Islamic reaction to radical Muslims

[Palwasha]

And here I go and give you a voice, to at least tell me -- and you are confirming everything that the muslims interviewed and in the news said.

I’m in the UK, I have no idea what’s being said in the interviews, so I can’t comment.

So far I don't see what you are complaining about. You have a voice -- use it.

Oh I can exercise my voice here and around people I know, but as Muslims we don’t have much influence in the media, please don’t bother trying to deny that.

I must be missing your point. I am not saying they do not have the right to be upset. They have every right to be upset. They do *NOT* have the right to be terrorists about it -- and should be shunned for doing so.

Yeah you are missing my point, I’m trying to help you understand *why* they feel so incredibly upset, I’m not justifying their actions. I don’t agree with violence or terror of any sort.

So you agree that different people can have different values -- and this is a legitimate concern? Then why are you getting upset when cartoonists have different values than you?

Yes, obviously different people have different values, but if having a lack of respect is one of them, then I don’t agree that. Ever heard the saying, ‘If you have nothing nice to say then don’t say anything at all’..? Well this is echoed to children in primary and secondary school, something adults can’t seem to follow themselves.

It’s common courtesy not to upset or provoke others.

Obviously you have never looked into christianity.

Haha, I grew up around Christians, I was the only Muslim in my year/grade in primary/elementary school, we were made to go to church and in highschool I only knew a handful of Muslims. One of my dearest friends is on her way to becoming a Christian missionary. I’ve looked into understanding the religion myself, it was never an option for me, but I have tried to grasp it’s concepts and to gain more knowledge on the subject. Christians themselves have said I know the bible more than they do, so don’t try and tell me I don’t know about Christianity.

I'm not defining it anyway, you are. You are the one associating what they did (death threats) with a justification (defend the honor of someone).

No. I’m saying, or trying to at least, that I understand their response, their anger and why they’re upset. Although I don’t agree with how they are supposedly going about it all. I also oppose the cartoons, if they had chosen to be abit more considerate then we wouldn't have this porblem in the first place.

I am calling into question how you can say that Mohammed founded a religion of peace out of one side of your mouth, and then try to claim terrorism can be used to defend his honor.

Gosh, you misunderstanding me. Seriously, please quote where I have said I approve of terrorism acts.

the appropriate response to a minor event like punching someone (or publishing a cartoon) is not to bomb their house (or torture and kill them).

Of course, that goes without saying.

The real question is 'why look at them if the are as an open flesh wound to you". If the images offend you, don't watch South Park, don't buy the paper you are offended by. Hell, write a letter to them and explain that you are no longer going to give them your business -- not a letter telling them you are going to kill them

Flesh wounds can’t be ignored, if you leave it, it gets worse.. you’re essentially saying if someone bullies you then ignore them, no you stand up for your beliefs, we at least have that right.

Oh and it was never me who threatened them in the first place.. most of your questions and confusion seems only answerable by the ones who sent the threats themselves. I mean I can’t reply to why they sent threats instead of letters, you need to ask them, it’s not my chosen method of confrontation.

Different definition. Those cartoons are not a crime -- and not a crime worthy of the death penalty -- and if you are injured by a cartoon, you need to grow some thicker skin, or wear gloves to avoid papercuts.

Different definition, geez I wonder how you define innocence, God forbid you ever be put on a jury. Again, I agree murder shouldn’t be a consequence, but people are affected by different things, forgive me but you seem insensitive. You’re really not understanding much of what’s being said, I’m not here to argue with you, you asking questions and I’m trying to answer them, but you already have set answers in your mind.

Don’t blames us for the low morals of others, to them showing these images is supposed to be funny and cool, well not if it hurts others. We clearly don’t adhere to their adaptation of ‘humour’.

We indisputably love our Prophet, seeing him portrayed in such a light doesn’t bode well with us. Once more, I say this not to defend acts of violence but to condemn the cartoons.

Read this thread. Post after post people, yourself included, have tried to justify terrorism and defend it. Either you are being extremist -- or the majority of muslims agree that terrorism is acceptable.

I know your idea of terrorism, and no I don’t agree with any of it whatsoever. I’m NOT defending terrorism, I’m saying the media need to stop provoking responses from Muslim and start respecting our beliefs. I’m just repeating myself now..

So? And people exercise their free speech all the time to talk negatively about both those groups -- and not once have I heard about death threats from either of those groups. Death threats *TO*, yes. From, no.

Those two groups are maybe sometimes imitated and made fun of, their beliefs aren’t insulted, they never talk about the torah or Abraham.

Freedom of speech does not cover legitimate threats of criminal activity.

Right, so freedom of speech itself has limits, kinda defies the whole concept of ‘freedom’ – (the power to act or speak or think without externally imposed restraints).

Do I have to define everything? =P

And mate what’s with the pictures.. if I had one for ‘Can’t reply himself, so refers to images to define responses with images’, then I’d use it.

Forgive me if I am wrong, but you defended these terrorists. You even went so far as to saying that what they did was 'natural'

Erm no I didn’t, and I’ve covered this in my response already, hope you understand it by now.

Don't play into the stereotypes and try to kill us!

Well then stop stereotyping and we won’t live up to it

*A joke - before that's blown out of proportion.

When was the last terrorist attack against a head scarf? Or the number of wives you do or do not have?

We’re attacked a bit more constructively.. the hijaab ban in France, Turkey..?

Bull****. Come out from under whatever rock you are hiding under. You have already listed two groups that are attacked just as much. You leave out atheists, agnostics, rationalists, minorities, and just about every single social group and stereotype on the planet. They all face the same struggles, hardships and bigotry in their own way -- just few of them resort to terrorism!

Honestly mate, I think it’s you who’s in a cave. Please, we are demonised SO much, I see Islamaphobia everywhere, I don’t even like using that term as it’s become a bit typical, but don’t know what other word to use for it. Don’t get me wrong, our situation could be MUCH worse, and I sincerely love living here, but we are facing prejudices at the moment. I live here and communicate heavily with the young Muslim generation here, they’ll tell you the same thing, we feel like we’re constant targets.

Those groups are nowhere near attacked as much.. dear lord.. Go to the UK, interview students in Universities, colleges and ask them what we have to deal with. Khair, I shouldn’t complain too much, situations can always be worse.

Recently many young Muslim males have been locked up for protesting in London, against the Gaza conflict. They weren’t violent, they apologised, the judges acknowledged that, their sentences were given to act as a ‘deterrent’.

FOSIS/ISOC are being attacked for as one of the previous members was involved in the whole Detroit bombing incident. Consequently, they are giving details of Muslim students to the CIA, they’re not even a part of this bloody country, their a secret service in America! Now this article I do have, please take time to read it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...ieties-radical

Oh and since your living in the US I wouldn’t expect you’ve heard about the attacks on uni students in London, but maybe you’ve heard of the BNP.

If you really want me to, I could hunt down links for all these articles, how I wished I’d saved them all..

What better way to assess teachings than by looking at what is taught? Besides, your book matters nothing at all -- what matters is how you apply it to your life.

Not really, people wil interpret that teaching differently or maybe not fully comprehend the true meanings, thus they may get the ideology wrong. For such reasons, you go straight to the main source for the most precise representation. In our case the Quran is *supposed* to be what define Muslims and how they *should* act not how they do act.. Don't judge a book by it's cover.. don't judge Islam by it's Muslims, not every one of them is fully practising, so you can't be sure what the reasoning behind their actions are.

As I believe, Muslims aren’t perfect, but Islam is.

We can go on forever, quoting and replying to each other, I really hope I got my points across. I also agree with much of what Pir_Rokhan has said.

[ozymandias]

Ozymandias,

How do you justify someone INTENTIONALY causing offence?

I'm not sure what's so hard to understand: Free speech is all the justification you need to say anything protected by free speech. Why would you need anything more?

If they want to offend people that is their right. They don't need to justify or defend that right -- it is the most important single human right from which all others flow.

[ozymandias]

I’m in the UK, I have no idea what’s being said in the interviews, so I can’t comment.

A quick google, or look at news sites ought to fill you in. It's more of the same as what we are seeing here -- people making excuses and justifications for terrorism.

Oh I can exercise my voice here and around people I know, but as Muslims we don’t have much influence in the media, please don’t bother trying to deny that.

I'm not. I am saying I am giving you a voice to communicate with me, right here, no censorship on my part -- but just about every comment is agreeing with the voice of the muslims the news is picking up -- so you have no ground to complain that the news is getting it wrong.

Yeah you are missing my point, I’m trying to help you understand *why* they feel so incredibly upset, I’m not justifying their actions. I don’t agree with violence or terror of any sort.

Yes, obviously different people have different values, but if having a lack of respect is one of them, then I don’t agree that. Ever heard the saying, ‘If you have nothing nice to say then don’t say anything at all’..? Well this is echoed to children in primary and secondary school, something adults can’t seem to follow themselves.

But breaking that 'rule' is not grounds for death. Besides that is a gross oversimplification of things. There are *many* topics I have nothing nice to say about, and I would feel inhuman trying to be quiet about them. Sexism, racism, slavery, bigotry, terrorism -- I have *NOTHING* nice to say about them, and not only do I not have to be quiet due to a manners rule for children, I have a moral obligation not to be quiet.

It’s common courtesy not to upset or provoke others.

I agree whole heartedly. I think we are going to disagree on who is being rude and provoking here. I think the people trying to refrain others from using their right to free speech are being horribly rude and provoking others. Besides courtesy and manners are not nearly the same thing as a basic, universal human right.

How rude is it to threaten to *MURDER* someone over a minor issue, anyway?

Haha, I grew up around Christians, I was the only Muslim in my year/grade in primary/elementary school, we were made to go to church and in highschool I only knew a handful of Muslims. One of my dearest friends is on her way to becoming a Christian missionary. I’ve looked into understanding the religion myself, it was never an option for me, but I have tried to grasp it’s concepts and to gain more knowledge on the subject. Christians themselves have said I know the bible more than they do, so don’t try and tell me I don’t know about Christianity.

If you are going to completely misrepresent what the crucifix means to christians, either you are ignorant about what it truely means to them, or are a deliberate liar. You go right ahead and pick the label we will use for you.

No. I’m saying, or trying to at least, that I understand their response, their anger and why they’re upset. Although I don’t agree with how they are supposedly going about it all. I also oppose the cartoons, if they had chosen to be abit more considerate then we wouldn't have this porblem in the first place.

There you are supporting terrorism again. Anytime you say 'well they should not have provoked the terrorists, and they would have been fine' you are outright supporting the terrorists actions. Period. That's how this works. If you side with the terrorists, you are supporting them.

Gosh, you misunderstanding me. Seriously, please quote where I have said I approve of terrorism acts.

Scroll up -- I just did -- from this very post.

Of course, that goes without saying.

Flesh wounds can’t be ignored, if you leave it, it gets worse..

A) we are not talking a literal flesh wound.

B) how can you be wounded by an image you are not exposed to?

[/quote]

you’re essentially saying if someone bullies you then ignore them, no you stand up for your beliefs, we at least have that right.

[/quote]

Not at all. I am saying if a book has a story that offends you, don't read it. If a movie offends you, don't watch it. If a cartoon offends you, don't pay for it.

You do not have a right not to be offended. You *DO* have a right to be safe from illegal physical attacks.

You are comparing apples to oranges here.

Oh and it was never me who threatened them in the first place.. most of your questions and confusion seems only answerable by the ones who sent the threats themselves. I mean I can’t reply to why they sent threats instead of letters, you need to ask them, it’s not my chosen method of confrontation.

My original question was why do you not openly cast out these people and distance yourselves from them. It is now why do you support them. An interesting follow up is how can you support them and then cry like little babies and get offended when people point out you support them.

Different definition, geez I wonder how you define innocence, God forbid you ever be put on a jury.

Not being guilty of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt.

Again, I agree murder shouldn’t be a consequence, but people are affected by different things, forgive me but you seem insensitive.

I'm not the one claiming a cartoon I don't even have to watch is the same as a fleshwound and justifies TERRORISM in response.

You’re really not understanding much of what’s being said, I’m not here to argue with you, you asking questions and I’m trying to answer them, but you already have set answers in your mind.

No, I have logic and common sense in my mind -- and I am not going to cast those aside to listen to your illogical answers. I am asking for realistic answers, not silly justifications and abuse of logical fallacies.

Don’t blames us for the low morals of others,

I don't. I blame you for defending them, supporting them, and ultimately encouraging them by giving them support and a sense of belonging.

to them showing these images is supposed to be funny and cool, well not if it hurts others. We clearly don’t adhere to their adaptation of ‘humour’.

Wait -- I thought we were talking about terrorists. I doubt they find murder funny and cool -- who are you talking about that has low morals?

We indisputably love our Prophet, seeing him portrayed in such a light doesn’t bode well with us. Once more, I say this not to defend acts of violence but to condemn the cartoons.

Go ahead and be offended -- but you should also be thanking them for helping you identify the disgusting members of your group you should be publically distancing yourself from.

I know your idea of terrorism, and no I don’t agree with any of it whatsoever. I’m NOT defending terrorism, I’m saying the media need to stop provoking responses from Muslim and start respecting our beliefs. I’m just repeating myself now..

In one sentence you say say you are not defending terrorism, but then go on and do just that. Read what you said slowly and carefully. Saying the terrorists are right is supporting them. Saying that the victims of terrorism need to just knuckle under and let the terrorists have their way is DEFENDING TERRORISM.

Those two groups are maybe sometimes imitated and made fun of, their beliefs aren’t insulted, they never talk about the torah or Abraham.

Bull****. I cannot think of a single more attacked group in america than homosexuals right now.

Right, so freedom of speech itself has limits, kinda defies the whole concept of ‘freedom’ – (the power to act or speak or think without externally imposed restraints).

Do I have to define everything? =P

No, just be realistic and logical. I am not promoting anarchy, I am promoting equal rights, and protecting the weak. The concept of free speech is a very well defined legal and moral term and the concept that criminal speech is not free has entire law libraries of precident.

And mate what’s with the pictures.. if I had one for ‘Can’t reply himself, so refers to images to define responses with images’, then I’d use it.

It amuses me to point out the silly use of logical fallacies. Why should I put any more effort refuting those logical fallacies than they did while parroting them out?

Besides, why take my word for it that it is a logical fallacy when it is very easy to identify them and see for yourselves?

Erm no I didn’t, and I’ve covered this in my response already, hope you understand it by now.

Sorry, it was pir_Rokhan that used the term 'naturally' -- but you continue to defend and support terrorism in the same sentence you pretend you don't.

Well then stop stereotyping and we won’t live up to it

*A joke - before that's blown out of proportion.

It might be a joke -- but it hits awefully close to home -- you are living up to the stereotype...

We’re attacked a bit more constructively.. the hijaab ban in France, Turkey..?


Honestly mate, I think it’s you who’s in a cave. Please, we are demonised SO much,

How can you not see why -- when YOU DEFEND COWARDLY ACTS OF TERRORISM?

I see Islamaphobia everywhere, I don’t even like using that term as it’s become a bit typical, but don’t know what other word to use for it. Don’t get me wrong, our situation could be MUCH worse, and I sincerely love living here, but we are facing prejudices at the moment.

Welcome to modern society -- where *EVERY* group has someone predjudice against them. Once you start acting like adults, the problem will go away, though.

I live here and communicate heavily with the young Muslim generation here, they’ll tell you the same thing, we feel like we’re constant targets.

Good thing you are not gay then.

Those groups are nowhere near attacked as much..

I'm sorry -- are you allowed to marry? Visit your spouse in the hospital? Inherit things from them? Adopt? Practice your life style as you choose?

Until you lose those rights, you can't even compare to modern homosexual couples.

What about a Holocaust? Going to go up and say you have it worse than the Jews?

Slavery and Africans? Hell, AIDS and africans?

dear lord.. Go to the UK, interview students in Universities, colleges and ask them what we have to deal with. Khair, I shouldn’t complain too much, situations can always be worse.

Recently many young Muslim males have been locked up for protesting in London, against the Gaza conflict. They weren’t violent, they apologised, the judges acknowledged that, their sentences were given to act as a ‘deterrent’.

Gee, I wonder why the judges would be worried about violent riots from muslim youths? I wonder if there is any precident of them blowing up over minor issues -- say a cartoon or two, and escalating it beyond reason.

No one to blame but yourselves for associating with and defending these people.

FOSIS/ISOC are being attacked for as one of the previous members was involved in the whole Detroit bombing incident. Consequently, they are giving details of Muslim students to the CIA, they’re not even a part of this bloody country, their a secret service in America! Now this article I do have, please take time to read it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...ieties-radical

Oh and since your living in the US I wouldn’t expect you’ve heard about the attacks on uni students in London, but maybe you’ve heard of the BNP.

If you really want me to, I could hunt down links for all these articles, how I wished I’d saved them all..

Not really, people wil interpret that teaching differently or maybe not fully comprehend the true meanings, thus they may get the ideology wrong.

So? To no-believers it doesn't matter if the terrorists have it right or wrong -- they are still religious extremists proforming terrorist acts -- and other religious crazies are supporting them for doing it.

Right or wrong religon-wise doesn't matter at all.

For such reasons, you go straight to the main source for the most precise representation. In our case the Quran is *supposed* to be what define Muslims and how they *should* act not how they do act.. Don't judge a book by it's cover.. don't judge Islam by it's Muslims, not every one of them is fully practising, so you can't be sure what the reasoning behind their actions are.

As I believe, Muslims aren’t perfect, but Islam is.

We can go into how wrong this is in another thread.

We can go on forever, quoting and replying to each other, I really hope I got my points across. I also agree with much of what Pir_Rokhan has said.

Your support of terrism is clear, do not worry.

[ozymandias]

But you are using double standards.


How do you define 'Freedom of speech' and to what extent? Didn't the patriotics act make it clear that it has a limit and an extent?

I am discussing both the universal human right laid out in the declaration of human rights, and in a slightly more broad sense free speech as practiced by pretty much all free countries.

They all place limits to protect people from criminal acts.

[Palwasha]

My original question was why do you not openly cast out these people and distance yourselves from them.

We try very hard to clear the whole misconception and we do openly cast them aside from us. They're a minority of people, most muslims do openly condemn them. I'm yet to visit a mosque or an Islamic gathering where terrorism is supported, encouraged or even welcomed. It's like a stain on us.

I’m not gonna bother replying to every individual quote anymore, I take the time to respond but your ears are closed. You’re misunderstanding everything I say, taking it all out of context and we’re not getting anywhere. (Feel free to define this with one of your pictures).

For the final time I’ll try and make it a wee bit clearer.. I do not support the response of death threats or anything of the sort, it was definitely over the top and uncalled for. However, I don’t believe Muslims should stay silent on the issue, they have the right to raise their voices in the matter, but in more civilised manner. At the same time, the cartoon drawings were stupid and childish - ‘‘ooh but it’s freedom of speech!’’ .. spare me please, it’s all double standards.

I don’t live in America! I don’t know the situation of gay people there, not something I tend to read into much either. We were talking about being attacked not suffering.. but please, let’s not start a competition on who’s felt the most pain, there’d be no point in going there.

I don’t support terrorism, but I do stand up for my beliefs. I know where I stand, so I don’t need to persuade you on that. Go ahead and label me as a sympathiser or as a terrorist supporter, (as you already have done), doesn't bother me much mate. 'Extremists' don't represent me, neither do I represent them.

You’ve already made up your mind, you don’t really need anyone to answer the question, you'll only try and refute it. Don’t really know why you bothered asking it in the first place to be honest.

Peace.

[Azmatullah]

Hey oozy, I have a question.

What on earth are you doing on a Pashtoon forum? You are not a Pashtoon from what i have gathered. If you really want answers join some Islamic forum, where you will be debated with properly. But from what i have seen so far, you are just here to provoke people and not interested in our views and feelings on the matter at all.

[Palwasha]

^ Ye but on a Islamic forum maybe he'd get the aswers he's looking for and I'm sure they could present a stronger arguement.

Result..

'South Park' parody of the Prophet Muhammed is censored following radical Islamists' warning

South Park's parody of the Prophet Muhammed has morphed into a parody of self-censorship.

The show's creators, Trey Parker and Matt Stone, came under fire after last week's 200th episode of the Comedy Central series featured the Islamic prophet dressed in a bear suit.

The duo received a "warning" on a radical Islamic website: "We have to warn Matt [Stone] and Trey [Parker] that what they are doing is stupid," a posting on revolutionmuslim.com read.

"They will probably end up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show," the site noted, referencing the Dutch filmmaker who was murdered in 2004 over a documentary he made that addressed violence against Muslim women.

On last night's episode, the prophet was referred to only with a "bleep" sound and his image was blocked out with the word "censored."

According to the "South Park" Web site, the studio added additional audio bleeps. Thursday afternoon, the duo released a statement in response to Comedy Central's decision to censor their show.

"In the 14 years we’ve been doing South Park we have never done a show that we couldn’t stand behind. We delivered our version of the show to Comedy Central and they made a determination to alter the episode. It wasn’t some meta-joke on our part. Comedy Central added the bleeps. In fact, Kyle’s customary final speech was about intimidation and fear. It didn’t mention Muhammad at all but it got bleeped too. We’ll be back next week with a whole new show about something completely different and we’ll see what happens to it."

Parker and Stone have parodied Muhammed before, first in 2001 and again in 2006, though Comedy Central censored the latter bit, which never aired.

[din]

well people really believe that if you start disrespecting a little your eventually going to slowly start doing it more and more.Islam and muslims dont want that.
and I see your talking alot about radicals..
radical means a fundamentalist..
and Islam has its own fundamentals and all muslims follow those fundamentals so basically your saying all muslims are radicals?

In Islam you cant kill Innocent people.so basically we don't even know what kind of people those are that you refer to as radicaals..

[pir_Rokhan]

Sure. When that happens, then we can discuss it then.

You have already terrorised the muslims by making fun of their revered personality.
You are using the terror [public humiliation of muslims in media ] by forcing them to accept your view of freedom of speech and terrorism [your target].This is terrorism.


.. what? I don't get this. How is a picture of a bear supposed to instill fear? is it a scary bear? A small child viewing the image?

Were those guys teaching public how to recognise a bear by showing them the picture of a bear or were they personifying the revered personality of Muslims?

What terrorism am I hiding? You keep trying to say I am hiding terrorism, but fail to point out a concrete example.

You want me to repeat.You use terror to instill fear in muslims that if they do not approve of your concept of free speech and do not consider humiliating act of presenting a revered person in the form of a bear as your right of free speech then the muslims would be alienated and humiliated publicly.This is terrorism.

Bull****. It might be disrespectful -- but the intent of portraying a bear costume instead of mohammed was *not* to cause others to do what the makers of South Park wanted due to fear. It was not an attempt to use terror to influence the actions of another group at all. Thus not terrorism.


Who gave you the right to judge on part of others.Something may be just disrespecting in your eyes but it might be a matter of life and death for others.Where have you learnt the science of quantifying emotional responses? Are you so naive not to understand that there could be multiple forms of terror? Social fear is more dangerous form of terror to influence a group. Sigmund Frued has base dhis whole argument on this fact when he says that conscious mind tries to intellectulise the desires of unconscious mind due to fear of society and hence give rational explanations or rationalises its desires to be acceptible to the society


If you are going to insist on calling anything you don't like 'terrorism' in order to justify atrocities, you have a serious problem.

-----Ditto as the last comment----

What the hell are you blabbering on about?

Terrorism is the use of terror to achieve goals. What do you find terrifying about a cartoon that you don't even have to watch -- to the point that you think death threats are the equivalent response?


I know and agree with this definition but what you are not able to understand is that you consider a cartoon of a revered person of a major demography across the globe same as the cartoon of Tom and Jerry.This is not the case.Be honest about your conscience.
I have already told you that as a response to such a terrifying act of humiliating a revered person , a death threat is not proper but what you should understand is that expecting no reaction from the followers of that person is also improper and an ignorance about mass psychology.


You made up an false analogy here -- a picture is not the same as murder, no matter how disrespectful the picture is. You have to be one hell of a coward that scared of a picture that it can control your actions through fear. I believe that you are deliberately ignoring the definitions of these terms and pretending to not have a clue what the word terrorism is, as you clearly are consistently misusing it.

You don't like a cartoon -- don't watch. There is no equivilent response to a threat of terrorism -- what do you think "Don't want to be murdered so don't... live?? don't... go outside?" Help me fill that one in a little bit, please

It is cultural relativism.Trust me Visit various cultures and you would know this fact.Fro example in most oriental cultures, they consider respect more valuable virtue than life.
In the old Indian civilisation ,they have a saying ,which means that:
The wealth has to be sacrificed for life and life has to be sacrificed for honor and respect.
In the Afghan culture,death is preferred over a disrespectful life.

So your argument that if you dont liek it dont see it absolutely rubbish.How can you disrespect me that too in public and that too not any of my personal habit or weakness but my concept of life and universe ,which I share with billions of other people and just tell me if you do not like to be humiliated then avoid watching my propaganda or avoid listening to my bull****.Get a god damned education.

[pir_Rokhan]

James

I think you got it much easily than Ozy will. It is a simple argument.

Criticise whatever you want using your freedom of speech but not in a provocative manner. Do it in a proper academic way, on a proper plateform and with the proper people. Using media for exercising the right of freedom of speech against the revered person of a certain failth is humiliating, insulting, disrespectful and provocative..

This is common sense.Jargon is not really needed to explain it.

[pir_Rokhan]

This is what I have been trying since last night. He mistakenly thinks I am a theist,while I am not though am not an athiest too.

[Master Khan]

I don't care what people said but insulting is not freedom of speech.
You can't just insult someones religion and then say "oh Its freedom speech".
And we said "Don't show our prophets and don't insult us" then DON'T.
you have no rights to use our belives and religion as comedy..thats not freedom of speech but its humiliating, insulting and disrespectful our religion and prophets.

[ozymandias]

We try very hard to clear the whole misconception and we do openly cast them aside from us.

Some might -- but not the majority of the people discussing this here.

They're a minority of people, most muslims do openly condemn them. I'm yet to visit a mosque or an Islamic gathering where terrorism is supported, encouraged or even welcomed. It's like a stain on us.

Whether it is open or not, you are clearly doing it. Quiet support, like that found here is still support.

I’m not gonna bother replying to every individual quote anymore, I take the time to respond but your ears are closed. You’re misunderstanding everything I say, taking it all out of context and we’re not getting anywhere.

I am not taking *ANYTHING* out of context. You say that people should just give the terrorists what they want, ergo you are supporting the terrorists. You may not wish to admit it, but you are doing just that.

(Feel free to define this with one of your pictures).

For the final time I’ll try and make it a wee bit clearer.. I do not support the response of death threats or anything of the sort, it was definitely over the top and uncalled for. However, I don’t believe Muslims should stay silent on the issue, they have the right to raise their voices in the matter, but in more civilised manner. At the same time, the cartoon drawings were stupid and childish - ‘‘ooh but it’s freedom of speech!’’ .. spare me please, it’s all double standards.

What's the double standard? I am saying everyone has exactly the same rights to free speech, and exactly the same rights to engage in, or be free from terrorism. No double standard.

I don’t live in America! I don’t know the situation of gay people there, not something I tend to read into much either. We were talking about being attacked not suffering.. but please, let’s not start a competition on who’s felt the most pain, there’d be no point in going there.

Right. Non-muslims are being attacked through terrorism, homosexuals are being attacked through laws and policies, and muslims are really getting off lightly. We agree, now lets move on.

I don’t support terrorism, but I do stand up for my beliefs. I know where I stand, so I don’t need to persuade you on that. Go ahead and label me as a sympathiser or as a terrorist supporter, (as you already have done), doesn't bother me much mate. 'Extremists' don't represent me, neither do I represent them.

You’ve already made up your mind, you don’t really need anyone to answer the question, you'll only try and refute it. Don’t really know why you bothered asking it in the first place to be honest.

Peace.

HEY! Look! You used the picture of Mohammed too!

I asked, expecting a real answer -- not terrorist support. I am going to hold out for real logic and real answers.

[ozymandias]

Hey oozy, I have a question.

What on earth are you doing on a Pashtoon forum? You are not a Pashtoon from what i have gathered. If you really want answers join some Islamic forum, where you will be debated with properly. But from what i have seen so far, you are just here to provoke people and not interested in our views and feelings on the matter at all.

Already answered at least twice.

[ozymandias]

Ya, but how can you not realize the fact that when you disrespect our prophet, you're intention is to make problems.

When did I ever say no one expected problems? That was pretty much the point -- exercise free speech and point out how absurd it is that this is even a problem.

Why cant we all live in peace and people leaving our religion alone? Is it that difficult? Really Ozy?

I'm sorry -- but the muslims making death threats are the ones that violated the peace with threats of terrorist actions. Until that point -- peace was maintained.