The ultimate misrepresentation is claiming a right of return based on ancient myths and legends, and at the expense of an existent population. Is there a fine for that? :m:
Rights don't constitute historical facts. It was simply an opinion that Jews should be allowed to resettle Palestine. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Are you serious? The Danish cartoon? It was a picture of him with a bomb in his turban. How the fuck is it not misrepresenting history?
it should be the same for all people and all religions...if ppl can bag out islam and muslims (which they do heaps) then they should be able to do the same to jews.
Ummm maybe because back in the days of Mohammed, there were no bombs. The cartoons of Mohammed misrepresent the present in that it misrepresents Islam as a whole. What does that represent to you?
One-sided fines like this are an anti-semitic conspiracy theorist's wet dream, especially in a place that has a reputation for protecting free speech. Hopefully others will avoid falling into the same trap.
You're actually comparing cartoons about Mohammed - a single, possibly fictional individual not executed in a gigantic mass-murder scheme - with cartoons mocking the death of known people actually executed in a gigantic mass-murder scheme, created by an individual taking the most conservative and hateful impression possible of his faith. Par for the old course. And here I'd almost forgotten.
Oh, what the fuck. Let's do the whole thing. Right? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Have a gander at their wiki writeup. Revealing, as they say. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_European_League
Actually, even if the Jews were from Mars - they still need a country and a Capital. But sorry to bust your Islamist buble: the Jews predate both Islam and the Arab race, and only the Regime states are a result of myth - they were 100% non-existant 120 years ago. Not that this has anything to do with MAD people denying the Holocaust while also calling it exaggerated, screaming allah akbar in F minor while murdering nuns and burning churches when anyone says boo about the Quran. If Muslims want anyone to respect their religion - they must first learn to respect other religions. That means ceasing your mythical BS the Jerusalem temple was a zionist myth - it only proves that Muslims are the real infidels who prostrate to historical falsehoods very obediantly. Why not admit you guys aligned with Hitler instead and begged him not to let any Jews escape - what price a real infidel? Fact is, Muslims have a track record of dumping Mosques on other peoples' most sacred sites - from India to NY. Oh - and please stay far from the 9/11 site - as a favor to its victims? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Some 60,000 Jews were mass murdered in the city of Medina because they refused to acknowledge any revelation of truth from Islam's messenger. It is given a cursory sentence in the quran that the Jews tried to fool a 2-million horde of Muslims! Some 80 Million Indians were mass murdered when Islam invaded India. Many other nations and peoples who rejected Islam were murdered in Arabia. THE TRUTH CANNOT SET EVERYONE FREE.
R-E-S-P-E-C-T. Find out what it means Islamic style: Muslim version of belief in Allah: The Protocols of Zion is true history - all Jewish history is a Zionist myth. :bugeye:
Strange that we value the memory of the lives of real people over the notion of a possibly mythical figurehead? Gentlemen, please.
Two sides of the coin, two edges of the sword? It was a commentary of the moment. To wit, can you answer a simple question about the frame itself: Was the artist declaring his view of Muslims, or reflecting on a social image of Islam that he perceived in society? Actually, it's not so simple a question. To the other, though, the cartoon seems—at least in my view—quite obviously intended to piss off Muslims, which it did, and perhaps that was the actual commentary. But we should also be wary of allowing just anyone to frame the debate. Consider Bert's post at #6. Look at what he has responded to in Mr. Foley's post. In reality, it is not a question that Muslims or Jews be off-limits. Rather, much of Europe has a rule about Holocaust denial. One might then suggest that if Holocaust denial is off limits, then cartoonists shouldn't be drawing pictures of the Prophet, bombs or no. But who in their right minds, among European nations, would actually pass such a law? Occaions such as this remind me of the blessings of being an American. To the other, I am sympathetic; I wish someone would hold the Republican Party accountable for its lies and hatred. But, in a nation with such standards at all, that's part of the trade-off; they're free to con whoever is stupid enough to buy in, and the rest of us should apparently just gnash our teeth in silence, since stating the obvious is somehow undignified. Life is what it is, and if all it means is that the next Republican president drags us off to war in Iran or somewhere else, I guess I should be thankful for what few extra years that gains us before the whole American monte collapses.
It's pretty tough to draw the line on this one. Mocking the Holocaust could be seen as inciting violence and discrimination against Jews. Mocking Mohammed by implying that all Muslims worship terrorists could do the same for Muslims. What matters is the harm and danger brought to ethnic communities in each case- where was the careful deliberation to consider this issue? For example, if the point of the Mohammed cartoons was to demonstrate our right to depict him, did he really need to have a bomb in his turban? It just doesn't make for good optics and rational debate when you say that hurting Jewish sensitivities deserves a fine, but hurting Muslim sensitivities doesn't. We need more specifics- how does this particular case do more harm and slander to Jews in general as compared to the Mohammed cartoons? Is there any evidence that the target audiences increased their discrimination and abuse against Jews/Muslims as a result? If the issue is that the Holocaust is well-documented and has limitless amounts of physical evidence to support it, then why even bother with the idiots who try to deny it? Don't deniers just end up shooting themselves in the foot when their claims can be effortlessly swatted away?
For quite good reason, revolving around the systematic murder of millions. It would indeed take someone not in their right mind to pass such a law, considering the distinction between the character of Mohammed of Medina, and the completely factual lives of 12 million people, six million of which were Jews. It strikes me that this sudden, sectarian outburst of religious intolerance by those trying to make the character of Mohammed above ridicule is an attempt to drag Europe into the regressive period of five hundred years ago. I believe we had a long series of bloody civil wars to decide this issue. Just how stupid ought our society to be in order to satisfy this already-satisfied point?
