hold the Prophet (saaws) closer to ones heart than oneself.”
And historical figures can be questioned, drawn even ridiculed; NOBODY is above reproach.”
- Well it is only muslims who should hold him closer to ones heart than oneself. That was not an argument directed towards non-muslims, but an argument showing that standing up for the Prophet (saw) when he is mocked is not idolatry.
But one should understand that, if you keep up the “we can mock everybody we like”-thing, we will just keep up the “we will defend our Prophet saw at all cost”-thing, and this way nothing will get better. One cannot expect us to dialogue if one is not willing to himself.
Not mocking peoples religion does not mean that one cannot question them. I have many reasons not to believe in christianity, for example, but i would never mock their religion - i feel myself above the level where i cannot argue against something without mockery.
Ahmad: “if you keep up the “we can mock everybody we like”-thing, we will just keep up the “we will defend our Prophet saw at all cost”-thing, and this way nothing will get better. One cannot expect us to dialogue if one is not willing to himself.”
In a nutshell, I totally agree.
Ponder: “We Muslims that support the Boycott have no problem with Danes as a nation, we are only trying to stop whoever offending our prophet.”
I appreciate that: if you don’t like Jyllands-Posten, you should cancel your subscription.
“Let me ad, if all muslim boycott all Danes products for only one month, all will bow on their Knees for the sake of truth, but…”
It’s been done, I’m sorry to tell you it didn’t hurt. Not even close. Burn a flag if it makes you feel better, THAT really hurt me. (and my children, we put our flag on their birthday cake,)
Punishing Arla Foods, Lego, Carlsberg
a whole country in general, and my 8-yr old daughter doesn’t look very Shari’a to me. But I’m no muslim scholar, so what do I know..
If this article http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7264903.stm
is not another one of BBC’s usual biased lies then finally someone is doing something logical. Whatever the end result, this seems to be a step towards modernization. A step towards coming out of “the woods” and living in “the village”. However, the road to “town” takes more than just revisions. But everything changes and it has to start somewhere.
Ito:
One of the leaders of the Turkish waqf have explained that they do not seek to reform the texts but to write them in a way more easy to understand for the layperson.
I do not know how much reliability to but in this statement of his, but if the way BBC presents it is true, then no doubt the Turkish Waqf are rejecting the Sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh).
Regarding the hadith of the Mahram thing, i would like to see their evidence for declaring that weak. I think that even i could refute it
By the way i’ve just compared the two conflicting articles to each other on my blog, if interessted then read
i think that boycotting danish goods is NOT a waste of time.i think that this would show the world and the danish how we love our prophet and religion besides,there are many danish products sold in arab countries especially diary products so this would affect their economy as well.
Leave a Comment