Danish drawings

Tim Evans wrote: Kechup, So, you have taken the coarse of creeping to the honest people on this site. 'Honesty is the best option' unless you are a British Nationalist provocateur. In which case you will use any cover to ingratiate yourself, in order to undermine the development of common theory.

Look puppy, if you want to keep following me around gnashing your teeth take it to PM.

I have just read though this long and fascinating debate, after a quick search on Google for an islamic reaction to the Prophet cartoons, turned up this forum. It has been an interesting ride, and has informed me of much that I was not aware. As well as providing me with links to the offending drawings courtesy of Ketchup (I'll get to him in a moment).

As a non muslim living in Norway, I have never had any bad feelings against ANY religion or faith. But now, that my children have expressed fear to me, ("Why are the muslims attacking Denmark and Norway Daddy???) I had to look to see if I could find some Muslim condemnation of the EXTREME reaction to the satirical drawings of your Prophet.

I have, on this list, and I am glad. I can tell mmy children NOT TO WORRY, that they are safe and that i is only a small percentage of muslims that are so violent and terrifying.

I have to agree with Tim that Ketchups posts seem to be tainted as one with an adenda, the Union Flag, the RE-posting of links to the offending drawings, (did I also spot an anti semitic and anti gay stance in there???) it all seems to point to the ravings of a neo nazi (I know Iknow Ketchup, I know you will have a go at me for your use of the flag, why shouldnt you... its the flag of the uk. etc... but you ALSO no its connotations. And in public you should avoid them unless you mean to provoke)

My belief is that one should NOT offend other peoples beliefs, religeons, or anything else really. By this I mean one should not insult or oppress a Muslim, a Jew, a woman, a blackman, a homosexual, anyone. BUT... and its a very BIG but.... BUT I think its important to have restraint when you yourself are under attack. I am a christian, but I found the previously mentioned film "Life of Brian" hystericaly funny and not in anyway offensive to me or my religeon. Christianity is 2006 years old, I think Jesus can survive a bit of teasing.

I think that the publication of the drawings in the Danish newspaper was not meant to be offensive, I believe it was merely un-informed, someone should have realised that it could be offensive to some Muslims, and maybe reconsidered the publication. However, having seen the drawing now, I really do NOT know what the fuss is about, and I would really like to know from Muslims what this offense REALLY is, feels like. Are you offended by the actual drawings or that someone dares to perform this blasphemy to your religeon? Please do not tell me that its Islamic law not to depic the Mohamed, I know this, but is it so important that you have to kill people??

People, people... these were a few drawings... Why Kill people over it? Can you NOT see this is an extreme reaction...

PLease... We are all getting scared of each other, and that scares me...

Mark

"Why Kill people over it?" Ironically speaking, other than destruction to the property during the voilance, killing has not been linked to any racial/ethenic/religious/cultural association. Killing, I think, was a direct consequence of a "mob" action.

This is true, but from where Im sitting an accidental death due to mob action.. is still un acceptable, is it not? No mob = no deaths.

Ive thought about it, its semantics...I still call it killing...

This is true, but from where Im sitting an accidental death due to mob action.. is still un acceptable, is it not? No mob = no deaths. Ive thought about it, its semantics...I still call it killing...

Since there is a war against extremists, both physically as well as academically, any opportunity through which they can "win" the feeling of masses through emotioanl incitation, they would not let it slip away.

From my own analysis of the situation, I think, if its the fault of those who published such material, then it was even worst on those who projected this issue, intentionally or unintentionally, outside the geographical boundaries of that country, solely for the purpose of inciting people through their emotions. However, worst came when, the same material was republished in mulitple journals, to counter the initial reaction. It was this time, then the opportunist's rehtorics becames seemingly plausible, even to those who initially rejected them.

Containment of the issue was the responsibiltiy of those who are the incharge of the place where this incident initally occured. Instead of raising their both hands up, they should have, not for the purpose to suppress the freedom of expression, but on a higher moral ground, for the purpose of securing the rights of their own helpless miniority, should have snubbed its publisher.