.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Rantings of a Sandmonkey

Be forewarned: The writer of this blog is an extremely cynical, snarky, pro-US, secular, libertarian, disgruntled sandmonkey. If this is your cup of tea, please enjoy your stay here. If not, please sod off

Friday, February 17, 2006

The chickens are roosting

I have told you before that the people who started this whole cartoon mess were the arab governments, all with their own agendas and goals. Now it seems that they will regret ever instigating this crisis, because it now seems to be out of control. They have unleashed the forces of chaos and now it's backfiring in their faces. Take Egypt for example: This whole thing was started by the egyptian government to gain ground at the increasingly islamic egyptian society and to divert people's attention from domestic issues. Now it seems that the MB has stolen the issue from them, and they are left cleaning the political mess and replacing abassadors that are no longer credible or desired by the Danish government. Or Syria, who used this cartoon crisis to change the Harriri debate and start secterian conflict in Lebanon are now paying the Price, according to the Strategypage anyway: Syria's attempt to leverage Moslem anger, over the Danish cartoons of Mohammed that have recently been published in some Western newspapers, seems to have backfired. By permitting the protest demonstrations against several Western embassies to turn into riots, the Syrian government appears to have been attempting to refurbish its connections with Islam. But some analysts in the region believe that the actual result has been to encourage anti-government Islamic extremists. This pattern is being seen in many Moslem nations, most of them run by dictators that normally do not allow free expression by the people. And it's true, and to further proof this point, you now have Libya on fire. Libya, who you will remember, tried to one-up everybody in their islamicness by closing the libyan embassy in Denmark, and now they are paying the price for that idiocy as well. Apparently an anti-Cartoon protest in Libya targetted the italian consulate for some reason and led to it getting on fire and for the death of 9 libyans so far. You could ask yourself: well what does Italy have to do with anything? It could be that there is an italian minister who printed the cartoon on T-shirts, but if that isn't the reason, well, really, who cares? It's european; that's close enough for the rioters. And now more people are dead because of this stupidity. I hope every single one of you who supported igniting this fire is happy. And don't tell me you didn't know it would get this far: It always goes this far! I hate the "I told you so" moment, but I know that this would happen and I warned about this before. I warned that the escelation of violence was inevitable. That the governments that have invoked and stoked the fire of islamism, will get burned by it, and burning us along the way, again. And now it's happening and even more people are dead, because of a damn cartoon. Because. of. A. Cartoon. Whatever...

60 Comments:

At 2/17/2006 04:55:00 PM, Blogger elengil said...

Bash.org

[defekt] eh, some muslims just burned the swiss flag as a danish flag
[naama-] it's the thought that counts



Bash.org
[@Wally] stupid muslims promise virgins
[@Wally] if they promised lightsabers I'd be on my way to mecca
[@Wally] I can hang out with virgins on IRC

 
At 2/17/2006 05:02:00 PM, Blogger The Sandmonkey said...

Ok elengil, I really shouldn't be laughing, but the virgins on IRC one is pretty damn funny!

LOL

 
At 2/17/2006 05:06:00 PM, Blogger elengil said...

I know.. I've been reading through these for the last hour and I'm laughing so hard I'm crying.

It's the cumulative effect, ya know.

 
At 2/17/2006 05:22:00 PM, Blogger Leilouta said...

The virgins might have a different opinion.

 
At 2/17/2006 07:12:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

SM said:
"I warned that the escelation of violence was inevitable. That the governments that have invoked and stoked the fire of islamism, will get burned by it, and burning us along the way, again. And now it's happening and even more people are dead, because of a damn cartoon. Because. of. A. Cartoon."

Yes you did. Now Bill Clinton has done something for which he should be hanged.

And I'm feeling really left out! Why can't the protestors flame a few low riders in East LA?

Hey! I'd even watch TV to see that one.

It would be rather like watching "Pro wrestling"/

 
At 2/17/2006 07:24:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting analysis. You have something there.

Looking back, the communists in Russia said their biggest mistake was allowing the Pope to visit Poland. There were crowds of the tens of thousands. It was then that the people realized their true power.

Could it be that the cartoons gave the same kind of pretext for Arabs to realize THEIR true power?

 
At 2/17/2006 10:30:00 PM, Blogger programmer craig said...

I wonder what it would mean to global politics if every western nation closed every embassy in a muslim country? All it's going to take is one "hostage crisis" or one massacre of european diplomats to turn this crisis into a war.

 
At 2/18/2006 01:23:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The muslims standing together realising their power?

Dont think so - with the total split between muslims (remember that muslims kill more muslims than westerners)

Maybe the power to be colective arsenists? Very strong feeling!

 
At 2/18/2006 02:22:00 AM, Anonymous sami said...

THE PICTURES WERE PRINTED IN SEPTEMBER BY THE DANES.

THEY ADMIT IT.

THEIR EDITOR QUIT/FIRED

THERE IS NO HYPOCROCY. JUST BECAUSE WE REACTED A BIT LATE DOESNT MEAN THERE WAS SOME CONSPIRACY.

TO SAY THAT MUSLIMS PLANNED THE WHOLE THING TO DIVERT ATTENTION FROM PROBLEMS IN THEIR COUNTRY IS A SIMPLE EXCUSE, BECAUSE ALL COUNTRIES HAVE POLITICAL OR ECONOMIC PROBLMES! FOR GOD'S SAKE WAKE UP PEOPLE, SANDMONKEY BOY IS SUFFERING WISHFUL THINKING.

FACT: WEST PUBLISHED CARTOONS TO INSULT US. THAT'S IT. LIVE WITH IT!

 
At 2/18/2006 03:08:00 AM, Blogger Nomad said...

did you know Syria is changing dollars into euros ?

and may be Iran will get his own bourse the next 20 of march ?

could you tell us more about those facts

 
At 2/18/2006 03:40:00 AM, Blogger Wade said...

Well I have to say that in the situation Calderoli was an idiot to deliberately inflame things further by handing out cartoon T shirts. That doesn't make the Lybian reaction any smarter as they lose the moral high ground that the Italian gave up, but in this case it does look as though this might have been a spontaneous rea ction by Lybians and the governmnet did its beswt to controlo the situation. In any case the link between targeting a consulate for the actions of an Italian Governmnet minister is far stronger than targetting butter producers for the actions of a Dansish newspaper.

ReL Lybia's switching from Dollars to Euros. As far as I could see they were switching the units of account rather than their actual reserves. Ie they will calculate the numbers in terms of Euros but I very much doubt whether they have switched their USD FX holdings from USD into EUR though it would be sensible for all countries to diversify more than they have done to date in any case.

 
At 2/18/2006 03:42:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sami,

1) The pictures were not printed by "the Danes" ("the Danes" refers to either all Danish citizens a couple of percentage of whom are Muslims or ethnic Danes which are citizens of other countries) but by an independent Danish newspaper.
2) Their edior has not quit or been fired, thank God. Their cultural editor has been sent for a holiday which is understandable. Imagine being the cultural editor of a relatively unknown newspaper and suddenly you find yourself in the middle of a global political crisis, your life being threatened and so on. Nobody can take that pressure. Besides, during his leave the last I've heard about him was that he took part in a panel discussion in the USA defending the cartoons.
3) "West" didn't publish any cartoons. Some papers and other media in some, but not all, Western countries have done that for various reasons, some for the freedom of speech, some for solidarity, some because it's hard to tell the the story to readers without showing what the mess is all about. No doubt some did it for insult as well but not the "West". And those cartoons have been published outside the West as well, starting from Sandmonkey's country.
4) You say the "West" did it to insult "us". Who is exactly this "us" you're talking about? Just you using the first person plural like royals? Your family? You and your friends who have given you the permission to speak in their name? Your country whatever that is? All the 1-1.5 billion Muslims in the world? I presume you mean the last thing here. That's not true. Some Muslims (and some people of other faiths) have been insulted, the latter comprising of Christians, Jews, Atheists and sure others while not all Muslims have been insulted by them and not all claim this was all an intentional insult by the West to the Muslims in the world.

 
At 2/18/2006 03:50:00 AM, Anonymous Rea said...

do you even realise, sami, that you're writing in english?

 
At 2/18/2006 03:56:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Can anyone cast the first stone? Who is perfect? Shouldn't we love thy neighbour? Why does it have to be us and them? Why can't it just be us? We all live on this world and it is important that we all get along or chaos breaks out. We all own this world we just choose to live in different places.

Cheers
Cindy

 
At 2/18/2006 05:20:00 AM, Anonymous Jokerman said...

SAMI
There is Hypocrisy ofcourse, you are a Hypocrite & an idiot too.
You generally condemned the whole population of Denmark for the action of a few danes, doesnt say much about your intelligence. Then should it not be that you are guilty for the suicide bombings, shooting & kidnappings of Muslims, christians, jews & other faith adherents too perpetrated by other muslims?
Sami, you're just another foolish liar, get a life.

 
At 2/18/2006 05:43:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

A translation of an article in today's issue of the Danish paper Politiken, which is one of Denmark's three leading newspapers (the others being Jyllands-Posten and Berlingske Tidende).


Egypt behind prophet-campaign
The Danish government accuses imams for igniting the Middle East. A new account from the Egyptian government shows, that is was Egypt that spread the Mohammed cartoon from Jyllands-Posten.

The Egyptian government has played a far more important role in the case of the Mohammed cartoons from Jyllands-Posten than sofar disclosed by the Danish government.

An account from the Egyptian government show that is put pressure on Denmark immediately after Danish prime minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen declined to meet with 11 Moslem ambassadors in October last year.

Ambassador warned
Only four day after Fogh Rasmussen declined the Egyptian foreign ministry summoned the Danish ambassador to Egypt.

According to the account, which Politiken is in possession of, a leading official on behalf of the Egyptian government demanded that the Danish government distance itself from the cartoons e.g. through an official statement denouncing scorn of Islam or the prophet.

According to the account the Danish ambassador was at the same time warned of "a possible escalation of the problem".

Egypt turned to the UN
As the Danish government did not distance itself from the cartoons the Egyptian government already in October and November contacted a number of Moslem countries as well as large international organisations like the Arab League and the Islamic Conference in order to put pressure on Denmark.

The Egyptian government also contacted general secretary of the UN, Kofi Annan and the European Union's coordinator of foreign policy Javier Solana.

Made sure cartoons were known
Sofar the Danish government has put a great deal of responsibility for the explosion of the case on the Danish Moslems, who in December visited a number of Moslem countries.

But according to the Egyptian account it was the foreign ministry in Cairo - and not the Danish Moslems - who made sure the Mohammed cartoons from Jyllands-Posten was known in the Middle East.

"The foreign ministry had informed a number of Egyptian papers and magazines of the anti-Islamic campaign in both Denmark and some western European countries", it says in the account of the visit of the delegation of Danish Moslems.

According to the account it was also the Egyptian foreign ministry that ensured the folder of cartoons brought to Egypt by the Danish delegation of imams was copied and distributed to other Moslem countries.

Helveg: Burden to the government
Former minister of foreign affairs Niels Helveg-Petersen [comment by translator: who is in opposition to the current government] finds the case to be a burden on the Danish government. "It is news to me that the Egyptian government reacted this strong and fast. This should have made the warning lights flash for the Danish government and made it to initiate damage control", he says.

Government unaware of account
Minister of foreign affairs Per Stig Møller does not wish to comment. The spokesman of foreign policy in the Danish Liberal party [comment by translator: one of the parties in the government coalition] does not know the Egyptian account and points to the minister of foreign affairs.
The spokeswoman of foreign affairs of the conservative party [comment by translator: also one of the parties in the government coalition] knows nothing of the account but calls the information 'interesting'. She states, that the Moslem delegations from Denmark have play an important role and that there is no basis for criticism of the government's handling of the case.

Unfortunately Politiken has not published the account from the Egyptian government.

Jorgen

 
At 2/18/2006 05:46:00 AM, Anonymous Cosmic Duck said...

To what extent are you collectively responsible for something that someone in your country does? And to what extent are you individually responsible?
Of course you cannot blame all Danes for what the Jyllandsposten prints, especially not when there is freedom of speech in the country. It is the cultural editor's responsibility. Don't punish all Danes!

On the other hand you can perhaps blame all Danes - or a lot of them - for having created a "cultural climate" in Denmark, where there is some islamophobia. An MP of the Danish People's party which is behind the government's parliamentary majority, has called muslims a "cancerous growth". And the leader of the party, Pia Kjaersgaard, has talked about "seeds of bad weeds" being blown into the country when refugies from certain places in the world have applied for asylum in Denmark.

Denmark now has the toughest immigration laws in all of Europe. The bridge from Copenhagen to Sweden is called the "love bridge" because couples of mixed nationalities have had to move to Sweden, even though they still work in Copenhagen, and one of the couple is a Danish citizen.

It is this cultural climate that may have affected Jyllandsposten, which is a conservative paper, to print the cartoons, rather than it is a chivalrous fight for freedom of speech. Seen in that light you can say that a lot of Danes have to share some kind of "responsibility" for what has happened.

Of course we must all protect freedom of speech. This right was, however, invented in the first place to make it possible to debate politics and criticize those in power. It was not invented as a means to mock people's religious feelings.

If my kid in school is mocked by other children, and I complain to the headteacher, can the latter refer to freedom of speech and say that the other kids have a "right" to mock my kid? No way. I have a right to demand that mockery of my kid stops.

In the same way muslims have a right to demand that their prophet is not mocked. There are some natural limits to freedom of speech, which you will also find in the Danish penal code. In Denmark it is seldom used, however. In 1938 there was a sentence comdemning an anti-semitic blasphemy violation.

 
At 2/18/2006 06:01:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cosmic Duck - thats the typical leftist wiev; and you can have it - but its only half-true!

And dont make comparison to free speech with a schoolyard - too naive!

 
At 2/18/2006 06:03:00 AM, Blogger Christine said...

This whole thing has reminded me of a children's song. It starts with,

Doe, a Deer, a female deer.

and ends with,
That will bring us back to, Doe.

This whole thing began back when an author was looking for someone to draw a picture of mo for a book. He found that no one would do it because of fear for their life. This fear came about because of the death of Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh. The newspaper felt this was wrong due to freedom of speech.

The right of freedom of speech being threaten by violence and murder is where this all began. It had nothing to do with religion and it still does not. Freedom of Speech is our side of this, period.

If the Muslims want anything they deem offensive to be considered illegal, then they must be required to follow the same exact law. Period.


-----------------------------------------------------------
FREEDOM OF SPEECH - USE IT OR LOSE IT
-----------------------------------------------------------

 
At 2/18/2006 06:08:00 AM, Anonymous ahmad said...

Hey Sami,

Don't mind what Jokerman said, for him everyone is hypocirte,idiot....etc.

 
At 2/18/2006 06:16:00 AM, Blogger Christine said...

Oh gee, almost forgot. The punishment.

Non-Western countries - Slap on the wrist

Western country - beheading

Hey, afterall it will be the UN overseeing this I'm sure.

 
At 2/18/2006 06:21:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well Sami is an hipocrite - and if the muslim world thinks like him; I think your religion is a dead-end, because it has made people think collectively without criticism - like a big hob of people torching, killing and threatening!
Ecxactly as in that little drawing that made muslims explode like a bomb!

You are proud to stand together? But you have no cause - the newspaper said sorry for hurting your feelings, and you just demands something else - its a shame that you have no anger-control! You cannot ask the rest of the world to put your prophet on untouchable ground... we really dont believe in him, and after this, believing in him means believing in violence, hatred, killing!
Either YOU are lying in the face of your prophet, or YOUR PROPHET represents nothing but a deathcult!

 
At 2/18/2006 07:22:00 AM, Anonymous Jokerman said...

Ahmad
finally you met someone idiotic & hypocritical as you are, good for both of you. You still cannot see your hypocrisy because your brain is AWOL, thats why, till you can come up with a logical proof argument, i suggest you shut up.

 
At 2/18/2006 07:29:00 AM, Anonymous JOkerman said...

Anon 6.21
ISlam has nothing to do with those idiots behaviour, no such thing as a dead end religion unless you consider christianity & judaism dead end too, you just have to look at the state of those 2 in the medievel times to realise its not really about the faith, & for the umpteenth time, its the sheikhs who are behind this torrid attitude, they are the ones who dont upgrade the teachings, or their knowledge, they protect the old text books with dear life because its the way to control people, hence the fierce resistance to any new interpretation or attempt to modernise.
But your statement does reek a bit of prejudism & ignorance.

 
At 2/18/2006 07:41:00 AM, Blogger Highlander said...

For the person who asked about Iran,Syria and Euros and $,and the person who responded using Libya.

Syria has switched to Euro yes see this link :
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyid=2006-02-13T153028Z_01_L13432231_RTRUKOC_0_US-SYRIA-US-FOREX.xml&rpc=22

As for Iran not sure yet but it would be wise for them to do so too and very advisable though IMHO it might precipitate an attack by the US.

Libya has no switched no - I am Libyan and though I wish they would not put their eggs in one basket again , they are not going to do so right now ....too busy getting those US companies...

And anyway why do you wish to know about this ? Are you travelling to the ME and wish to find which money to carry with you ?

 
At 2/18/2006 08:48:00 AM, Blogger Blogspat said...

They burnt ANOTHER Swiss flag!? :-D

This whole affair is quickly moving from stupid to moron and we are quickly moving in the direction of brain-dead. One doesn't whether to cry or laugh.

Now apparently an Indian minister has promised to pay the beheader of the cartoonists with a very generous amount.. Payed for by taxes!! (I lost the original link but here is something)
href "http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1419820.cms"

An Indian sailor har been killed over "discussions" on the matter (no more info given). Is anyone keeping score? The prophet (pbuh) must be crying over loss of lives over simple stupid cartoons.

Sami... EVEN IF THE CARTOONS HAD BEEN DRAWN TO INSULT "YOU".. MY COMMENT WOULD HAVE BEEN.. SO WHAT? "LIVE WITH IT".
FOR PETE'S SAKE THEY CARTOONS!!!!!

..and then.. three chears and more hurrays!!
Saudi-Arabia have decided to publish a book on the life of the prophet and distribute it in Europe.. Finally a sane disicion - Im looking forward to reading. Just can't help thinking though... Why did the whole thing start. Someone wanted a drawing of Muhammed for a childrens book on the life and deads of Muhammed. So here comes a word of advice. Skip any pictures of the prophet in the Saudi version...

 
At 2/18/2006 08:52:00 AM, Anonymous Rea said...

hm, forgive my ignorance and off topic question but i was wondering about something. women are supposed to be quiet and keep their bodies covered and what not... so when these guys blow themselves up and go to meet the 72 virgins... what exactly will they do with them???

 
At 2/18/2006 09:01:00 AM, Anonymous Angie said...

Sami,

"FACT: WEST PUBLISHED CARTOONS TO INSULT US. THAT'S IT. LIVE WITH IT!"

Suppose this was true as a hypothetical? I believe it isn't, I believe it's as the Danish newspaper stated, they did it to test the waters and see if they could overcome this prohibition on publishing Mohammed's "visage".

However, if you were right, how is this any different from the millions of insults the rest of us endure everyday? Our religious icons insulted, our religious beliefs ridiculed...

Hell, just try being an American these days. Get on an Anti-American, European chatroom someday if you feel you're lagging in righteous indignation and your battery needs charging.

If we American's took offense the way this group of Muslim's have at the feeblest provocation
(such as some other country's newspaper printing *gasp* insulting articles, cartoons etc. about our religions/culture/people/leaders) you'd all be dead now.

Because we got NUKES! More nukes than anybody else got!

We don't think that Muslims deserve any less respect than anyone else in the world does. We simply don't hold you on a pedestal to be especially revered and coddled. We don't do that with anyone, even our over-esteemed celebrities get hauled off to court if their diva behavior gets the better of them and they toss an electronic applicance at a hotel clerk.

So I'm just not sure you're making your point that you're in anyway SPECIAL and should be regarded as sacred cows???

 
At 2/18/2006 09:09:00 AM, Blogger Blogspat said...

"Rose of Muhammed"

-At least the Egyptians were so large they actually renamed Danish pastry after the guy who published the the cartoon in the first place.. Yes his name is Rose...

 
At 2/18/2006 09:45:00 AM, Anonymous sami said...

DEAR ANON 3.42 AM, REA, JOKERMAN, and ANGIE

See? Capital letters do grab your attention don’t they? That was my only intention.

1- I used the term DANES because you people are now thinking it is the MUSLIMS who somehow began this whole drama. Obviously I do not think the WHOLE Danish population is responsible, please, please don’t underestimate people’s sense of logic. Fine, lets get technical then since that suits you.. the Danish people who I blame are ofcoarse the cartoonists, and the cultural editor of the Danish magazine who printed it. Happy now?

2-you say the editor has not been fired, but from what I read last week on TIME magazine, the issue before the FEB 20 one which I cannot find at the moment, actually says that he has been fired. So I recall, you can find out for yourself.

3-I know the WEST did not publish the cartoons, but it WAS published by western newspapers to begin with. Why? Only reason I can think of is to INSULT our prophet. Yes he is NOT your prophet you need not even LIKE him but for god’s sake a little respect is due for a man whose SOLE purpose in life was to make people closer to god and love and give charity as much as they can and keep people away from sin. SURE you don’t believe in him, but have some respect for a human BEING and not be so racist. Again, I and no muslims blame the west, I was making a POINT since sandmonkey thinks MUSLIMS are behind this whole fiasco.

4-ANON 3.42 aka “mr technical” I’ll get technical for ya, “Us” = muslims. I thought that was pretty obvious, are you that simple that I have to spell things out for you?

ACCORDING TO TIME MAGAZENE, ISSUE FEB 20, PAGE 18 AND 19.
I quote:
Sept 2005, Flemming Rose, cultural editor of the Danish weekly jyllands posten, solicits illustration of the prophet mohammad hoping to start a debate about self censorship in denmark”
Etc etc, goes on to say that it publishes the cartoons on SEPT 30, and on OCT 14: 3,500 muslims in denmark demonstrate peacefully in Copenhagen, demanding an apology from the newspaper.

NOW, if TIME magazine is WRONG and you are all RIGHT I will eat my goddamn shorts. It’s spelled out clearly the Danes, oops sorry, I mean Danish newspaper is responsible, and not muslims.

JOKERMAN= first how old are you, does anyone know if this person is old enough to comment? Lol ok yes im an idiot I hope I made your day..

It saddens me to see people like you who jump to conclusions. Shows that you underestimate people a lot, and from experience I’ve realised that all the problems in the world is caused by, guess what, RACISM. RACISM= lack of respect for people and cultures and undermining them, and underestimating their LOGIC. Please get OVER YOURSELF people. Really, I beg you, open your minds, don’t let the media brainwash you with biased BS about arabs and muslims, go READ, educate yourself and each other. I love the west really I do, I lived there for 6 yrs. We have a lot to learn from each other, but I noticed is that MOST western people are NOT EDUCATED ABOUT ISLAM and muslims, and believe everything they see on TV. It’s a shame.

And ANGIE, everyone is special, don’t you know that? We are all children of god, isn’t that enough a reason to love and respect each other? Freedom of speech is very vert different from insulting someone. There are limits for everything, and you know that.

 
At 2/18/2006 09:52:00 AM, Blogger Nomad said...

And anyway why do you wish to know
@ highlander

about this ? Are you travelling to the ME and wish to find which money to carry with you ?


not at all ! just curious !some newspapers printed it !

anyways,that would be a great mess for nations who use dollars !

 
At 2/18/2006 10:02:00 AM, Anonymous sami said...

ANON 3.42 AM

I take it back, you're right Flemming took a leave of absence, exhaustion apparently, i dont blame him. although someone at that newspaper was fired for sure.

 
At 2/18/2006 10:04:00 AM, Anonymous Angie said...

Sami,

It should be enough of a reason Sami, but it isn't.

I believe you're actually a lot more reasonable than people give you credit for.

In fact, people don't respect one another many times, they fight, hate each other, love the wrong people and even people attending the same church fight with each other. It happens constantly within one's own family.

So how does a mature, adult deal with the reality that another person/group insults them, denegrates them?

They accept the fact that people are imperfect and satisfy themselves in their own hearts, that it is NO reflection on them. That people WILL be assholes, no matter what we all may wish.

As far as Mohammed being a man whose "SOLE purpose in life was to make people closer to god and love and give charity as much as they can and keep people away from sin"

After reading Mohammed's biographies, I think you simplify Mohammed to a very one-dimensional character. My impression, and the impression of many of those who look objectivly at Mohammed's life realize that there was a lot more behind Mohammed's life than that...

In fact many Muslim's I've talked to view Mohammed to be something of a self-serving opportunist. Those are their words, not mine.

 
At 2/18/2006 10:18:00 AM, Anonymous sami said...

ANGIE

you're right, i am a lot more reasonable than people think. SEE, that is the problem, people underestimate others, when in fact they must OVERestimate each other and not assume evryone is not as logical as they are.

anyway...

Yes, reacting by burning embassies is obviously wrong, and the prophet would condemn it if he were alive today since it is against islam to begin with. however, i can understand why it has happened. there is a deep rooted feeling with many middle eastern countries who believe that the west (i guess mainly amerca and the uk) dont really care about their freedom from tyrants, but are actually out to use them, their oil, and go about it in a very destructive way. perhaps these stupid cartoons was a means to let all that rage out. what they showed about our prophet is very angering, but i think the issue is much deeper than that.

plus, if we just sat around NOT reacting that would be the green light for other racist bidots to go even further and disrespect our prophets and religion even more. i understand that in the west it is normal to insult each other, but im sorry but we cannot tolerate that here. and what is wrong with voicing our opinions? isnt this a world where we need to communicate with each other and tell each other how we feel so that we can all live more harmoniously??

i did not simplify mohammeds character, and without trying to sound patronising i believe i know more about the life of mohammad than you do. how could he be self serving when he was poor? how could he be self serving when he went sometimes for months on water and dates alone? how could he be self serving when as soon as he got any gifts of money he would not let them stay in his house for more than 3 days before giving it to the poor? how could he be self serving when he died with only a handful of posessions in his name? these muslims you spoke to obviously dont know much about their own prophet. please go read more, and go to islamic websites actually written by muslims.

for example, read this, all of it then tell me what you think:
http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library/jesus-say/ch9.html

 
At 2/18/2006 10:28:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Its a novel ,for christ sake, Sami - dont take it to literaly!

 
At 2/18/2006 10:37:00 AM, Anonymous sami said...

lol, a novel?? LOOOL. You made me laugh, seriously.

Not every book in the this world is a novel, there are these things called Biographies, where other people get their info from. check the index on that site. I also reccomend "The life of Muhammad" by Haykal.

let me quote some non-muslims from that same page i just gave in the previous comment.

Some Quotes:


The Encyclopedia Britannica states:

"....a mass of detail in the early sources show that [Muhammad] was an honest and upright man who had gained the respect and loyalty of others who were like-wise honest and upright men." (Vol. 12)


George Bernard Shaw said about him:

"He must be called the Savior of Humanity. I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it much needed peace and happiness." (The Genuine Islam, Singapore, Vol. 1, No. 8, 1936)



Gandhi says in Young India:

"I wanted to know the best of one who holds today's undisputed sway over the hearts of millions of mankind....I became more than convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme of life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the Prophet, the scrupulous regard for his pledges, his intense devotion to this friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission. These and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every obstacle. When I closed the 2nd volume (of the Prophet's biography), I was sorry there was not more for me to read of the great life."



Edward Gibbon and Simon Ockley speaking on the declaration of Islam write:

"I BELIEVE IN ONE GOD, AND MAHOMET* , AN APOSTLE OF GOD' is the simple and invariable profession of Islam. The intellectual image of the Deity has never been degraded by any visible idol; the honor of the Prophet has never transgressed the measure of human virtues; and his living precepts have restrained the gratitude of his disciples within the bounds of reason and religion."

History Of The Saracen Empires, London, 1870, p. 54



Michael H. Hart in his recently published book on the ranking of the 100 most influential men in history writes:

"My choice of Muhammad to lead the list of the world's most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular levels."

The 100: A Ranking Of The Most Influential Persons In History, M.H. Hart, New York, 1978, p. 33



Jules Masserman, an American psychoanalyst, says:

"Leaders must fulfill three functions: 1) Provide for the well being of the led, 2) Provide a social organization in which people feel relatively secure, and 3) Provide them with a set of beliefs … People like Pasteur and Salk are leaders in the first sense. People like Gandhi and Confucius, on one hand, and Alexander and Caesar on the other, are leaders in the second and perhaps the third sense. Jesus and Buddha belong in the third category alone. Perhaps the greatest leader of all time was Muhammad, who combined all three functions. To a lesser degree, Moses did the same."

Time magazine, July 15, 1974, article titled "Who were history's greatest leaders?," this quote by Jules Masserman.



"Head of the State as well as the Church, he was Caesar and Pope in one; but, he was Pope without the Pope's pretensions, and Caesar without the legions of Caesar, without a standing army, without a bodyguard, without a police force, without a fixed revenue. If ever a man ruled by a right divine, it was Muhammad, for he had all the powers without their supports. He cared not for the dressings of power. The simplicity of his private life was in keeping with his public life."

Reverend Bosworth Smith, Muhammad and Muhammadanism, p. 242



"Serious or trivial, his daily behavior has instituted a canon which millions observe this day with conscious memory. No one regarded by any section of the human race as Perfect Man has ever been imitated so minutely. The conduct of the founder of Christianity has not governed the ordinary life of his followers. Moreover, no founder of a religion has left on so solitary an eminence as the Muslim apostle"

Arabia, D. G. Hogarth, p. 52



"He was sober and abstemious in his diet, and a rigorous observer of fasts. He indulged in no magnificence of apparel, the ostentation of a petty mind; neither was his simplicity in dress affected but a result of real disregard for distinction from so trivial a source ... In his private dealings he was just. He treated friends and strangers, the rich and poor, the powerful and weak, with equality, and was beloved by the common people for the affability with which he received them, and listened to their complaints ... His military triumphs awakened no pride nor vain glory, as they would have done had they been effected for selfish purposes. In the time of his greatest power he maintained the same simplicity of manners and appearance as in the days of his adversity. So far from affecting a regal state, he was displeased if, on entering a room, any unusual testimonials of respect were shown to him. If he aimed at universal dominion, it was the dominion of faith; as to the temporal rule which grew up in his hands, as he used it without ostentation, so he took no step to perpetuate it in his family."

Mahomet and his successors, Washington Irving, pp. 332-334, 343



"His readiness to undergo persecution for his beliefs, the high moral character of the men who believed in him and looked up to him as a leader, and the greatness of his ultimate achievement - all argue his fundamental integrity. To suppose Muhammad an impostor raises more problems than it solves. Moreover, none of the great figures of history is so poorly appreciated in the West as Muhammad … Thus, not merely must we credit Muhammad with essential honesty and integrity of purpose, if we are to understand him at all; if we are to correct the errors we have inherited from the past, we must not forget that conclusive proof is a much stricter requirement than a show of plausibility, and in a matter such as this only to be attained with difficulty."

Muhammad at Macca, W. Montgomery Watt, Oxford press, p. 53



"It is impossible for anyone who studies the life and character of the great prophet of Arabia, who knew how he taught and how he lived, to feel anything but the reverence for that mighty Prophet, one of the great messengers of the Supreme. And although in what I put to you I shall say many things which may be familiar to many, yet I myself feel, whenever I reread them, a new way of admiration, a new sense of reverence for that mighty Arabian teacher."

The Life and Teachings of Muhammad, Annie Besant, p. 4



"Four years after the death of Justinian, C.E. 569, was born in Mecca, in Arabia, the man who, of all men, has exercised the greatest influence upon the human race … To be the religious head of many empires, to guide the daily life of one third of the human race, may perhaps justify the title of a Messenger of God."

History of Intellectual Development of Europe, William Draper, MD., LL.D., Vol. I, p. 329-330

 
At 2/18/2006 10:56:00 AM, Blogger programmer craig said...

These two quotes pretty much say it all...

In London, demonstrators carried placards reading "Europe lacks respect for others," and "Don't they teach manners in Denmark?"

"We want that those who drew these blasphemous cartoons to be hanged," Aysha Munawar, a senior party leader, told the crowd.

Libya Suspends Official After Deadly Riots

 
At 2/18/2006 10:57:00 AM, Anonymous Kevin said...

Sami,

Don't talk about respect. Course respect is only one way as I see it right now. Can you answere me how much respect do women get from muslims? And how much do the non-believer get?????? Apperantly not much if you read the quran.

 
At 2/18/2006 11:03:00 AM, Blogger programmer craig said...

"to guide the daily life of one third of the human race"

Hmmm.... somebody has some serious math problems!

Sorry, Sami, most of those quotes are bunk. The defintion of "leader" doesn't match any definition of leader that I've ever heard, for instance. Did that person make up the definition just to fit Jesus and Mohamet? Leaders have to provide a "set of beliefs" to their followers? Sorry, man. That's indoctrination. Brainwashing. Not leadership.

Less quotes. More personal opinions.

 
At 2/18/2006 11:04:00 AM, Anonymous sami said...

and ofcoarse, this aysha is the spokeswoman for all muslims, right? that says it all?? LOL. and yes they should at least teach those cartoonists and flemming some manners, and others who think so narrowmanidedly as them.

 
At 2/18/2006 11:07:00 AM, Blogger programmer craig said...

Sami,

"Yes, reacting by burning embassies is obviously wrong"

No. Burning embassies is a crime and an act of war.

Insulting another person's religion is merely "wrong."

Punish those guilty of criminal acts. We're waiting.

 
At 2/18/2006 11:28:00 AM, Anonymous sami said...

craig

you dont think "1) Provide for the well being of the led, 2) Provide a social organization in which people feel relatively secure, and 3) Provide them with a set of beliefs" is the definition for a well rounded leader? rememeber he was a spiritual leader also, hence the part about beliefs.

kevin,
the quraan gives women more rights than american or european women have today. read the quraan yourself first. and how about christian women? how much respect are they getting from chritians? isnt it dr.phill who said every 9 seconds an american woman is being beaten by a man she loves??? and what about 1 in 5 woman in scotland who suffer abuse from their husbands? that was on tv in the UK by the way. also, everything is context, the quraan wasnt sent down in one go, it happened on a course of 26 yrs, and usually a verse came down for a reason. unbelievers were the pagan arabs who terrorised muslims for years. the quraan clearly states that any muslim, christian, jew or sabean who believes in god and does good will go to heaven, ie, they are not considered unbelievers. the quraan was referring to the pagan arabs at the time who kept trying to kill the muslims and always broke treaties.

craig, those ARE opinions of educated non muslims and orientalists who studied the life of the prophet.

 
At 2/18/2006 11:37:00 AM, Anonymous sami said...

btw my point about the christian women and the beatings has nothing to do with christianity, which is my point, JUST AS muslims women being treated badly has NOTHING to do with islam. i stress on that point alot.

I hope i have cleared up alot for everyone.

 
At 2/18/2006 11:39:00 AM, Anonymous Angie said...

Sami,

"i understand that in the west it is normal to insult each other, but im sorry but we cannot tolerate that here"

Sami please, don't be disengenuous or we're going to stop reasoning with you altogether.

Muslims insult each other as a matter of daily nourishment. A lot of it is really funny too. I've seen a lot of the jokes, including the new Arabic "Southpark" that includes a character who is obviously Palestinian, but keeps running around trying to cover up his Palestinian accent.

As far as your knowing Mohammed better than I do, evidently not, because the biographies I've read from about the time Mohammed lived, show a completely different Mohammed.

They're written in a glorifying fashion, but the facts speak for themselves and it isn't pretty.

A man who waged war on his neighboring villages and populations. A man who killed detractors, a man who raided, plundered, murdered jewish settlements and caravans, taking women captives, raping them, and/or enslaving them.

A man who captitalized on his rich wife and then after she died, married woman after woman, or kept them as slaves to satisfy his lust when he so desired. A man who married his own adopted son's wife and wrote a sura to exonerate himself when his own wife Aesha, exasperated, no doubt by his continued infidelity even to his numerous wives declared, "I see how your God hurries to please you."

It doesn't impress me that Mohammed elected to appear poor, even when his Mujahadeen were required to tithe 50% of their plunder to his "church".

Wealth, many times is not what narcissists crave. Narcissitic personalities typically crave adoration wherever they can find it and by whatever means they can employ to gain it. Money is desired by some only if it brings adoration with it. If a narcissist perceives he can increase the level of adoration by eschewing weatlth, by Allah, he'll dig a huge hole and bury every diamond and ruby within 50 meters in it.

You're adhering to what you've been taught your whole life Sami, without the slightest critical analysis.

Even reading the Quranic suras regarding Mohammed and his wives should be enough to tip someone off that life in Mohammedville was not all it was cracked up to be.

 
At 2/18/2006 11:51:00 AM, Anonymous Angie said...

"kevin,
the quraan gives women more rights than american or european women have today. read the quraan yourself first. and how about christian women? how much respect are they getting from chritians? isnt it dr.phill who said every 9 seconds an american woman is being beaten by a man she loves??? "

Sami, you're going off the deep end. The Quranic verses regarding women's rights do most certainly NOT give women more rights than American or European women.

What are you saying? The fact that a women is given 1/4 inheritance from a parent, that she can divorce and re-marry, that she ONLY has to be part of a group of another 3 women before she can testify in Sharia court as an eye-witness to a crime? Tht her husband may only "beat her lightly" when demanding her obedience?

You seem like a nice woman, but get serious.

As far as domestic violence statistics in the US...if you do your research, you'll find that to unfortunately be the case world-wide. And we suspect the case is even more severe in the ME. It's simply not reported there.
http://www.stopvaw.org/Prevalence_of_Domestic_Violence.html

 
At 2/18/2006 12:16:00 PM, Anonymous sami said...

dear angie

there you go again. in the west they insult each other all the time, and what am i obviously referring to here? matters of religion, which is what this whole discussion is about, plus they even joke about the queen. everyone has a good laugh at jesus and the queen. fair enough, that is in the european or western society, but in our society it is very different. no religious figure is ever 'joked about', especially not god or the prophet. maybe in 200 yrs, but not today. people must be culturally sensitive, dont you agree? and ofcoarse i know muslims insult and joke with each other all the time, but when it comes to religion and god and the prophets we never dare, out of utter respect for god and all his prophets. as for all your other points, you choose to view things as you wish, but if you were really interested in knowing the truth about all those "facts" you stated you would look properly at reliable muslim sources, because that discussion would take pages and pages and days to explain, which i dont have the time for, and the information is all out there for you to find, just as i found it, you just have to be humble enough to want to know and not make assumptions without knowing detailed facts about everything, reasons why verses came down, and the circumstances they came down under, and other things relating to 1400 years ago.

i hope you can tell by now im not a fool, and i am not adhering to what i've been taught my whole life. most of what i know today was out of my own interest in my religion, if anything, more religion should be taught in schools in arab countries, we are barely taught anything. i have done my research for years, i suggest you do the same if you sincerely want to know the truth about what we believe. i will not be posting any more comments, i've said what i wanted to say and at the end of the day, we are all different, and no matter what our differences are and what beliefs we follow, we must all respect our differences, because if we were all the same we would just be robots. [by the way, im a guy. my name is arabic for 'semetic, which is what arabs are. just fyi.. :)]

 
At 2/18/2006 12:27:00 PM, Anonymous Angie said...

Sami,

I'm sorry to have mistaken you for a woman.

Believe me, I have a delicate side that understands perfectly your desire for a gentle utopia that we all deserve and that hopefully we'll all retire to someday (not too soon I hope).

And I understand you come from a more sensitive society, however, I believe you're wrong in one regard...Muslim's joke about Allah and Mohammed all the time, I get the jokes in my e-mails sometimes. They just don't dare joke about it in PUBLIC...and there's the rub.

You should be able to joke about it in the ME without getting killed or ostrecized, it's part of your identity and your heritage, it's not going away, so what's the harm of relaxing just a little? Can you not learn to love your Prophet and your God enough to have a little fun between the three of you?

Would Allah and Mohammed love you any less because you shared a joke with them?

 
At 2/18/2006 12:27:00 PM, Anonymous sami said...

the female version of Sami is Samia, nice name for a daughter i think..

 
At 2/18/2006 12:33:00 PM, Anonymous Angie said...

Sami,

And yes, I do think Samia would be a beautiful name for a girl.

 
At 2/18/2006 12:45:00 PM, Anonymous angie said...

Sami,

But still I believe that you can afford to be more playful with your Prophet and your God.

If they love you, wouldn't they permit you to share a joke with them?

Would they love you any less?

 
At 2/18/2006 01:11:00 PM, Blogger programmer craig said...

Sami,

"you dont think "1) Provide for the well being of the led, 2) Provide a social organization in which people feel relatively secure, and 3) Provide them with a set of beliefs" is the definition for a well rounded leader? rememeber he was a spiritual leader also, hence the part about beliefs."

Hell no I don't, Sami. Didn't I already say that? Good leaders don't brainwash their followers. Osama and Hitler are the types of leaders who "provide a set of beliefs" to their followers.

Leadership is not a poorly understood principle. Why are we even discussing this? Most of your quotes look like something a 12 year old would fabricate on an essay. The percentage of the world's population is easily ascertained, and there are a multitude of sources to find out what the REAL principles of effective leadership are. Why are we being told that so-called experts made such glaring errors? You need to screen your sources a bit better, Sami, or just tell us your own opinion, instead of providing external quotes of... dubious.... value!

 
At 2/18/2006 01:27:00 PM, Blogger programmer craig said...

Sami,

"read the quraan yourself first."

We aren't allowed to read the Quran in anything but Arabic. If somebody who had read the Quran siad something that you didn't like about, you'd be the first to condemn him for reading a mis-translation.

Same old story, Sami. You tell people to read the quran, then you tell them they must first learn to read arabic before they can read the quran, then you tell them that they should just take your word for it. Right?

Well, everyone is judging Islam by the deeds committed by muslims now, not by what is written in the Quran. If you don't like that, then fucking STOP LETTING THTOSE CRAZY MURDEROUS BASTARDS SPEAK FOR YOU. Otherwise, if you do side with them, then stop complaining, when you reap what you sow. And stop pretending that those rioting mobs of 100,000 (or a million) don't speak for muslims. Put out a hundred thousand protesters condemning the burning of another nation's embassies, and maybe some of us will believe it. And maybe we won't. Islam has a lot to answer for.

 
At 2/18/2006 01:43:00 PM, Anonymous jokerman said...

PC
you can read the quran in any language, doesnt have to be arabic. Though ofcourse in arabic will help you undrstand the words better & the meaning but its not compulsory & whomever tells you otherwise is an idiot.

 
At 2/18/2006 02:11:00 PM, Blogger Christine said...

Sami,

Our thoughts, our fears, our impressions and our ever growing knowledge of Islam is not something we woke up with one day. It is something that has grown over time. Yes, 9/11 was for a lot of us the beginning. But, for most of us, we were still naive. All that day did was open a lot more eyes. We actually really started noticing what was happening. It has been a wake up call for us and now, those of us who are listening are hearing all of the messages, reading all of the past signs that we missed. These messages are ones we would prefer to not hear. You see, for the majority of us, we don't want to hate, we don't want to fear. But, after all of the signs and messages, we have no choice anymore. If we continue to be naive, we will die.

If those muslims that truly and honestly do not feel inside their hearts the hatred of us, want us to believe you. Your messages are going to have to be louder, stronger and last longer than the others. That is the reality now, whether we like it or not.

 
At 2/18/2006 02:29:00 PM, Blogger Blogspat said...

Sami,

Just to clarify, as I recall on of the first republishing of the cartoons were in an Egyptian newspaper?

The original printing of the cartoons was actually a protest against the same people you condemn - the ones who try to threat there will through. One can definately argue whether it was the right way to go about the business but the "West" IS NOT generally against the Muslims - but just like all over Arabia we have problems with certain groups. If the "West" were so much against the Muslims I don't think they would actually be working so hard to try and fix things (although this is percieved differently by different sides). Even the newspaper "you" are so against at the moment has sided for the Palestinians several times.

When it comes to the knowledge on Islam in Europe - you are definately right - "we" really need to learn more. When it comes to the general Muslim knowledge of the "West" the same is true.

But to be totally honest with you quite a lot of Imams aren't even capable of actually reading the Qu'ran in some Muslim countries. Please do not correct me on this - I know first hand.

 
At 2/18/2006 03:09:00 PM, Blogger Blogspat said...

*Arabia being a sloppy word for in many Muslim countries.

 
At 2/18/2006 05:05:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sami,

I'm the former Anon 3.42 now posting as Anon whatever time this gets public on Sandmonkey's blog. I see you've really written a lot since my first comment and would really like to comment but there's just too much to handle here. Generally, I think for example Angie and Craig are thinking more or less as I do. I, however, want to stress that I've personal experiences of travel in various (10+) Islamic countries and these expeiences are almost entirely positive. Therefore I think it's a shame bigots are now destroying the reputation of 'normal' Islam. A small but very vocal minority. Another problem is that it's hard to find Muslims willing to view their religion critically, not just quoting the Quran and/or non-Moslems when it best suits them.

Below I'm only commenting to what I think you commented directly to me.

See? Capital letters do grab your attention don’t they? That was my only intention.

No, it's the content, not the font.

1- I used the term DANES because you people are now thinking it is

You people??? Who are these you? I'm not a Dane. If you, on the other hand, mean 'Westerners', yes, I'm one but how on Earth do you claim you know how I think (and how on Earth can you claim I'm a Westerner before I revealed it now to you?)? You're prejudged, my dear Sami.

the MUSLIMS who somehow began this whole drama. Obviously I do not

Some Muslims began this whole drama. The drama didn't begin with JP printing the cartoons but with all the mess after it. Publishing some cartoons honestly isn't dramatic at all. Had the cartoons been about any other religion or historical person, none of this bloodshed, embassy burnings, death threats and other idiocies would have followed. I stress again: not because of all Muslims responsible for those but for a vocal minority only.

Danish people who I blame are ofcoarse the cartoonists, and the cultural editor of the Danish magazine who printed it. Happy now?

Not quite. The Danes number around five million, and in your calculation the people responsible are around one millionth of them. So, could you please stop talking about 'the Danes' when 99.999999% are not involved? Just as it was not 'the Muslims' who caused 9/11, just an even smaller amount of them. Therefore I never say Muslims did this or that before 9/11.

2-you say the editor has not been fired, but from what I read last week on TIME magazine, the issue before the FEB 20 one which I cannot find at the moment, actually says that he has been fired. So I recall, you can find out for yourself.

You commented that later as well. Yes, we agree, he's not been fired and to my best knowledge, neither has anybody else there. The last I read was that the publisher backs the editor-in-chief as well. A good example of workplace solidarity and not caving in.

3-I know the WEST did not publish the cartoons, but it WAS published by western newspapers to begin with. Why? Only reason I can think of is to INSULT our prophet.

It's your limited imagination of this is the only reason you can think of. I listed various other reasons in my first post and if you really read the official motivations of the papers publishing the cartoons, you have to be a conspiration theorist to claim it's that simple that it's just insulting.

However, if I buy your theory that those were insults, please keep in mind that perhaps one in a thousand, ten thousand, million or so Western papers have ever published the cartoons, the rest have declined for various reasons: fear, disinterest, because they've seen them offensive and so on. Let's say (my estimate) 99.99% of Western papers haven't published them. That's a huuuuuge majority which according to your logic then doesn't want to insult Muslims. You don't get this high confidence figures for anything else in the West.

he is NOT your prophet you need

It's your interpretation that he's not my prophet. Never said anything on that because my religion or lack of it is irrelevant here.

sin. SURE you don’t believe in him, but have some respect for a human BEING and not be so racist.

This has absolutely nothing to do with racism!!! Racism is related to looking down on people of other ethnic origins. You can blame the cartoons for blasphemy (which they are not in Danish law) but not for racism. If they insult your religion, it's nothing to do with your ethnic origin. Also, if you claim the cartoons insult all Muslims, it's then about like 1-1.5 billion people of various ethnic origins, including Westerners. One cartoon can't be racist to various ethnic origins at the same time, including that of the cartoon drawer's own origin (= Muslims of Western origin).

Again, I and no muslims blame the west, I was making a POINT since

Yes, you do if and when you claim they'be been published by the West as you did.

4-ANON 3.42 aka “mr technical” I’ll get technical for ya, “Us” = muslims. I thought that was pretty obvious, are you that simple that I have to spell things out for you?

Maybe I'm simple. But I guess you're a simple man as well. What authority do you then have to speak for at least one billion people? Who has given you that? Could you please scan at least some credentials and send them to this blog? I think you only want to look important. My dear Sami, you can only speak for yourself at this point, not for people who've never given you the right to speak for them.

NOW, if TIME magazine is WRONG and you are all RIGHT I will eat my goddamn shorts. It’s spelled out clearly the Danes, oops sorry, I mean Danish newspaper is responsible, and not muslims.

Yes, it's responsible for publishing these cartoons and so what? JP is not responsible for what happened after that. I also have to remind you that in Denmark the way to try to challenge the cartoons is by court and that hasn't been succesful because the legal apparatus hasn't regarded them as illegal.

there for 6 yrs. We have a lot to learn from each other, but I noticed is that MOST western people are NOT EDUCATED ABOUT ISLAM and muslims, and believe everything they see on TV. It’s a shame.

Surely you're right. The West does have ignorant bigots as well and it's a shame. But do you claim Muslims are better educated on other religions then? At least the record of the West as what comes to religious freedom is as from another planet what comes to tolerance and respect for minority religions. See for example Saudi Arabia claiming to be the country custodian of the two holy mosques where all other religions are banned. If you think this is not right, why don't you protest? It's a shame Muslims seem to tolerate that their holiest places are ruled by some of the most narrow-minded and intolerant leaders anywhere. And that Muslims don't simply believe what their tv or newspapers or sms hate campaigns say? Nope, my dear Sami. Remember stuff like idiotic sms's claiming the Quran was burnt in Denmark, which never happened, and the completely unfounded rumour of what was one of the background factors of the illegal burnings of diplomatic missions in Syria.

By the way, now that you attack Western media, how can you then regard Time as a credible source? You simply believe what you read?

 
At 2/18/2006 11:10:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Personally I like the part where Saud is the holder of Mecca and Medina, support the Wahabists and have the largest bases that the scum-sucking infidel dogs of the great satan have in the ME. I just love the irony of it all and I'm sure that they would love nothing more than change Saud from a royalty to an Islamic state.....power corrupts.......

 
At 2/19/2006 12:37:00 AM, Blogger The Sandmonkey said...

Sami, You watch Dr. Phil?

And you wonder why someone thought you were a woman?

 
At 3/07/2006 05:50:00 PM, Blogger Bob O'brian said...

Check this out: picture of zoroastrianism

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home