Wakas Mir "The Blog"

Though you have some good points here, it is ironic you do not discuss the fact that the muslims burn a religious symbol just as important for an entire religious community (Christianity). Also, that symbol is the flag of Norway, thus muslims offense the entire Norwegian people.

The muslims doing this is no better than the ones “making fun of” muhamad, they are in fact alot worse.

I see, so in your mind “freedom of speech” is OK as long its cencored by moslems? I noticed how you avoid to mention the real reason for printing these immages.. The Danish guy who actually made them recieved death threats from moslems all over the world, and very recently some moslems tried to kill him.. they failed. aftenposten printed those pictures because a group of people should never be allowed to force their insane views on the rest of the world, as they do in the backwater 3rd world countries. In a democratic civilized soceity people are allowed to voice their opinions without the threath of violence and death. You speak of “our freedom of speech” and “their freedom of speech” This just go to show you havent grasped the idea of freedom of speech at all. There are no such distinction.. In the free world you can critize my way of life all you want as im free to do the same to your. Burn what you want, terrorize, you will never silence the free world.

Nice to see this comment. You tried to make it come out as my double standard of saying their and our freedom of speech. But it would be nice to see if you see your comment since its packed with an attitude to fix the world and no you didnt reply to how we can come to a conclusion rather ended the convo that only shows that if there is a world police then its only going to target Muslims..

I can’t speak for those burning the flag just like i guess you cant personally take responsibility of allowing reprint after reprint of cartoons trying to make a mockery of someones religion. I wouldnt burn a flag rather would love to check the brainscans of those that like to poke a group of people just to see them do this. When the retaliate then things are mourned over..

It has not so much to do with freedom of speech, it’s more like “freedom of bringing the devil out of ones own mask” – I don’t think people doing such thing again N again knowing the reaction have any kind of respect for their own religion or others. N when the then get ” death threats” they have none to blame but themself. Freedom of speech don’t give anyone the right to insult or disrespect anyone or their religion, let it then me Muslims or Christians or anyone for that matter.

I find it ridiculous that the newspaper printed the cartoons once more. Freedom of speech doesn’t mean that one does something totally out of the way to insult a group of people. Expressing ones opinion is fine with me, but if one targets a specific group of people to ridicule them and make fun of them, then it is not ‘freedom of speech’ anymore, it is discrimination. Freedom of speech means standing up for your rights and expressing your views; it doesn’t mean attacking a specific group of people.
They published the cartoons once and the Muslims from all over the world reacted to it. The fact that some people consider the demonstrations by Muslims obnoxious is shocking. What do you expect? If one is making fun of someone you highly respect, won’t you react to it? And don’t forget, the demonstrations were a result of publishing the cartoons. If you would provoke someone, what else can you expect?
They published the cartoons one time… now they published the cartoons again… They just want to see how the Muslim world will react to it… they actually want the response of the Muslim world to diminish over time… and they will keep doing this, till they know that now no one will have a problem with the cartoons… That is sick!!!
I think, it is the right of the Muslims to stand up for their rights… it is their right to demonstrate and protest and show the world that they have respect and dignity too!
I would personally not burn any country’s flag, but friends… Drastic situations ask for drastic measures… You can’t expect from the demonstrators to come, demonstrate a little bit and leave while you are stamping on their believes… If Norwegian flags are burned, I would consider it the fault of the newspaper rather than of the people who are forced to go so far…
Respect other people’s beliefs and learn from each other… I have friends from all beliefs and I love them all very much… I have learned a lot from them, and there is no reason why everyone can’t live in peace together…

Where does it say in the quran or in the hadith that no person should ever depict Mohammed? Perhaps your god considers it immoral for his subjects to depict images of Mohammed, but that still wouldnt apply to non-muslims, as we arent bound by the same religious code as you are. The apparant “ban” for non-muslims to refrain from depicting Mohammed in any way they like is not at all supported by your religious texts, and is based on irrational and downright intellectually void arguments.

I can only speak for myself, but i think this applies for alot of other westerners, we couldnt care less what a bunch of bearded, stone-age-mentality, crazed religious freaks do with their spare time, even if that does include burning the flag. You know why? Cause its just a symbol made out of cloth, just like the quran is a book made out of paper and religion is a construct of the human brain.

However, we do start to wonder when the so-called moderate muslims side with the extremists.

PS. The newspaper printed the images to inform the public about what the crazy somali extremist thought was reason enough to kill the cartoonist over.

@ik larkii thats the thing i guess people feel just say something the whole world will say ’sure even if you are non muslim you can do as you wish making mockery of my religion’ if freedom of speech is what a few have in mind then i think same people will agree that the one trying to kill the artist is just enjoying his freedom of speech..

@dua
Funnily enough I guess it’s become a hobby for people to mess around feelings of Muslims

@ Kuffar you could become a good debater if you talk about things in context. We are talking about freedom of speech. If you prove to me that the action taken by Aftenposten was justified and humane .. if it was then I guess there is something I am missing here. Because to me it’s as I said before.. poking around with other’s beliefs. And that in my view is not only pathetic but outright makes people do things which never have a good result.

Wakas – obviously, people invoking freedom of speech to print the cartoons should respect the freedoms of other to express themselves. Including burning a flag, if they so wish. However, I’m quite astonished if you think the freedom of speech includes the right to burn churches or KILL someone. Freedom of speech is just that: of speech. It is not a license to kill. Are you serious in your deeply immoral comparison? And if not, do you see that the fact that some people believe it is justified to kill over these cartoons, makes the cartoon issue into an issue of freedom of speech?

Since youre critiqueing a norwegian article for its content i expect you to be fluent in Norwegian. I find it hard to believe then that you dont see the obvious justification for publishing the cartoons. Since muslims by their own means have made this issue into a major one, it is in the interest of the public to know what the issue is about. From a modern, liberal point of view, its Aftenpostens DUTY to publish those images so to create the basis of any broader, meaningful discussion on the subject.

Infact, from the western point of view, its the muslims who must show beyond a doubt that public display of cartoons can not and should not take place. Claiming hurt feelings just isnt a good enough reason.

“- Vi står overfor en rettssak i Danmark knyttet til dette alvorlige angrepet mot Jyllands-Postens tegner. Da synes vi det er naturlig og riktig å minne om det kunstneriske og journalistiske uttrykket som trolig ligger til grunn for denne voldelige handlingen, sier Haugsgjerd.”

http://www.dagbladet.no/2010/01/08/kultur/innenriks/muhammed_tegningene/aftenposten/tv_og_medier/9823624/

Further on, i do find it hard to understand the, apparantly huge, difference between publishing the cartoons on paper or just simply displaying them online.

The cartoons is published on several internet based newspaper sites and they are also displayed on Wikipedia (which you must know since you deleted my link to that article).

Wheres the muslim uproar against major online publishers of the images? Everyone in the world can watch the depiction of Mohammad with two clicks of a mouse, yet pakistani extremists go nuts over a newpaper with a couple hundred thousand copies printed daily.

Hurt feelings or not, you should be mentally prepared to realize that people who turn violent or even murderous and sadistic over cartoons does NOT under any circumstances have the higher moral ground.

And if theres any doubt at all, understand that Europe has struggled with dogmatic, middleage philosophy before, and theres a reason why theres so few religious people here. Christianity lost it foul grasp on peoples liberties, and islam will never gain it.

Well commonsense no one in their right mind would say killing is right just like no one in their right mind would go ahead and keep printing cartoons again n again..

Kuffar if you would start talking about moral and that too of high standard then comment when you have a solution rather than losing sleep over nuts who burn flags. I wouldnt be all lovey dovey towards anyone who finds it amusing to make fun of a religion.

Solutions is what we are looking for not links related to your amusement.

Well, the only real problem as i see it is people like you, who claim to not be supportive of religious extremists, yet still condemn newspapers for publishing cartoons. Do you think youre better then the people burning flags, just because youre not expressing your hurt feelings in the similar manner? In principle, youre just as wrong.

The failure of the average muslim to understand the hypocricy, yes even the blatant irony of this matter, is a better showcase of the integrational problems of muslims into a liberal, secular country then anything else.
1) Man says subjects are encouraged to violent acts by religion.
2) Subjects respond with acts of violence in defence of religion.

Its a repeated, almost comical, self-defeating act of stupidity.

Dont get me wrong, your right to form an opionion is all well and good, but the muslim hive mind in questions of religious nature is a force to reckon with, although i do also recognize the small initiatives of the REAL moderate muslims that claim not all muslims think in this totalitarian, dogmatic way.

Yes i am better than those burning flags since i am using the platform to communicate and no one can present a humane reason as to why making fun of a religion is the only amusement left. As for average being a word used a lot i would love to know what an average muslim is according to average ‘lets make fun of others belief’ person..

Wakas, I get the impression again, that you equate the printing of cartoons and the killing of cartoonists. The question is not whether you condemn killing, which I am sure you do, or whether you believe the printing of cartoons is foolish, which you of course are entitled to: It is whether you would agree whereas the latter is – and should be – protected by the freedom of expression, whereas the latter is an abominable act, which should be universally condemned.

Or, even if you do not believe that making fun of other people’s belief should be protected by the freedom of expression, which would be deeply illiberal, but still not too uncommon, whether you would still agree that the two acts are and should be completely incomparable in terms of morality and law.

Some people, of course, believe that making fun of other people’s belief (or rather, their own particular belief) should be punishable by death, and for them, then, the act of printing such cartoons is equivalent and comparable to murdering somebody. These are the people we (rightly) call radical fundamentalist extremists. I trust you’re not one of them.

Mis-spelling, meant to write: It is whether you would agree that whereas the latter is – and should be – protected by the freedom of expression, the former is an abominable act, which should be universally condemned.

I never see any point or any reason to have any kind of “blogg- debate” where people join with closed mind N heart. When people like “Kuffar” can come N say “problem is “people like you” – You’re not here to point a finger mr/miss Kuffar, so Mind it! You can freely express your views on the situation but you have no right to say such thing. N no I’m not at all trying to grap away your “freedom of speech”. Go ahead a utter whatever you have to say but mind your words.

If anyone come N call me religious extremist because I’m one of those who Condemn publishing cartoons like this, then be it so.

Dua – I think a lot of the debate hinges on what the word “condemn” means.

This is how I think about the issue: I don’t have a problem with people disagreeing with the publishing of these cartoons. They might find them personally offensive, or they might find that they ignite conflicts, even if personally not offended. People supporting the freedom of expression, though, would still ALLOW them, that is, any condemnation would not go further than stating one’s belief about the publication. The whole point of freedom of expression is to allow statements and expressions that at least SOME people find offensive – if not, there would be no need to protect such a freedom. Many important statements throughout history have been extremely offending to groups of people – think of Gallilei who challenged the whole worldview of the Catholic church, a blasphemous act which at the time could be punished with death. I’m not comparing the cartoons and Gallilei, the point is just to say that from a freedom of expression point of view, the fact that people are offended is not a reason to prohibit the expression of something. That does of course not imply that one should publish anything just in order to offend someone, and there is no doubt that there are statements which are offensive and at the same time completely useless. Such offensive statements, then, should be condemned by those who disagree – but, and that’s the crux here, nothing more.

Even people who do not support freedom of expression in this sense, i.e. people who believe that this freedom is not absolute, and that offending religious sentiment is something which should be prohibited (do you really believe this, though?), should – if they believe in the rule of law – not ask for punishment against people who express themselves thus, as long as they have done so within current laws. You would then have to work to change freedom of expression laws in Norway or Denmark.

People who condemn, but tolerate the cartoons are certainly not extremists. Even people who advocate more stringent blasphemy laws, I would not necessarily call extremists. What worry me, though, is the sometimes implicit, sometimes explicit comparison of the cartoonist and those who wish to or attempt to have him killed. That is what I have tried to get an answer to in this debate: Could we agree that even if one disapproves of the drawing or printing of cartoons of the prophet, there is no comparing such an act to the attempt to kill another human being. NO comparison. It is only when I hear a will of censorship combined with equivocation of killing and drawing cartoons, that I would consider using the word extremist. I do not get the impression that Wakas or Dua here are extremists in this sense, but I’m a bit baffled by the lack of willingness to be very clear on the matter to avoid misunderstandings.

Condemn to me can mean something like this: I not only disagree with these cartoon publishing wirdos, I “hate” it to the max that they can’t find anythin better than this, they don’t see something so obvious N clear that by doing so they are the enemy of “Peace” because from how I see it, when someone knows the bad “reation” of their “action” N they still go for it, they can only blame themself for the disaster N the outcome.

Second thing just to make it clear: Never supported violence, of any sort. [publishing such cartoons, in my opinion is making fun of somebodys religion which is one form of violence as well] – tc

Oh Dua, is that like when a girl dresses like a street girl, she shouldnt complain if she gets raped, because she know how the crazy rapists will react to her clothing?

Your logic is flawed buddy.

This is one topic that will never get resolved just because three or four people are trying to guide each other to their own mindsets which have been built due to their upbringing, surroundings and hours of watching a media that is amazing when it comes to messing minds and change thought processes.

@ commonsense

No I don’t agree that killing someone is same as cartooning. But when a country like Norway has laws even when the neighbours dog barks you call the police and they come running to shut your neighbour. Atleast this messing with other’s religion should be a notch more important than the DOG incidents.. because that disturbs your sleep but this poking with someone’s religion disturbs their whole inside and outside.

@ kuffar

Well this girl dressing like this or that isn’t the topic so don’t bring in other discussions within this one.

It’s not about supporting religious extremists or anything. Yes I am a Muslim, a proud Muslim. If for me Muhammad PBUH is a very important person and for you he isn’t atleast in a very humane way instead of keep on saying “i don’t care who is to you” you could atleast NOT bother about saying anything to not get into a situation where both end up “fighting” or abusing each other in some way. Don’t you feel there is no need to be hating one another just because what’s happening is not my fault but some people who feel that its their right to “show the world that it’s ok to play with sentiments of others”

If I say.

Kuffar, the person you love the most I am going to ridicule and make fun of in public again and again. And don’t you DARE react knowing that for you this person, your mum dad wife or kid for that matter is the most wonderful person in your life. I am sure you won’t just sit there. Maybe one time you will react maybe next time you will be “WHAT THE HELL DOES WAKAS WANT??”

That’s what’s happening here.

We say Muhammad WAS but this thing will keep on coming in between when other religions will keep on denying it till doomsday. So I see no point at this moment to keep discussing what will NEVER be fixed

So let’s all of us have a cup of cofee or tea and enjoy life.. topic closed until another fiesty one comes up.

At the end I would say. If today I start saying Holocaust never happened and keep on coming up with funny remarks about it just to see how the jews react. I am sure it won’t be pretty.

Case closed thx for commenting