Manal and Alaa's bit bucket

I've enjoyed reading (and learning from) the discussion here, but I have one question: Why does everyone keep telling m4m to calm down?

I don't read Arabic, so I can't read his posts. It seems as if he's insulting people who are posting in favor of the cartoons/free speech/etc.?

If so, I have to say that is the funniest thing I've read all night - someone being scolded for insulting people who probably can't even read his insults...

...certainly funnier than any of those so-called cartoons!

Assalamu Alaikum to my dear brothers and sisters that feel so strongly as i about our Beloved Prophet(SAAWS)

and to 'alaa, whom i am thinking is either مسيحي or يهودي (كافر)?...

oh, and this is to المسيحي, اليهودي, and كافر

as far as the cartoons go, the insulting part is merely the fact that our Prophet(saaws) was put into a drawing(which has been done by persians so i hear) then what y'all have labled as insulting add to it.

as y'all may not know, we don't like the idea of pics too much, some ppl don't believe to have pics in their homes of people b/c jinns live in the eyes in a picture, and i don't know about you, but i don't want no jinn in my house(especially my eye) they are said to do some pretty mean junk...

so anyway, pics are controversial.

making a pic of Muhammad(saaws) is even worse, b/c we were told not to do so, but i agree with the kufar on the idea that they made the cartoons, and they will have to answer to Allah for it... and it isn't like they are forcing us to look at it... and i agree that half the pics sound like some Mohammed من Persia... you don't even know they mean our Prophet(saaws)...

but anyway, the wrong action was definately taken, danish muslims should have just written letters or set up meetings with the newspaper to stop it, before it turned into world news, causing 1.5+ ppl emotional pain and later physical pain, and maybe more emotional pain(by-product of death)

i don't think we need to boycott the danish, just the newspaper, come on ppl, this IS a big deal, but it isnt Denmark's fault, it is the newspaper's fault, and nobody wants free speech to be against the law, except maybe bush, but thats another story for another time

(yes, i am اّميركي)

Allah Hafiz Mariam Abdullah

أنا لا ادعى الالمام بالسينما الامريكية ككل لكن لى تعليق مرتبط بالرسومات إذا نظرنا للسخرية من الالمان أو الروس فى الافلام الامريكيه (ولا داعى للقول إن المقارنة لاتعقل) فإذا كنت غير قادر على إحترام أدميتك فى بلدك فأنت لن لن لن تستطيع على جعل الغير أن يفعل لك ذلك. عوده الى الالمان: لم يختار الشعب الالمانى المقاطعة (وهو قادر إذ أنه يملك صناعة) لكنة إختار الاعتزاز بالنفس والعمل. لم أشاهد فى حياتى سوى فيلم وحيد ينصف الشعب الروسى (إذ أننى أهوى الافلام الامريكيه) لكننى قرأت أدب روسى واستطيع أن أوكد أن روسيا لن لن لن تقاطع لكنها ستجعل العالم المتمدن يحترمها. أما اليهود (بعد المحرقة) ولا أجادل فى العدد المحروق (بالمناسبة هوا عدد الغرقى بتوع عبارة السلام 98 كام إنسان) أقاموا دوله , عنصرية: نعم لكنها لا تقل عن عنصرية الامن المركزى فى ميدان مصطفى محمود. إستعمارية: أكيد لكن ماذا عن هوية مزارع شبعا (بجد أنا باسأل). أعزائى المقاطعيين: ندائى لكم أن تقاطعوا السلبية فى بلادكم وانا على يقين أن الاخرون سيحترموننا.

hi, just ive created a blog specfically for the cartoons incase copies start vanishing off the net due to fachist intervention.

thanks

cartoonz

http://prophetmohammedcartoons.blogspot.com/

Under the pretext "freedom of press," my beloved prophet, peace be upon him, was being mocked 1,400 years after his death. What did he do wrong to be treated this way? Was it his call for humanity to worship the one God and abandon idol worshipping? Was it Islam's message that makes human beings accountable for their deeds, good or bad? Was it his call to stand for justice, compassion and equality? Freedom of press should be respected, and Muslims should be the first ones to protect and seek this right. However, freedom comes with responsibility, sensitivity and fairness. As much as you are not free to inflict physical harm on someone as a way expression, you should not inflict an emotional assault on 1.5 billion people and shield yourself behind the freedom of press. To me, Islam is the best way of life, and Muhammad is the best role model for humans. I share these feelings with 1.5 billion Muslims -- men and women, white and black, Arabs and Asians, professionals and illiterates, young and old, all over the globe. I do agree that, as was said after 9/11, Islam is a religion of peace hijacked by the terrorists. This is the feeling of the majority of Muslims. However, the war on terrorism is perceived as a war on Islam and Muslims. Islamophobia is spreading all over the Western world and hate crimes against Muslims are on the rise. Muslim masses feel that they are attacked not only by the West but also by their own pro-Western governments. At a time when Muslim detainees are stripped naked and tortured in Abu Ghraib, when Muslim women are prohibited from wearing hijabs in France, a Danish newspaper becomes the center of attention by publishing cartoons attacking the prophet of Islam. What is the cartoonists' motive? Who is benefiting from publishing them? At a time when sages across the world are desperate to build bridges of understanding, a detonator for a clash of civilizations comes from the north. Many Muslims are very emotional by nature. When they love, they would give everything, and when they hate, they turn into volcanoes of anger. Burning buildings, kidnapping people or hurting them is unacceptable under Islamic teachings. "You do not do evil to those who do evil to you, but you deal with them with forgiveness and kindness," the prophet once taught his companions. The Quran tells the prophet to "show forgiveness, speak for justice and avoid the ignorant." These are the teachings Muslims should follow as they express justifiable concern about the publication of the Danish cartoons. This unfortunate episode can be used as a learning opportunity for people of all faiths who sincerely want to know more about Islam and Muslims. It can also be viewed as a "teaching moment" for Muslims who want to exemplify the prophet's teachings through the example of their good character and dignified behavior in the face of provocation and abuse. As the Quran says: "It may well be that God will bring about love (and friendship) between you and those with whom you are now at odds."

Salam all.

After writing an rather longish article on my thoughts about the prophet Muhammad cartoon controversy, I found this article by Alaa.

So, thought I would paste a reference here.

The most talked about cartoon, the one picturing Mohammed with a bomb in his turban, is by a lot people(also Danes) frowned upon. Personally I don't find it degrading to Muslims, but that is related to what I see in the drawing.

As explained by Thomas, stereotypes are very common here in Denmark when it comes to satiric drawings. They are used to simplify complex situations and provoke the viewer to think and find his/her own opinion or at least remind us of how we feel. I see this very controversial drawing trying to communicate the question: "Is Islam the same as terrorism just because some fanatics blow them selves up in the name of The Great Prophet or Allah?" We in the western world is bombarded with pictures of fanatic Muslims doing all kind of crazy things in the name of Allah, I do not even know where to start, but is that the same as Islam being fundamentally evil? I and everyone I know will say no but some of us need this picture among other things to provoke and remind us of that. This might sound backwards, but this is how we sometimes debate and communicate in my country. Sometimes it requires a lot from the viewer and artists are often misinterpreted locally so of cause they are misinterpreted internationally.

I don’t know the real intension behind the drawing and it might be what we all are afraid of(hate), but remember that drawings like these are meant to be interpreted and there is rarely any singular truth in art(not that the drawing is very well made). Often the response or feeling awoken in the viewer tells more of the viewer than the art itself.

This is my opinion on this single drawing and not the whole controversy, which I find too confusing at this moment. Denmark being the root of so much evil??? Anyone who has any contact with Danes or Denmark must be asking the same question!

لعنه على الغرب قاقبتاً وعلى الدنمارك اكلة لحم الخنزير بل هم في الحقيقه هم خنازير ماذا فعل الرسول العظم لكم صلى الله عليه وسلم وعى اله بيته الطيبين الطاهرين

Hello everyone,

I was actually in Denmark when the paper came out, and I read it back then. I remember thinking, that if they wanted to help finding illustrations for that children's book (explaining the islam to children in Denmark, which in fact is contribuing to mutual understanding), why then didn't they ask for such illustrations. But everything beyond is speculation. Why don't we start to realize that we have more in common, than what seperates us. I am not saying that understanding is easy, and as a woman I can sometimes wonder about women's position in islamic countries even be offended by some of the things I see, hear and read, still I wouldn't impose my view. I may not agree, or approve of it but I respect the fact that not everyone is having it my way. To finish this off: I embrace this forum as a positive way to front the problem. I believe in the next generations and I hope we will learn from the mistakes our parents might have made.

Peace Lise

Dear Alaa, dear forum readers,

There seems to be a lot of misunderstandings on both sides of the "conflict", so i'd like to contribute to a better understanding of the western culture in relation to those caricatures:

- The history of most every western european country is strongly marked by the emancipation of the people against feudalism and monarchy _and_ against the political influence of (christian) religion, which was a pillar of the feudal and royal power and oppressiveness.

- The result is a democratic system where (among other points that don't relate that much with these caricatures) freedom, equality and secularity are key principles. Freedom includes liberty of speech and expression. Thus, the people control the state, the state is not allowed to control the people or the media.

- religion is a priori not allowed to have any direct power in this democratic structure. Besides the role played by (christian) religion before democracy could prevail, this is because

a) there had been many bloody religion wars not only outside europe, but also and expecially inside (especially between catholic and protestant christians), and that was a threat to any stability and peace. And

b) every religion has its own rules which are usually mutually exclusive and incompatible, so the only viable solution to allow for a peaceful coexistence of many religions was a completely secular state where no religion has the right to enforce its rules upon the people (especially, those who believe in another religion or no religion at all). That doesn't mean that the state is anti-religious, but it does mean that religion is considered to be a private thing that everyone is allowed to follow, but no one is allowed to force upon others. thus the rules of every religion are restricted to, at most, its own believers.

- While there is in Europe, a minority who dislikes people of other countries, religion, colour or sexual orientation, discrimination is widely frowned upon. As a matter of fact, the historical wound about the nazis deporting and killing jews, people of other religions, gay people, people of certain races, handicapped people and people who spoke up against the non-democratic nazi system led most european countries to have a system that doesn't tolerate discrimination and intolerance.

- So how come the states didn't intervene against the caricatures, then? some may ask. The thing is: a) the caricatures were much less critical or insulting than those published regularly about, say, christian religious figures and symbols (and no one protests about those). b) criticism and humour about religions explicitely falls under the liberty of free speech (remember it was criticism of religion and feudalism that allowed democracies to come up in the first place). As a matter of fact, if any christian church dared to question liberty of expression for the caricatures about christian figures and symbols (which they don't), you can be assured that there would be a democratic uproar against it. Compared to that, there's a much less severe criticism against muslim demands to restrict liberty of expression. Besides, humor and criticism, including the necessity to also be able to accept jokes and criticism about oneself, are an integral part of the european cultural identity.

- Another logical misunderstanding is when radical muslims demand excuses from the danish government. Besides the fact that all the caricatures lasting on for years about christians and jews in newspapers in arab countries make that criticism sound quite ridiculous, the thing is: what exactly did that government do that would have to be excused? here's what: it did not infringe against its own democratic rules and principles in order to apply the rules of a religion instead and restrict freedom of expression. One can hardly criticize the government for that. If they had tried, the people would rightfully have impeached that government for breaking basic rules of any secular democracy.

- So what about the newspapers then? The initial newspaper might have had some latent anti-immigrant tendencies (note that even if that was the case, it wouldn't even be about religion), but the others who reprinted the caricatures certainly did not in any way. they did it because they saw it as a necessary step to prevent a restriction of the liberty of expression and of the media. Remember: the people had to fight against one religion's influence in order to have democratic liberties. They don't want to lose that to any religion.

-Again: this is nothing anti-islamic or anti-muslim. It's just that no religion has any right to restrict democratic liberties and that the newspapers wanted to clearly draw that lign and protect their democratic rights, just as they did against the christian religion.

- So what's happenning now? Now people in Europe see that their flags and embassies are burnt and their people killed by people who do this in the name of the islam. they see that it's not just a small minority following this uproar, but real masses of people. So the image in Europe of islam and muslims is definitely suffering of this.

-It seems absolutely terrifying that a stupid caricature that depicts a relationship between islam and terrorism would seem to be confirmed by the very people who act in protest against the caricature itself (ouch!) by burning and killing innocent people who just happen to have the same nationality as some newspaper. how dumb.

-The minority far right-wing parties trying to make resentments against immigrants (and thus also against muslims) are happy to find an easy "confirmation" of their claim and are slowly gaining ground because of this shit. Similarly, the integrist islamists who want a war of cultures against the western world are gaining of this whole shit.

-Those who will suffer from all this are all the moderate and peaceful muslims who will have to more clearly show that they have nothing to do with those radical extremists which are burning and killing.

- So to sum it up: There is (still) no wide anti-islamic tendency in Europe (just a small far-right minority). People in Europe just don't want their democratic and secular order to be threatened by any religion. But with every human killed in the name of islam, every burned flag or embassy, every act of terrorism in the name of islam, the currently small percentage associating islam with these terrible acts quickly increases.

- The time has come for all moderate and peace-loving muslims to speak up, take distance from the extremists doing those violent things and make clear that islam doesn't stand for violence but for peace. That voice is clearly too weak now and the only loud voice claiming to represent islam right now in Europe is the voice of those who want to force the rules of their very own religious beliefs upon all people and upon the now secular state.

All of this was just an accident waiting to happend, the clash of two cultures. The 12 cartoons gave the muslim world an legit reason to vent their anger against the western world. The fact that it all started in Denmark made it much more easy for muslims to get angry at a small country which has limited power on the political scene. Usa has several times pushed the muslims boundaries (the way people was/are treated at guantanomo bay), but has'nt experienced the same rage and consequences from the arabic world. This is beyond the 12 cartoons, but they have been the ignition to vent anger against the west. Embassies was burned down because people THOUGHT! that the danes were burning the koran in Denmark, but they did'nt, it was just rumors. Much false information has been given to the arabic world about Denmark, the burning of korans, that people in Denmark are racist and hate muslims and so on. All wrong.

And I see no reason for the prime minister of Denmark to give an apology for the newspapers actions. That is totally up for the newspaper to do. They printed it and therefor have the responsibility. It might be hard for the arabic world to understand our world, but religion is seperated from the government in the west and newspapers are not controlled by the governments, which is why sitations like this occur and in the end, with the free press it is much harder for the government to blindside the civilians and neglect the democracy. I appreciate democracy and free speech, it makes it much easier to have an dialogue under these premises, which are now taking place in Denmark, In a civilized maner.

The arabic world see all of this as an attack on Islam, but I see it as a lack of understanding of an different culture. Insteed of taking the discussion and perhaps teach the western world about the Islamic religion, the arabic world are only reinforcing the perception the western world has of Islam, as an violent religion. I just don't understand why violence has to be the way ahead for so many people, the threats on Denmark and its people and against other countries too. Boycuts makes more sense, but not violence. If you have an case, don't be ignorant and hurt yourselves a long the way, because that's what the muslims are doing right now.

It is understandable that all longs for happiness not for suffering, in depth even the small insects. If one can't give happiness to others why think of harming others? For oneself can't bear the prick of needle, why think of chopping others head? If one cannot tolerate to see the mere cartoon image, why the Talibans destroyed Bamiyan Buddha, and many more historically! what was the re-action of world Buddhist community at that time? Nothing out of anger and hatred! because we are taught to tolerate and feel compassionate to the ignorant ones. Learn the way of tolerance and compassion, as the fire of hatred and anger will burn oneself, there is nothing to gain by following the views of radical fools.

Be a wiser being, learn to live in Peace and Harmony!

As a fervent muslim believer, I did not find anything offensive about the cartoons. They are cartoons at the end of the day. Let's put things in perspectives. I was ashamed as a muslim when muslim extremists killed so many innocent lives sept11 and in london.

I think many people are being childish and overeacting but at the same time the immensense sensitivity of the issue should have been taken into consideration before releasing the cartoons.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1703501,00.html

Gwladys Fouché Monday February 6, 2006

Jyllands-Posten, the Danish newspaper that first published the cartoons of the prophet Muhammad that have caused a storm of protest throughout the Islamic world, refused to run drawings lampooning Jesus Christ, it has emerged today.

The Danish daily turned down the cartoons of Christ three years ago, on the grounds that they could be offensive to readers and were not funny.

In April 2003, Danish illustrator Christoffer Zieler submitted a series of unsolicited cartoons dealing with the resurrection of Christ to Jyllands-Posten.

( ( إِنَّا كَفَيْنَاكَ الْمُسْتَهْزِئِينَ ) ) بقلم/عز الدين محمود حامد

إن الحمد لله وحده و الصلاة والسلام على من لا نبى بعده .. و بعد فقد إستهللت مقالتى بعنوان إقتبسته من الآية الكريمة 95 من سورة الحجر والتى يوجه رب العزة الخطاب فيها لنبيه صلى الله عليه و سلم أن بك بإهلاكنا كلا منهم بآفة وهم الوليد بن المغيرة والعاصي بن وائل وعدي بن قيس والأسود بن عبد المطلب والأسود بن عبد يغوث . ففى الآونة الأخيرة ظهرت تخرسات على نبى الرحمة (ص) و تطاول من بعض الصحف الأجنبية و بعض الشخصيات على مختلف جنسياتهم و إنتماءاتهم الدينية المتطرفة مما ألهب قلوب المسلمين و ضاقت نفوسهم غيرة على حبيبهم و نبيهم و بدأ البعض يطالب بالثأر و الرد و المقاطعة وخلافه .

و إننى من منطلق إيمانى و يقينى بالله و رسوله (ص) أقول إن رسول الله (ص) كبحر مترامى الأطراف و لا يدكرك أحد من البشر منتهاه ومثل هؤلاء الذين تطاولوا على ذاته (ص) كمن يتفل فى هذا البحر و لن يستطيعوا أن ينالوا من طهارة و قدسية و عظمة هذا البحر أبدا مهما أتوا من قوة و بأس وسنرى فيهم عبرة قريبة كما سبق و رآى السابقين هلاك المستهزئين الذين إجترؤا على رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم .

إن مثلى و مثلك ياحبيبى يارسول الله كرجل تائه بصحراء جرداء لا زرع بها ولا ماء فلما جن عليه الليل و إنقطع به الرجاء بزغ القمر بنوره فأهتدى به حتى وصل إلى الديار حيث الأمان و الإطمئنان و السلامة من كل بلية فراح يقول ماذا أقول لك أيها القمر أأقول نورك الله كيف و قد نورك .. أقول جملك الله كيف و قد جملك .. أقول رفعك الله كيف و قد رفعك وأنت ياحبيبى يارسول فيك أكثر من كل هذه الصفات فقد أثنى عليك المولى عز و جل فى كتابه الكريم فقال تعالى { يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ قَدْ جَاءكُم بُرْهَانٌ مِّن رَّبِّكُمْ وَأَنزَلْنَا إِلَيْكُمْ نُوراً مُّبِيناً } النساء 174 فالبرهان أى الحجة هو النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم { وأنزلنا إليكم نورا مبينا } مبينا وهو القرآن وقال { يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ قَدْ جَاءكُمْ رَسُولُنَا يُبَيِّنُ لَكُمْ كَثِيراً مِّمَّا كُنتُمْ تُخْفُونَ مِنَ الْكِتَابِ وَيَعْفُو عَن كَثِيرٍ قَدْ جَاءكُم مِّنَ اللّهِ نُورٌ وَكِتَابٌ مُّبِينٌ }المائدة15 (يا أهل الكتاب ) اليهود والنصارى (قد جاءكم رسولنا) محمد (يبين لكم كثيرا مما كنتم تخفون) تكتمون (من الكتاب) التوراة والإنجيل كآية الرجم وصفته (ويعفو عن كثير) من ذلك فلا يبينه إذا لم يكن فيه مصلحة إلا افتضاحكم (قد جاءكم من الله نور) هو النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم (وكتاب) قرآن (مبين) بين ظاهر و قال { يُرِيدُونَ أَن يُطْفِؤُواْ نُورَ اللّهِ بِأَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَيَأْبَى اللّهُ إِلاَّ أَن يُتِمَّ نُورَهُ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ الْكَافِرُونَ } التوبة 32 و قال تعالى {وَرَفَعْنَا لَكَ ذِكْرَكَ } الشرح4 بأن تذكر مع ذكري في الأذان والإقامة والتشهد والخطبة وغيرها فإذا تصورنا كم آذان و إقامة و تشهد و صلوات خلال اليوم على وجه البسيطة لعلمنا أن ذكر رسول الله (ص) لا ينقطع أبدا و تلك شهادة من الله عز و جل لم يؤتى مثلها أحد فقال عز من قائل { تِلْكَ آيَاتُ اللّهِ نَتْلُوهَا عَلَيْكَ بِالْحَقِّ وَإِنَّكَ لَمِنَ الْمُرْسَلِينَ } البقرة252 (تلك) هذه الآيات (آيات الله نتلوها) نقصها (عليك) يا محمد (بالحق) بالصدق (وإنك لمن المرسلين) التأكيد بإن وغيرها رداً لقول الكفار له لست مرسلا وقال سبحانه {وَإِنَّكَ لَتُلَقَّى الْقُرْآنَ مِن لَّدُنْ حَكِيمٍ عَلِيمٍ }النمل6 (وإنك) خطاب للنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم (لتلقى القرآن) يلقى عليك بشدة (من لدن) من عند (حكيم عليم) في ذلك توضيح لمكانة رسول الله (ص) فقال سبحانه { وَكَذَلِكَ أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَيْكَ رُوحاً مِّنْ أَمْرِنَا مَا كُنتَ تَدْرِي مَا الْكِتَابُ وَلَا الْإِيمَانُ وَلَكِن جَعَلْنَاهُ نُوراً نَّهْدِي بِهِ مَنْ نَّشَاء مِنْ عِبَادِنَا وَإِنَّكَ لَتَهْدِي إِلَى صِرَاطٍ مُّسْتَقِيمٍ } الشورى52 (وكذلك) مثل إيحائنا إلى غيرك من الرسل (أوحينا إليك) يا محمد (روحا) هو القرآن به تحيا القلوب (من أمرنا) الذي نوحيه إليك (ما كنت تدري) تعرف قبل الوحي إليك (ما الكتاب) القرآن (ولا الإيمان) أي شرائعه ومعالمه والنفي معلق للفعل عن العمل وما بعده سد مسد المفعولين (ولكن جعلناه) الروح أو الكتاب (نورا نهدي به من نشاء من عبادنا وإنك لتهدي) تدعو بالوحي إليك (إلى صراط) طريق (مستقيم) دين الإسلام ثم يمدح المولى عز و جل نبيه (ص) بأعظم مديح فقال سبحانه { وَإِنَّكَ لَعَلى خُلُقٍ عَظِيمٍ } القلم4 فإهدأ بالا أخى المسلم و قر عينا بنبيك (ص) لتكن ممن قال الله تعالى فيهم { وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ وَآمَنُوا بِمَا نُزِّلَ عَلَى مُحَمَّدٍ وَهُوَ الْحَقُّ مِن رَّبِّهِمْ كَفَّرَ عَنْهُمْ سَيِّئَاتِهِمْ وَأَصْلَحَ بَالَهُمْ } محمد2 (والذين آمنوا) أي الأنصار وغيرهم (وعملوا الصالحات وآمنوا بما نزل على محمد) القرآن (وهو الحق من ربهم كفر عنهم) غفر لهم (سيئاتهم وأصلح بالهم) حالهم فلا يعصونه . صلى الله عليك ياسيدى ياعلم الهدى و رزقنا شفاعتك و جوارك بالجنة و سقانا بيدك الشريفة من حوضك الشريف شربة مريئة هنيئة لا نظمأ بعدها أبدا .. آمين .. آمين .. آمين

علي فكرة يا جماعة علاء بيقول كلمة حق يراد بها باطل هو بيتكلم عن حرية الراي في الدنمارك اللي من غير حدود طب اوكي انا معاك فعلا هما شعب ديمقراطي جدا وحرية التعبير عندة عالية لكن انا دلوقتي بتكلم عن اهانة الحكومة الدنماركية وجهتها للنبي بتاعي وبالتبعية وجهتها لكل المسلمين فاظن بالمنطق بتاعك دلوقتي انا من حقي اتظاهر واحرق علم الدنمارك واحرق الدنمارك نفسها واقاطع والعن واسبلهم الدين واسبلك الدين انت كمان لاني انا حر اعمل اللي انا عايزة وقت ما احب اعملة انا حر حرية مطلقة وهو دة اللي انت عايزة مش كدة

لا يا اسطي علاء انت فاهم الحرية غلط

وعموما احنا كسلمين وتحت اي مسمي انت تختارة هنعمل كل اللي ربنا يقدرنا علية عشان ندافع عن رسولنا وعن عقيدتنا

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

دي أول مرة أكتب فيها تعليق على البلوج دا الموضوع يهمني جدا

1. أول حاجة من الهبل الاعتقاد بأن وجود مقدسات لا يمكن الاقتراب منها يضر بحرية التعبير فالدنماركي الذر صور النبي محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم لا يستطيع أن يصور شارون أو المحرقة
2. تاني حاجة بقا الاعتقاد السائد بأن الغرب عندهم حرية التعبير 100 في المية غير صحيح لانهم مايقدروش ييجوا جنب اليهود
3. ثالثا إننا يكون عندنا مقدسات دي مش حاجة وحشة ولا عيب ولا تدل على إننا متخلفين فالبوذيين عندهم بوذا واليهود عندهم أكم من المقدسات الباطلة اللي محدش يقدر ييجي جنبها
4. رابعا ودا الاهم أنا ضد نشر الرسوم دي وتداولها فهمها آه لكن تداولها لا لان دا هيدي الرسام أكتر من حقه في الشهرة والفلوس طبعا

وأنا بقا متشدد جدا ومتعصب وإرهابي وبدعو إلى مقاطعة جميع المنتجات الدنماركية والنرويجية والامريكية لان ببساطة وبعيدا عن صور الاساءة إلى خير البشر كفايانا بقا إتكال عليهم وإذا كانت دي إمكانياتنا نعيش على قدها ومش لازم فشخرة على الفاضي

أيوا أنا مع المقاطعة

ومع اللي بيحصل دلوقتي من غير عنف لان دا هيؤدي إلى حاجة حلوة قوي اسمها الحوار

Please, please seek to understand before you get carried away with your discussion. E3kal. Unfortunately, you misinterpret many discussions (and go in uncontrollable insult fits) because your English is WEAK.

So calm down, respect people's opinions, breathe, ok, breathe again. Now think and reply.

As Alaa told you many times, go ahead and boycott, that's your right but please relax. Using a public forums like this to insult people and their wives is unecessary. So one more time, Relax

Thank you and I hope you feel better.

ش فارقة معايا كتير نقاطع أو لا نقاطع, نشجب أو ندين, بس نفسي اعرف .. بلاش من ناحية دينية, طيب من ناحية قومية أو عروبية, بزمتكم مش حاجة تفقع البيضان إن الرسومات دي بتجمع و بتلخص القومية الشرق أوسطية كلها في نمط أو قالب واحد و أهبل:

لو شفتم الصور حتلاقوا الملابس خليط بين الزي الهندي و الافغاني و المملوكي و العثماني و شكل الرسامين متأثرين بشكل أونكل (بن لادن) بتاع ال جيمز و رسائله المصورة في قناة الجزيرة مع أونكل (أيمن الظواهري) و بتوع طالبان و الجماعة اللي بتخطف الأجانب في العراق..

لو كانوا عملوا الكاركاتيرات دي قبل أحداث سبتمبر, كنت حتلاقي يمكن الزي الخليجي من غترة و دشداشة كممثل للزي الإسلامي, زي الشخصيات العربية اللي كانوا بيطلعوها في الأفلام الامريكية في السبعينات و الثمانينات, كنت تشوف العربي لابس الغترة و العباية و نضارة سودا و بيلعب قمار في لاس فيجاس.. يعني حتى ولاد المتناكة اللي رسموا ما تعبوش نفسهم في البحث عن الشكل الذي كانت تبدو عليه الملابس في (الجزيرة العربية) قبل 1400 سنة, و ده على أساس إن الرسوم في الاصل كانت مصنوعة لتنشر في كتاب للأطفال يتحدث عن النبي محمد.. http://yakhya7a.blogspot.com/2006/02/blog-post.html

سؤال بمناسبة حرية التعبير في الدنمارك:

هل يمكن نشر هذه النكتة في يولانس بوستن؟

"ما هو الفرق بين البيتزا و اليهودي؟"

ج: البيتزا لا تصدر صوتاً حين توضع في الفرن, بينما اليهودي يصدر صوتاً عالياً داخل الفرن النازي..

بعيدا عن الشتايم و اللغه المتدنيه الي بيستخدمها البعض هنا و بيضطروا الواحد يستخدمها عشان يرد اذا كان يا علاء الرسومات مش مقصود بيها الرسول برغم انها نشرت في اطار مسابقه للرسومات الرسول ليه الحكومه الدانماركبه موضحتشي ده

مجهود جميل ياعلاء.. كتير جدا بيجعجعوا من غير ما يشوفوا الكاريكاتور .. الاخ اللي قال سبيلبرج اتحط في دماغ اليخود لانه انكر المحرقه يروح يتفرج على الفيلم الاول بعدين يتكلم ... صباح الفذلكه اللي من غير علم .. بجد نرفزتني

خسارة ..أنا كنت فاكرك عقلت،مفيش فايدة

العيب علينا احنا علشان بتصرفاتنا و تعاملتنا التي لا تمت للاسلام بصلة سمحتلهم انهم يعملوا كدة، فلازم كل واحد مسلم يراجع نفسه لانه دعاية للاسلام و المسلمين.

Well ya Alaa I found the newspaper page on the internet that contains the comics and I am afraid there is no mistake that they meant prophet Mohamed "PBUH" in fact I translated what is written in title "Muhammeds ansigt" and it is "Muhammed's face ,the rest I can't translate because it is scan, I can't see it you can interpret the meaning as you want but remember it was competition made to make fun of the prophet Mohamed "PBUH" tha danes can apologize as they want yet it is useless with out the newspaper's apology It is very strange when no journalist in Europe can open his mouth about the holocaust yet it is freedom of press when they make fun and offend our prophet "I am not speaking about antisemitism thing but it is a reality

Free speech is a wonderful thing. As a Canadian, I enjoy the right to express myself as I like; at the same time, I'm proud that my nation has 'hate speech' laws as well. I'm not saying the cartoons spring from hatred, however. Bad judgement, though, for sure.

I've stayed in Egypt 4 times over the last 5 years (total time 16 months), and enjoyed being accepted by Muslims who showed respect for my faith (I'm a practising Catholic). I know that depicting Mohammed is not acceptable to many (most) Muslims, despite Persian and other images of him from the past. What is to be gained by showing the Prophet of Islam in the first place, let alone as a human bomb with a lit fuse? Humour's great.... But who picks the subjects? And how about some respect along with the jokes?

-- Peace --

معلش بقى

احنا مش حانناقش تفاصيل الرسومات وما تعنية

القضية ان الغرب عموما منافق

يخاف ما يختشيش

لما مجموعة من الوثنيين , كانوا يعبدوا "قضيب الرجل" دخلوا الديانة اليهودية واسسوا دولة قوية كانت الند للبيزنطيين من ناحية و الخلافة الاسلامية فى بغداد من ناحية اخرى

لم يكن هناك ما يشغل بال الغرب سوى كيف يخطبون ود تلك الدولة " دولة الخزار" والتى كانت تقع على الحدود الجنوبية لروسيا , والحدود الشمالية للمسلمين

وعندما قويت روسيا و ملت اسلوب البلطجة المتبع معها , هاجمتهم و ازالت تلك الدولة , لم يجد اهلها سوى شرق اوربا ليهاجروا اليها, وانتشر الجيتو اليهودى فى اوربا , واحتفظوا بلغتهم "اليادش"

المهم ان هؤلاء اليهود الذين من اصل اسيوى اساسا , من نسل يافث بن نوح كانوا الاساس لليهود الاشكناز

هم نفسهم الذين يقودون اسرائيل الان

وهم ايضا الذين وضعوا قواعد وهم معادات السامية

وهم لا ينتمون الى الساميين باى صلة.

لو واحد من(العرب) الساميين الحقيقيين كتب او تكلم فى حق هؤلاء لقامت اوربا واهتز ضميرها , ووضعت ذلك السامى تحت نيران الهجوم

يا سادة

اوربا يجتاحها جهل بالتاريخ

ونفاق سياسى

ادرسوا تاريخكم لتعلموا الحقيقة

انا مش مع قصة ان معاداة السامية تختلف عن اللي حصل، لان هما وجهة نظرهم ان حرية التعبير عندهم بتخلي مفيش خطوط حمراء. الكلام دا المفروض ينطبق على أي موضوع، يعني مش فارقة قوي إن احنا مش عايزين حد يتكلم عن الرسول صلى الله عليه و سلم و اليهود زعلانين من التشكيك في الهولوكوست. المفروض يقدروا يتكلموا في الموضوعين مش واحد أه و واحد لأ.

Dear Alaa, RESPECT man. It's good that you got someone from the Denmark to write about this. I totally agreee that some of the cartoons are offensive, and never the less, religion and belief is not something of any persons that can freely be mocked or made fun off (under any circumstances), there should be a minimum ammount of respect and consideration to other people. But hey, Denmark is the fairytale land. They can just make fun of their Queen and Christ as well. This is the same in Italy, Germany and even France. Having been in Denmark almost every year for the past 15 years, I would like you to note that Danes respect everyone, and every religion. Danes are the calmest people one can ever imagine, and they would never like to you have any clash or problem with a single person. I know this, because I have lived with them. Regarding the industry and export part... This part you are wrong :P trust me. Tomas, nicely said in your first email. It's the message that had to come accross from a Dane. Tak. Anonymous, nicely said.

- J

so my score is

• 2 cartoons not trying to be offensive or insulting or even make a statement, they are just drawings of the prophet (not offensive IMO)
• 2 cartoons that actually mock the paper and criticize the whole thing (not offensive)
• 1 cartoon making a statement about fear limiting freedom of speech done without insulting anyone, given the death threats that came from fringe lunatic muslims I can see how that fear could be very real (not offensive)
• 2 cartoons trying to be funny by using elements from common stereotypes, I don't believe the artists intended any harm but I can see how they could be offensive (they're stereotypes after all)
• 2 cartoons I don't understand
• 3 very cartoons intended to be offensive (or if you agree with tomas then only 2)

not that it makes any difference to me, I believe in absolute freedom of speech, even hate speech is ok by me. but who cares about my opinion.

مع كل الاحترام لرؤيتك أو رؤية صديقك لهذة الصور تبقي عدة حقائق وهي:

1. هذة الصور أرسلت الي الصحيفة ضمن مسابقةأعلنت عنها لرسم النبي (صلعم)فلا مجال هنا للقول بأن المرسوم هنا هو أي شخص مسلم بلحية وبشرة داكنة ..لا ياسيدي المقصود هو الرسول و النيل من شخصه الكريم.
2. الرسم الثاني هو لشخص ذو قرون (لعنة الله علي من رسمها)والمقصود منها واضح لا يحتاج الي تبريرات بهالة أو غيره...
3. الرسم الخامس يحمل الاستهزاء و السخرية من المسلمين وعقيدتهم و رسولهم انظر الي هؤلاء الذاهبين الي السماء بملابس مقطوعة أملهم في الجنة و في العذاري لينبري لهم نبيهم بأن الحور العين قد نفذوا.....ما المقصود يا تري غير نبي مخادع و مسلمين جاهلين (هل هناك تفسير أخر؟؟؟
4. الناس اللي في أوروبا رغم احترامنا لكثير منهم و معظمهم مش في دماغه لا مسلمين و لا رسول و لا أي شيء كونهم يعيشون للحياة الدنيا فقط....الا انهم بيخافوا و ما يختشوش ....و الا قل لي بربك لماذا يبول الواحد منهم في سرواله اذا أشير له بأنه ضد السامية و تعتذر الحكومات و الافراد و تختفي هنا الحريات كلهاطالما الحكاية فيها اسرائيلأو اليهود...بينما لم يبدأ التراجع و الكلام عن الاعتذار للأمة الاسلاميةالا عندما بدأت المقاطعة تؤثر في الاقتصاد.
5. نحن لم نتجني عليهم في شيء فقط استعملنا (حريتنا) في ألا نشتري منهم...."ثم يا سيدي اذا كنا احنا ناس مش محترمين و جهلة و ضالين و ارهابيين و نبينا بيعلمنا الارهاب عايزين يبيعوا أو يشتروا منا ليه؟؟؟"

مع خالص تقديري لمجهودك في هذة الصفحة و احنا ناس متفتحين و نتكلم في كل حاجة و لكن لا نسمح تحت أي ظروف و لأي حد بالتطاول علي الدين و علي الرسول ..وفيه فرق كبير بين المناقشة و حتي الهجوم وبين السخرية و الاستهزاء.

Dear Alaa

I have never considered myself as a religious person , I agree with you that most of these cartoons were just plain stupid and dry humour , it's like the Preists and Shaikh's jokes , but what really shocked me was the one with the bomb which is pure Racism , I can't help feeling angry because the bad intentions of the newspaper itself. I am aware that some Muslims in Denmark as well as in other European countries are not blending well in the societies for one reason or another (That needs a separate thread).Some of them may have Provoked the paper or some right wingers but the paper's unacceptable behaviour was to provoke and anger all Muslims worldwide instead of just dealing with its local problems.

and the PM who was childish , refused to meet up with a group of Muslims citing that there is nothing that he can do because the caricatures were not illegal.

He could have just said: "I am deeply concerned and sorry about the whole issue , and I am sure that the majority of Danes do not want to insult or humiliate Prophets but I can not force the newspaper to print an apology , as what they have published was within the borders of freedom of speech that we enjoy in Denmark which they could have used more wisely. "

Now here are my Do's and Dont's About the Danish Products Boycott:

DO get angry and take action by boycotting all Danish products, the Export industry should act as a pressure group on the Danish government and media and demand a proper aopology and action towards building better relationships with Muslims , based on mutual respect.

DON’T boycott all Danes; people should always be treated as individuals, keeping the conversation channels open and keeping the dialogue will help us to argue our case with the help or ordinary Danes who wouldn’t have approved the appalling behaviour of one of their papers and are not necessarily sharing the point of view of their government about the issue. Just ask yourself this question: “As a citizen of X country, do I agree with every single decision that my government takes?”

DO make sure that the products your are actually boycotting are Danish; use the internet to research before you take action against the wrong company. By the way Danish pastries are NOT Danish anymore! I have seen many products on the boycott list that are Swiss “Nestle” , Spanish/French “DANONE”, New Zealand “Anchor” and even Kuwaiti “KDD”and Saudi “SDAFCO” Products, who made that list? And how was it compiled? Why most of us are circulating it without investigation?

DON’T boycott local and regional producers based on their name only or based on pure assumptions that they are importing from Denmark “KDD and SDAFCO are a 100% Arabic ownership and they only use raw material from the local markets and farms”. Boycotting them is WRONG; we will be shooting ourselves in the feet to prove our point! Why would we want to close down a successful factory that helps our local communities to grow by providing jobs and other services, would you do that if you or any of your relatives worked there?

DO learn to control your anger, I get angry everyday on the roads by bad or unsafe drivers, yet it is not an excuse to do something foolish.

DON’T alienate all Danes by burning their flags or insulting the whole of Denmark, I am sure that not all of them agree on what was published.

DO voice your anger through the right channels and the media demanding a proper apology from the paper and the Danish government. We all need dialogue to guarantee that this will never happen again in the future. It was not very wise, humiliating billions of people by ridiculing their beliefs and their prophet (PBUH) is not freedom of speech, its freedom of ignorance, snobbishness and RACISM! Isn’t this the reason for having laws against racism and anti-Semite?

DON’T threaten to harm or kill Danes; again I can not reiterate enough that this is unacceptable and barbaric. We always complain that our image is deformed in the western media and in many places Muslims and Arabs are suffering because of the generalisation and the link to terrorism but that did not stop ordinary Americans and Europeans from engaging in a dialogue with us and trying to find out the truth. DO write to Mr. Peter Mandelson, the EU trade commissioner as I have noticed that he has threatened Saudi Arabia to refer it to the WTO for possible trade sanctions because of the boycott!

Mr. Mandelson would you please explain this to us:

“If consumers in a certain country have had a change of taste or opinion about specific products why would retailers insist on buying or stocking it?” Retailers are not in the business because they want to loose their money or are they? Can we force a country or a group of countries to buy something that their citizens are refusing to consume? Can you force the people anywhere in the world to consume certain brands or products against their free will? Why was it acceptable then to take British beef products off the shelves in most countries because of the BSE “mad cow” scares even after the British meat producers assured consumers that proper action and guarantees had been taken to ensure the safety of their beef products and their suitability for human consumption?

This is merely a change of the Macro environment for the Danish industry and they will have to deal with it in the affected markets without crying out loud for state protection. After all, many farmers in Europe are still receiving government subsidies to enable them to compete against the rest of the world and the EU has re-imposed quotas on Chinese clothes exports.

Should we expect the WTO to only protect European interests? Thanks.