What's new

On Insulting Muslims

EVERY society has people that take religious too personally. In the US, we have many Jewish and Christian fractions (some very close friends) who are very religious. Their ideas are also a bit on the hard core side about things. Similarly, you'll have people in Muslims, Hindus, Jews, etc. Wasn't it Indian's (hundreds of thousands of them) that attacked historical islamic masjid under police's supervision and security and destroyed it? Raped hundreds of thousands of Kashmiri women and killed unlimited number of men? Wasn't that India where hindu fanatics burned down the entire vilages when people were sleeping inside their homes???

I don't think you (or other Indians) have a right to speak here. You guys have killed Christians and Muslims without any cartoos or anything else, over decades. Thanks to the trade relationship.....it never comes out but here...some stuff for you to see how 'India' is.

Massacre of Christians in India - YouTube

INDIA IS ONLY FOR HINDUS EXTREMISTS THEY ARE KILLING CHRISTIANS MUSLIMS AND SIKHS Hindu Terrorists - YouTube

RSS terrorists kill innocent christians in india - YouTube

Hindu Radicals Attack Christians in Karnataka - YouTube

Massacre of Muslims in Burma by Buddhists"They will Kill us all, please help us"! - YouTube
difference is most of the Indians condom those violent acts while Pakistanis, Muslims here are trying hard to find reasons to justify their fellow Muslims violent actions and their immature emotions.
 
EVERY society has people that take religious too personally. In the US, we have many Jewish and Christian fractions (some very close friends) who are very religious. Their ideas are also a bit on the hard core side about things. Similarly, you'll have people in Muslims, Hindus, Jews, etc. Wasn't it Indian's (hundreds of thousands of them) that attacked historical islamic masjid under police's supervision and security and destroyed it? Raped hundreds of thousands of Kashmiri women and killed unlimited number of men? Wasn't that India where hindu fanatics burned down the entire vilages when people were sleeping inside their homes???

I don't think you (or other Indians) have a right to speak here. You guys have killed Christians and Muslims without any cartoos or anything else, over decades. Thanks to the trade relationship.....it never comes out but here...some stuff for you to see how 'India' is.

Massacre of Christians in India - YouTube

INDIA IS ONLY FOR HINDUS EXTREMISTS THEY ARE KILLING CHRISTIANS MUSLIMS AND SIKHS Hindu Terrorists - YouTube

RSS terrorists kill innocent christians in india - YouTube

Hindu Radicals Attack Christians in Karnataka - YouTube

Massacre of Muslims in Burma by Buddhists"They will Kill us all, please help us"! - YouTube



Come on Drama Queen, These all are propaganda. Since when Youtube and blogs became authentic source??/ We all saw how jamati used false photos and video to instigate fundamentalists. We saw the Mumbai incident where Muslims went on rampant by seeing these propaganda.


Jamatis use propaganda to spread terror. These all u mentioned are part of jamati propaganda.
 
yes they will protest..but no sensible person will protest over a bunch of cartoons , we don't consider drawing cartoons in general as offensive , we enjoy cartons drawn in good taste even if it portrait Hindu , Christian gods. And even if some body protests they must do it in peaceful manner.

Of course some pople will object. When TN Chief Minister said Ram did not exist, show me which college he went to blah blah, some Hindus protested. But peacefully. And the CM continued as CM, did not have to step down, was not killed by his bodyguard etc.

Insulting religious feelings is like any other issue, and is handled the same way.

Great!

But unfortunately i dont see you guys condoning peaceful protests either:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/cricke...bands-show-love-prophet-pbuh.html#post3429472

Yeah, yeah the OP was talking about what if there were non-Muslims in the team.

No, he was annoucing that the suggestion in itself was 'silly'.

It's nice to have your intentions (toy guns) exposed ;)
 
Great!

But unfortunately i dont see you guys condoning peaceful protests either:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/cricke...bands-show-love-prophet-pbuh.html#post3429472

Yeah, yeah the OP was talking about what if there were non-Muslims in the team.

No, he was annoucing that the suggestion in itself was 'silly'.

It's nice to have your intentions (toy guns) exposed ;)

you may proceed with the proposed protest because Pakistan any way is a Islamic republic.But in a secular state it would be better if we keep the religious issues, symbols as much as possible..but yes if team members themselves do it on their personal basis it's a good thing..for example if irfan pathan wear a band to protest on his own personal basis let him do it.
 
Who's afraid of Muslim Rage?
by Avaaz Team - posted 20 September 2012 01:18

A US magazine cover (below) screams out the general media slant of the last two weeks: the Muslim world is burning with anti-western anger over an Islamophobic film, with hordes of violent protesters on the streets threatening us all ... but is it really? Citizens and new media are responding, and Gawker has brilliantly satirised the hype with alternative images of "Muslim Rage":


When Newsweek asked readers to tweet their own stories about #MuslimRage, many thousands did, hilariously:

Seven things you may have missed in the 'Rage':
Like everyone else, many Muslims find the 13 minute Islamophobic video "Innocence of Muslims" trashy and offensive. Protests have spread quickly, tapping into understandable and lasting grievances about neo-colonialist US and western foreign policy in the Middle East, as well as religious sensitivities about depictions of the Prophet Muhammad. But the news coverage often obscures some important points:
1. Early estimates put participation in anti-film protests at between 0.001 and 0.007% of the world's 1.5 billion Muslims – a tiny fraction of those who marched for democracy in the Arab spring.

2. The vast majority of protesters have been peaceful. The breaches of foreign embassies were almost all organised or fuelled by elements of the Salafist movement, a radical Islamist group that is most concerned with undermining more popular moderate Islamist groups.

3. Top Libyan and US officials are divided over whether the killing of the US ambassador to Libya was likely pre-planned to coincide with 9/11, and therefore not connected to the film.

4. Apart from attacks by radical militant groups in Libya and Afghanistan, a survey of news reports on 20 September suggested that actual protesters had killed a total of zero people. The deaths cited by media were largely protesters killed by police.

5. Pretty much every major leader, Muslim and western, has condemned the film, and pretty much every leader, Muslim and western, has condemned any violence that might be committed in response.

6. The pope visited Lebanon at the height of the tension, and Hezbollah leaders attended his sermon, refrained from protesting the film until he left, and called for religious tolerance. Yes, this happened.

7. After the attack in Benghazi, ordinary people turned out on the streets in Benghazi and Tripoli with signs, many of them in English, apologising and saying the violence did not represent them or their religion.

Add to that the number of really big news stories that were buried last week to make room for front page, angry Muslim "Clash" coverage. In Russia tens of thousands of protesters marched through Moscow to oppose Russian President Vladimir Putin. Hundreds of thousands of Portuguese and Spaniards turned out for anti-austerity protests; and more than a million Catalans marched for independence.
Muslim rage or Salafist strategy?
Meet Sheikh Khaled Abdullah, the Salafist TV host who peddled the film (Ted Nieter)

The "Innocence of Muslims" was picked up and peddled with subtitles by far-right Salafists – radical followers of an Islamic movement long supported by Saudi Arabia. The film was a cheaply made, YouTube failure until an Egyptian Salafist TV host, Sheikh Khaled Abdullah (right) began promoting it to viewers on 8 September.
Most insulted Muslims ignored the film or protested peacefully, but the Salafists, with their signature black flags, were leading instigators of the more aggressive protests that breached embassies. Leaders of the Egyptian Salafist party attended the Cairo protest that broke into the US embassy.
Like the far-right in the US or Europe, the Salafist strategy is to drag public opinion rightwards by seizing on opportunities to fan radical anger and demonise ideological opponents. This approach resembles that of anti-Muslim US pastor Terry Jones (who first promoted the film in the west) and other western extremists. In both societies, however, the moderates far (far!) outnumber the extremists. A leading figure in Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood (the more powerful and popular political opponent of Egypt’s Salafists) wrote to the New York Times saying: "We do not hold the American government or its citizens responsible for acts of the few that abuse the laws protecting freedom of expression".
Good reporting
A lonely band of journalists and scholars have approached the protests with an intent to truly understand the forces behind them. Among them, Hisham Matar, who powerfully describes the sadness in Benghazi after J Christopher Stevens' killing, and Barnaby Phillips, who explores how Islamic conservatives manipulated the film to their advantage. Anthropologist Sarah Kendzior cautions against treating the Muslim world as a homogenous unit. And Professor Stanley Fish tackles a tough question: why many Muslims are so sensitive to unflattering depictions of Islam.


Sources: Newsweek, Gawker, Al Jazeera, Sky, Foreign Affairs, Washington Post, Kuwait Times, Avaaz, New York Times, Reuters, Guardian, Atlantic, TIME, New Yorker
 
Those who insult HAZRAT MUHAMMAD SAW only deserve to die and die the most brutal death that is order of ALLAH and INSHALLAH Muslims will make sure who ever has made the film meets this fate sooner or later

...Mr go first read Muslims history from many sources you will know Muslims have proven the best people for whole humanity even those areas we conquered Non Muslims lived in security and in those times they made most progress -

From NARRATIVE OF A RESIDENCE IW ALGIERS by Signor Pananti, 1818:

...Of Jews, there is an immense number scattered all over the coast of Barbary. The city of Algiers contains about eight thousand, most of whom have swerved considerably from the belief of their ancestors, following the Talmud and Kabbala, with the exception of those called free, who generally come from Leghorn to this place, and are allowed entire liberty in their movements. The unhappy sons of Israel, so badly treated in other countries, can expect little indulgence from the barbarians ; consequently there is no species of outrage or vexation to which they are not exposed. They are prohibited from writing or speaking Arabic, to prevent their being able to read the divine Koran. They cannot ride on horseback, but are obliged to go on mules and ***** ; the first being too noble an animal for them. When passing a mosque, they are obliged to go bare-footed. They dare not approach a well or fountain, if there be a Moor drinking there ; or sit down opposite a Mahometan. Their clothing Is obliged to be black ; which colour is held in contempt by the Moors. The Jewish women are only permitted to veil a part of their features. The indolent Moor, with a pipe in his mouth and his legs crossed, calls any Jew who is passing, and makes him perform the offices of a servant. Others amuse themselves by smearing the hands, visage, hair, and clothes of the Jewish boys, with paint or mud ; while the Turkish soldiers often enter their houses, insulting the females, without the heads of the family having the privilege of desiring them to retire.

It is the business of Jews to execute all criminals, and afterwards bury their bodies. They are also employed to carry the Moors on their shoulders, when disembarking in shoal water. They feed the animals of the seraglio, and are incessantly exposed to the scoffings and derision of the young Moors, without the possibility of resenting it. Frequently beaten by their persecutors, if they lift a hand in their own defence, agreeable to the lex talionis of the Moors, it is taken off. But that which is still more irksome, is the never ending contributions levied on them : the weekly sum of two thousand dollars is exacted as a general tax upon the whole tribe, besides various other individual assessments, particularly whenever any Moorish festival takes place. The Turks insist on borrowing money even by force ; and contrary to the European maxim, it is not he who forgets to pay, that is incarcerated, but the man who refuses to lend! A Jew cannot leave the regency without giving security to a large amount for his return. If any of the sect become bankrupts, and there happens to be a Turkish creditor, he is almost invariably accused of fraudulency and hung. Woe to those, who attempt to complain on such occasions : which is no trifling aggravation of their sufferings. There was once an imposition laid on fountains; upon which a poet wrote the following address: " You are loaded with imposts like us; but more happy than we — you are at least allowed to murmur."

It is, however, astonishing with what stoical fortitude all this is borne by the followers of Abraham...On one side this extraordinary race suffer innumerable vexations and acts of injustice, together with the most cruel servitude ; while on the other, their talents and industry, place them as the directors and proprietors of commerce, manufactures...They serve as interpreters and secretaries, being frequently employed both as counsellors and agents, in affairs of the greatest delicacy -
[h/t: EoZ]

You see, it isn't easy to draw an honest comparison between Muslims and non-Muslims without raising the spectre of some sort of insult. Note that in no case described above did Muslims themselves feel they should restrain their hatred of Jews.

No, the centuries non-Muslims spent under Muslim domination were by no means all wonderful by their own accounts and those of neutral visitors and observers. But pick a Muslim source and everything is wonderful, yes? And if you try building on that lie and everything falls apart and you end up frustrated and wonder why, if you are powerful enough you're going to commission your own memoir or "history" to set things the way you want, right? Then, centuries down the road, the cycle can be repeated once more...
 

Back
Top Bottom