The interesting part....this has nothing really to do with cartoons. It has to do with the Islamic agenda to take control and to become a force for Allah. The cartoons are just another excuse. The cartoons are equal to the U.S and Israel being Allies, or any incident in any other country created to give the Muslims an excuse to start a Jihad. This is the actual, non-biased reason for all of this. It's a fact.....more to come.
To be the slave of Allah was the best Mohammad could hope for.
To be the slave of Mohammad was the best a Mulism could hope for...
To be the slave of a Muslim is the best a Dhimmi (infidel)
can hope for...
Freedom from the will of Allah aka the will of Allah aka the will of Islam is slavery to evil...
Only slavery to the will of Allah,the will of Mohammade,and the will of Islam is true freedom...
Out of controversy comes fresh dialogue. Having a mullah, iman or mufti controlling people whereby the people are kept in the 9th century mode of thinking is just downright wrong. Unfortunately, these idiotic islamic ruffians with their dictatorial leadership doesn't see.
Eventually the whole world has to come to the conclusion that free speech is necessary if there is to be civilization.
This part is interesting from the Islamic Scholar:
"Muslims might have miscalculated the manner in which they handled the crisis," noted prominent Islamic scholar Abdel-Sabour Shahine, who suggested that instead of pursuing a boycott of Danish products, the Islamic world should have shown more tolerance, by focusing on promoting dialogue with the west, and educating them more about Islam. "The Qur'an ordains Muslims to engage in peaceful dialogue and use a more logical approach with those of different creeds." The prophet himself, Shahine argued, was constantly subject to offence during the first years of his prophecy in Mecca, and his reactions were so tolerant that those who initially opposed him ended up becoming Muslim.
"After all," said Shahine, "we'd rather have the Danes apologizing out of conviction, rather than because they feel threatened."
Exactly thats the whole point isnt it. Islam will have to compete in the marketplace of ideas like everyone else. At this point I am not sure of the true level of Islamic Indigation over this. At one level I understand the frustration. THe proper response whould have been to boycott products advertized in that paper not the whole country. Its becoming more apparent to me that this whole thing was started by the Saudi Govt to get the fact ,that their mismangement of the piligramge to mecca again resulted in hundreds of deaths people out of the media limelight . The State dept should have stepped in then with a quiet call once this stuff starting appearing in Saudi newspapers.
Muslims wrestling with pigs? How culturally insensitive.
Behead him! Infidel!
funny... I'd rather have the Danes reiterate the "insults" out of conviction than apologize for any reason
Could somebody more knowledgable clarify something here?
By reading the link, I now have the impression that the 12 cartoons were a running theme in the particular editorial cartoonist's commentary over several weeks. If this is true, then I view the commentator not as simply an alternate view of Islam, nor a Judeo-Christian man of faith, but rather a carnal unbeliever seeking to foment political unrest relentlessly.
My previous impression was an ultra-sensitive group of Muslim cultured warmongers ceased upon a particular political cartoon as a public justification for lawlessness and rebllion to legitimate authority as a guise to promote an Islamic overturn of western politic.
This later article though, implies a relentless egging of Islamic believers so as to promote conflict.
Which position is more accurate? Or are they both true and feeding one another?
Attribution
Brian Fairrington, Cagle Cartoons