Muslims Enraged at Wikipedia

[Calanen]

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=28838_Muslims_Enraged_Seething_at_Wikipedia&only (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=28838_Muslims_Enraged_Seething_at_Wikipedia&only)

Muslims Enraged, Seething at Wikipedia

Mon, Feb 4, 2008 at 11:05:25 am PST
Apparently there are a whole lot of Muslims enraged and offended at Wikipedia, because there are ... gasp ... drawings and images of Mohammed in his Wikipedia entry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad).
Blasphemy!

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/pictures/20080204WikiMaome.jpg

So they’re demanding that Wikipedia stop violating their delicate sensibilities and remove the offending images, with an online petition that’s already gathered 82,783 signatures: Care2 : The Petition Site : Removal of the Pics (http://www.thepetitionsite.com/2/removal-of-the-pics-of-muhammad-from-wikipedia).
The petition has a little “lolcats (http://icanhascheezburger.com/)” flavor to it.

Removal of the Pics of Muhammad from Wikipedia
Target:To tell wikipedia editors to respect other peoples religion
Sponsored by: Faraz Ahmad
In Islam pictures or Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and other holly figures are not allowed, but on wikipedia they has published some pictures that are showing not only a body with white face but an image that has a complete face.. that is even not allowed by ****AT fact of Islam.
i request all my brothers and sisters to sign this petition so we can tell wikipedia to remove them.
UPDATE at 2/4/08 11:32:39 am:
Good for Wikipedia on this one: Talk: Muhammad (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Muhammad).

Please note that discussion on this talk page has determined that pictures of Muhammad will not be removed from this article and any removal of the pictures without discussion here first will be reverted on sight.
That makes them braver than 95% of the world’s media organizations.
(Hat tip: Wilderstad.)

[Calanen]

That makes them braver than 95% of the world’s media organizations.


Amen to that. At least the people at Wiki have got a pair.

[Alpheus]

Who wants to bet that that painting was done by a Muslim.

[Dling]

THANK YOU wikipedia...

[Johnny_H02]

Hats off to Wiki!
If only more would follow suit and show some back bone.

[Mat_fr]

don't take care of 82.783 extremists out of 1 billion..

Moreover i don't see why these pictures which are historic should be removed..
people signing this (bs) petition aren't the only users of wiki !

"that is even not allowed by ****AT fact of Islam".. -> or not allowed by interpretation of some extremists ??


mat.

[icesarge]

I've seen this picture before on a Chino resturant menu here in Las Vegas!!

[budgie]

On the other hand if Wiki removed the image because of a peaceful petition from concerned Muslims everyone could win: it sends the message that death threats and so on are not effective - they just make we infidels dig our heels in.

[PsychoMantis]

Way to grow a pair wiki!

[Laworkerbee]

On the other hand if Wiki removed the image because of a [i[peaceful petitionfrom concerned Muslims[/i] everyone could win: it sends the message that death threats and so on are not effective - they just make we infidels dig our heels in.

You have a very valid point.

[Pars]

How about they just GTFO of Wikipedia?

[tsuri]

On the other hand if Wiki removed the image because of a [i[peaceful petitionfrom concerned Muslims[/i] everyone could win: it sends the message that death threats and so on are not effective - they just make we infidels dig our heels in.

But it also sends the image that muslims have a right not to be offended by anything in this world. Which is clearly not the case.

Funnily, this does not have to do with Wikipedia growing a pair and standing against Muslims. It is the ordinary level of fa**otry that they display for all kinds of edits.

[Laworkerbee]

faggotry

A word I find offensive, then again your taste in weird pedophile like avatars makes it quite hard to figure you out in the first place.

[Vince S]

Hats off to Wiki!
If only more would follow suit and show some back bone.

I hear ya, we need that type in Canada, I'm sick of immigrants (and or religions) being granted whatever they want.

Like that YMCA that had to get his windows blurred because Hassidim community of Outremont freaked out that their "pure little boys" could see a woman in short *shock* doing workout in the gym...

[Calanen]

On the other hand if Wiki removed the image because of a [i[peaceful petitionfrom concerned Muslims[/i] everyone could win: it sends the message that death threats and so on are not effective - they just make we infidels dig our heels in.

Forget that. The petition is misconceived. Why should Wiki obey some aspect of Sharia law? They can have their own Sharia wiki where everything is banned if they want.

[MJC9678]

Seriously, what do Muslims not get enraged over? When will the west just say "deal with it or leave"?

[4X4Driver]

Who wants to bet that that painting was done by a Muslim.

I was thinking about the exact same thing. It sure does have typical Islamic art lines to it and it is known in the whole muslim world that it exists. :roll:

[Pars]

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/islamic_mo_full/0_01.jpg


Illustration showing Mohammed (on the right) preaching to his earliest converts, taken from a medieval-era manuscript of the astronomical treatise The Remaining Signs of Past Centuries by the Persian scholar al-Biruni; currently housed in the collection of the Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris (Manuscrits Arabe 1489 fol. 5v). This scene was popular among medieval Islamic artists, and several nearly identical versions of this drawing (such as this one [shown in detail below] and this one) were made in the Middle Ages.


http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/islamic_mo_full/prophet_on_rug_large.jpg


Mohammed on his prayer rug; Persia, late medieval (date unknown).

Source (http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/islamic_mo_full/)

Oh yeah, we're heretics alright p-)

[2Sheds_Jackson]

On the other hand if Wiki removed the image because of a [i[peaceful petitionfrom concerned Muslims[/i] everyone could win.

Well...everyone but modern society. The message I think it would send is that Wiki needs to conform to religious sensibilities. Are pictures of pork-related products going to be next? Wiki has a very thorough SPAM page, and I will not have it trifled with.

Listen, they had their chance. Do the math -how many hundred work years have they wasted since the dawn of civilization, bowing and scraping several times a day? Like each wafer-thin Pringle adding to my prodigious ass, it all adds up. If they'd spent that time engaged in meaningful work, they'd have invented all these internets first - and have their own blasphemy-free version of history to report.

[Alpheus]

haha, I knew it. I love how the rules apply to infidels, but followers of Islam get a free pass. Hypocrites. Do as I say, not as I do.

[digrar]

Are pictures of pork-related products going to be next? Wiki has a very thorough SPAM page, and I will not have it trifled with.



Trifle contains alchohol, I find that offensive and would appreciate if your posts in future did not contain that particular reference.

[T3ngu]

Trifle contains alchohol, I find that offensive and would appreciate if your posts in future did not contain that particular reference.

While we are at it can we ban fat people in spandex, thats offensive.

[Pars]

haha, I knew it. I love how the rules apply to infidels, but followers of Islam get a free pass. Hypocrites. Do as I say, not as I do.

Almost all older paintings of Mohammed with his face uncovered are Persian. I think it's another way for Persians and non-Arabs to say 'blow me' to the Arabs :)

[DevilDogHopeful]

He looks of Asian decent.

[Tokamak]

He looks of Asian decent.

How dare you?!!!!! p-)

[SBL]

I've seen this picture before on a Chino resturant menu here in Las Vegas!!


CHINO!!! RRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAUUUUUUUUUUUUGGGGGGGGGGHH!!!!!!!!
http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i228/Captainbadd/islamic_rage_boy.jpg

[Hypno85]

Seriously, what do Muslims not get enraged over? When will the west just say "deal with it or leave"?

What i was thinking to.

[Alfacentori]

Seriously, what do Muslims not get enraged over? When will the west just say "deal with it or leave"?

Now theres an Idea! If you can't handle these annoying Western things like freedom of speech and expression kindly pack up and move to Iran or wherever.........p-)



Alfa

[SBL]

What i was thinking to.

It's political coersion. Lacking a majority, 'they' are taking advantage of western law and sensitivities to "muslify" society.

[T3ngu]

It's political coersion. Lacking a majority, 'they' are taking advantage of western law and sensitivities to "muslify" society.

Hating to point out the cynical and obvious, someone should start a petition to keep the information on Wikipedia. The statistics would be more than interesting.

[Christophe]

Those muslems get pretty annoying.
Last one I arrested told me -In two generations we run the place here-
I tried to remain pc but I failed.

[Laworkerbee]

Those muslems get pretty annoying.
Last one I arrested told me -In two generations we run the place here-
I tried to remain pc but I failed.

Who could blame you.

[LaoSexMachine]

i signed the muslim petition

[Alfacentori]

It's political coersion. Lacking a majority, 'they' are taking advantage of western law and sensitivities to "muslify" society.

Isn't it sad that our own achievements and laws/freedoms can be used to change the very thing that created them.




Alfa

[Christophe]

Laworkerbee: This is not a rare occasion. We hear lots of stuff like this all the time. And every time we reply they threaten to file a racism complaint with internal affairs. Fun.
The worst thing is, seeing how it is going, they are right.
It is like a flood, and there aren´t enough sandbags.

[kuttless]

way to go wiki

[helomech]

When are the muslims not getting pissy about something to do with their religion?Tough sh1t for them and good for Wiki!Now if only main stream media and all forms of govenment can get on the same bandwagon-but I already know that sh1t ain't going to happen

[T3ngu]

i signed the muslim petition

I think i just saw your signature.

** Edit... Perhaps your not the only one from here to sign it.

[-Max2-]

Here we go again...

They really need to get a life.

[LaoSexMachine]

I think i just saw your signature.

** Edit... Perhaps your not the only one from here to sign it.

i didnt want another buddha statue to be blown up.

[Dasein]

So now creating an online petition makes one an extremist and a fanatic?

[LaoSexMachine]

So now creating an online petition makes one an extremist and a fanatic?

reaching .

[lightfire]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6e/Wikipedia_flag_large.png

Not long before Jihad is announced on this flag,and it shall be burned

[that_one_guy]

perhaps Anonymous will wage e-war on them as they had declared war on scientology.

[that_one_guy]

So now creating an online petition makes one an extremist and a fanatic?

No, I almost applaud the non violent approach they're taking right now. Extremists and fanatics are the ones who were wanting to kill the British teacher who named a teddy bear Mohamed after her pupils chose to do so.

[WarDancer]

So now creating an online petition makes one an extremist and a fanatic?

Well, it depends what the petition is for or against. If it is as petty as I think than it shows a total lack of tolerance on the part of Islam. Of course, tolerance has never been a strong point for that religion.

[evanfitz]

petition there petition

in all seriousness, kudos for wiki for putting there foot down.

[haze99]

Another problem from our favorite political/religious group, eh? Me thinks the muslims would be best to stay in their muslim lands and not be logging on to the internet.
So what is next? Will they protest the Wendy's Baconator?

[Dasein]

Why do we assume these people behind this petition speak for all Muslims? There seems to be a fairly small group of conservative Muslims who get incredibly up in arms about any images of Muhammed, the same way there are Christians who get angry about anything seen as pro-homo******. Why do people tend to lump all Muslims together?

[WarDancer]

Why do we assume these people behind this petition speak for all Muslims? There seems to be a fairly small group of conservative Muslims who get incredibly up in arms about any images of Muhammed, the same way there are Christians who get angry about anything seen as pro-homo******. Why do people tend to lump all Muslims together?

Not all muslims, just a majority of muslims. Christians dont get angry over anything "pro-homo******". I think they disapprove of it, but at least they dont call for their murder!

[Calanen]

Why do we assume these people behind this petition speak for all Muslims? There seems to be a fairly small group of conservative Muslims who get incredibly up in arms about any images of Muhammed, the same way there are Christians who get angry about anything seen as pro-homo******. Why do people tend to lump all Muslims together?

Just more semantics. The argument runs like this - because we can find one muslim anywhere who does not do something, we have to ignore the large amount of muslims who do things, in the name of Islam. Its a way to sidestep the issue and excuse inexcusable behaviour.

These muslims, have said, in the name of Islam, don't have pictures of Mohammed on wikipedia.

These people are doing this because of islam, in the name of islam, and because they are muslims. The fact that there are other muslims who do not support them (and who are normally reasonably quiet about this fact, maybe for good reason) is beside the point. What we need to deal with is this Muslim Outrage phenomena. You don't ignore a building fire just because you can find other structures that are not alight.

[VMICadetJNA]

Not all muslims, just a majority of muslims. Christians dont get angry over anything "pro-homo******". I think they disapprove of it, but at least they dont call for their murder!

dude, last time i was in Lynchburg, I was told out of the blue, by this group of Liberty kids that I am evil and going to hell because I'm Catholic. Don't discount that there are fanatics in all religions.

[gaijinsamurai]

Good for Wikipedia.

[T3ngu]

You don't ignore a building fire just because you can find other structures that are not alight.

Nice example ill put that in my kit.

[JJC]

It's easier for Wiki to be macho hiding in the virtual world, journalists don't have that option.

[FelixA9]

Way to grow a pair wiki!


Great avatar! rofl

[Skutatos]

dude, last time i was in Lynchburg, I was told out of the blue, by this group of Liberty kids that I am evil and going to hell because I'm Catholic. Don't discount that there are fanatics in all religions.


They didnt kill you though did they?

[Mu-Meson]

You don't ignore a building fire just because you can find other structures that are not alight.
Well put! And hat tip to Wiki for showing true grit!

[deagle]

cry me a river. whyy doesn't the govt censor it or block out that site then ?

[SBL]

cry me a river. whyy doesn't the govt censor it or block out that site then ?

Context?

...

[SkyUS]

All fanatics are dangerous, no matter the religion, philosophy, belief system etc.

I tip my hat to you Wiki, you have more balls than any major media.

[little icebear]

The worst thing is, seeing how it is going, they are right.
It is like a flood, and there aren´t enough sandbags.

No need for hysteria... we Europeans are a very patient crowd but silent waters run deep.
I say wait ´til they try to bann pork and beer. It´s gonna be a messy but rather short "clash of civilizations"... p-)

[Player]

I don't know who is responsible for this but since the thread is about wiki so I thought I would let you know that there is no Israel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel) at the moment.

http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/7444/israelwikiwk4.th.jpg (http://img528.imageshack.us/my.php?image=israelwikiwk4.jpg)

[filochard]

Hi,

Saying *Muslims* got enraged is misleading. Saying *religious extremist retards* got enraged would be more fair imo.
Could have been christians or jews or whatever religious extremists, would be ridiculous too.
It's just that christians or jews religious extremists, we laugh at them (so far), why don't we laugh at Wahaby/Salafist bigots as well ? we should.
Who know some jokes about Wahaby/Salafists ? is there some in Muslim countries ?

[Kevlarhead]

Heeeeeere they go again... :-(

[nullterm]

I don't know who is responsible for this but since the thread is about wiki so I thought I would let you know that there is no Israel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel) at the moment.

http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/7444/israelwikiwk4.th.jpg (http://img528.imageshack.us/my.php?image=israelwikiwk4.jpg)

That's just not kosher.

[Dercius]

Everything about this issue seems absurd to me.

First of all, in all those countries were this religion of "peace" and "love" is mayoritary, access to the internet is not free. As information is dangerous for people living in teocratic and totalitarian systems, everything has to pass through censorship. So, I suppose that all this members of the religion of peace and love who signed this petition were somewhere in the world were women are not third class citizens who has to walk two steps behind of a man.

So, my recomendation for all those agraviated muslims is to return to the place they miss soooooooo much. The land were they can lapidate any woman because his father or husband says that she is a bitch, and were being homo****** equals a death sentence.

Like it or leave it.

[Dercius]

****, Im starting to think about an interesting issue.

Here in Spain and in all hispanic countries there is a surname "Matamoros" that literally means Muslimslayer. It comes from the times of Reconquista. I wonder, will they make a petition asking them to change their surnames or will they make a Fatwa??????:)

[9mmRifle]

Who wants to bet that that painting was done by a Muslim.

Muslims need to wake up

and GTFO of the Dark Ages

The Islamic society was once a center for learning, culture, writing, art etc. They once produced great buildings and beautiful art.
http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/islamic_mo_full/
You could draw and paint Muhammed but the society got hijacked by extremists and ever since all they have been know to produce are extremists groups, mud huts in the sandbox, ugly paintings that look like carpets and suicide bombers

Muslims were allowed to pained the Prophet for hundreds of years, modern prohibition on images of Muhammad came from a bunch of retarded extremists who took upon themselves to make some bizarre interpretation of chapter 42 of the Koran and the EXTREMISTS (not the Muslim people) then declared all images of Muhammed were BANNED

Jihad in the Modern Age is pushing Muslim society back into the Dark Ages

[IDF_TANKER]

I don't know who is responsible for this but since the thread is about wiki so I thought I would let you know that there is no Israel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel) at the moment.

http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/7444/israelwikiwk4.th.jpg (http://img528.imageshack.us/my.php?image=israelwikiwk4.jpg)

Yep, wiping of the map has begun.(So that's what Ahmedinijad meant by that...:|)

[Calanen]

Hi,

Saying *Muslims* got enraged is misleading. Saying *religious extremist retards* got enraged would be more fair imo.
Could have been christians or jews or whatever religious extremists, would be ridiculous too.


But its not jews or buddhists repeatedly, is it.

[MG 3]

Why don't wiki buy AQ some guns and RPGs while they are at it.

[junglejim]

I dont see what's the big deal in all of this. Where I'm from Christians (mostly Catholics) live with Muslims and there is no problem with it, and so far, extermists are controlled in the hundreds, mainly the Abu Sayaff group. (The Moro Islamic Liberation Front or MILF, I **** you not thats their name, although a rebel force is fighting for an autonomous region and not for the conversion of the population to Islam and is not included in the numbers of extermists). From what I saw growing up, both religion can coexist and the muslims can become quite tolerant, one just needs to be firm in their resolve to enforce a more peaceful society.

The west tend to be apologists or just turns a blind eye when members of this faith voices their opinions or act it out. This will not change them, but only encourages more actions and rhetoric on their part. Ignoring them almost cost us 1/3 of our territory back in the 70's.

[E-2]

...wiki is a battleground for extremists who just delete each other propaganda, religious texts and other bull.
no one's standing up for anything, its a website.

[Basillicus]

...wiki is a battleground for extremists who just delete each other propaganda, religious texts and other bull.
no one's standing up for anything, its a website.

IMO Wikipedia is more than just a website. Before if you wanted to seach some info about anything you'd use a search engine and find millions of pages of bullcrap. If you were lucky you might occationally find something useful. Nowadays you start Wikipedia and search suitable article from there, and here you have a good introduction to the topic, written and maintained by professionals and experts.

I've noticed that usually people who disrespect Wikipedia are biggots who have little factual base on their prejudiced opinions, and blame Wikipedia for taking unbiased stance. Sure there are a lot of articles that are not perfect, but gradually they are getting better and there's huge amount of good stuff already. It should not be used as a single source of information but usually it gives at least a very good introduction to any topic.

[MG 3]

Its not about extremists. You ppl just dont get it do you, muslims are prohibited to depict the Prophet. This kind of stuff only plays in the hands of extremists. And it is our religion so pls let us decide what is libreal in it or not.

[Pars]

Its not about extremists. You ppl just dont get it do you, muslims are prohibited to depict the Prophet. This kind of stuff only plays in the hands of extremists. And it is our religion so pls let us decide what is libreal in it or not.

Why should it then be prohibited for non-muslim to depict him?

[tsuri]

Its not about extremists. You ppl just dont get it do you, muslims are prohibited to depict the Prophet. This kind of stuff only plays in the hands of extremists.
1)The ones who painted the picture were of a different opinion
2) There are lots of non muslims who would like to see a picture of this particular person. Why should they follow YOUR rules?

Everyone who wants to force his belief system on others IS an extremist. Nobody can be a moderate if he cannot tolerate that freedom of expression is cherished in other cultures.

[MG 3]

Why should it then be prohibited for non-muslim to depict him?

Simple, he's our prophet. Ever seen muslims depicting Jesus or Krishna?


1)The ones who painted the picture were of a different opinion
2) There are lots of non muslims who would like to see a picture of this particular person. Why should they follow YOUR rules?

Everyone who wants to force his belief system on others IS an extremist. Nobody can be a moderate if he cannot tolerate that freedom of expression is cherished in other cultures.

Firstly how can there pictures be of him when they were all painted hundreds of years after his death.

You know why. Cause its my religion.

Well if freedom means forcing pain on to others then how do you call yourself a non-EXTREMIST. I or for that matter other muslims dont have a problem with you ppl doing whatever you want to your religions but you have no right to play with ours. If you do this then what will be the difference between you and AQ who will both be using this religion for personal gains.

[Pars]

Simple, he's our prophet. Ever seen muslims depicting Jesus or Krishna?

(...)

Firstly how can there pictures be of him when they were all painted hundreds of years after his death.

(...)

You know why. Cause its my religion.


It all boils down to this:
Rules for muslims don't apply for non-muslim. I have the freedom to depict whoever I want. Regardless of what some religion might think about it.

[Lazy Lob]

Simple, he's our prophet. Ever seen muslims depicting Jesus or Krishna?

You are just reinforcing Pars' point with that statement. It also has little to do with his question.

[MG 3]

It all boils down to this:
Rules for muslims don't apply for non-muslim. I have the freedom to depict whoever I want. Regardless of what some religion might think about it.

But with freedom comes responcibility. You depict something which leads to global problems and hurts other ppl beliefs than sure do what ever you want. But then dont cry when you get attacked or your embassy burns.

[Ulytau]

Especially about Jesus too if someone insult to him i'll answer to him/her too..

About drawin Hz.Muhammed some people dont interest to understand something i think anyone seen Ottoman Miniature about Hz.Muhammed 100 years ago most of people didnt using Muhammed name too we were using Mehmet ''Mehemmet''

I smellin your extremist my extremist idea with so called freedom of speech..Still saying..

Extremists are usin this for propaganda and converting especially uneducated people..In these days UK pm Gordon Brown did great thing he gonna call Al Qaida etc. as a terror group who aganist Islam at offical documents..Radical groups always needs something for propaganda for converting people and some people givin rights to them..

[MG 3]

I dont expect you ppl to understand but I just wanted to forward my point of view and this is one of the most liberal things that you will hear coming out of the muslim world.

[Lazy Lob]

But with freedom comes responcibility. You depict something which leads to global problems and hurts other ppl beliefs than sure do what ever you want. But then dont cry when you get attacked or your embassy burns.

Whoa, blimey you seem to be coming out of the woodwork.

[tsuri]

Well if freedom means forcing pain on to others then how do you call yourself a non-EXTREMIST. I or for that matter other muslims dont have a problem with you ppl doing whatever you want to your religions but you have no right to play with ours. If you do this then what will be the difference between you and AQ who will both be using this religion for personal gains.

If it pains you so much, don't read the article. All the religious information you need about that guy is in your holy texts where your religious rules apply and everyone is happy.
If everyone went around to not offend muslims all day long, we all would have to live like we were muslims. Who is playing into Al Qaeda's hand here?

[Ulytau]

I dont expect you ppl to understand but I just wanted to forward my point of view and this is one of the most liberal things that you will hear coming out of the muslim world.

If it was for me i always support you mate especially about this subjects :hug:

[MG 3]

If it pains you so much, don't read the article. All the religious information you need about that guy is in your holy texts where your religious rules apply and everyone is happy.

If everyone went around to not offend muslims all day long, we all would have to live like we were muslims. Who is playing into Al Qaeda's hand here?

I wish it were that simple.

This could turn in to a long debate and we would end up on what caused AQ to form.

Do what ever you ppl want I dont care anymore I have enough **** to deal with here(the real front, not in rural germany) so a few more liters of petrol on the fire dont bother me anymore. Its like we here kill some and then you help them recruite some more and the cycle goes on. Not blaming you for the entire problem though.....

[Niels]

But with freedom comes responcibility. You depict something which leads to global problems and hurts other ppl beliefs than sure do what ever you want. But then dont cry when you get attacked or your embassy burns.
With freedom comes responsibility? No, you are trying to curtail my freedom by saying I can't do this or that. If you want to live in a world where people rampage and kill over an image, go for it. But keep it within your borders.

[tsuri]

The enemy dislikes my freedoms, my liberties and my culture. If I submit to theirs, they win.

If somebody joins a terrorist organisation because somewhere, hundreds of kilometers away some european dares to publish a picture of a long dead arab, then their mental health is seriously endangered to begin with.

Where are my liberties? As an atheist, I could be deeply offended by the Quran saying that a god exists and that a random arab warlord was his prophet. It offends me and millions of others. Do I ask for it's removal from a book that I can easily ignore? Nope because freedom is a two way street.

[Big Lebowski]

I wish it were that simple.

This could turn in to a long debate and we would end up on what caused AQ to form.

Do what ever you ppl want I dont care anymore I have enough **** to deal with here(the real front, not in rural germany) so a few more liters of petrol on the fire dont bother me anymore. Its like we here kill some and then you help them recruite some more and the cycle goes on. Not blaming you for the entire problem though.....
Ever thought of the problem may be from within to begin with...

I see alot of muslims talk about respect. But tell me what can be more disrespectful then to force you believes and values onto others who do not wish to live the way you do?

Religion has 0 meaning in my life, should that change cause of you?

[Johnny_H02]

But with freedom comes responcibility. You depict something which leads to global problems and hurts other ppl beliefs than sure do what ever you want. But then dont cry when you get attacked or your embassy burns.
When I was a child, I was taught that "People are going to do and say things you don't like, you have to learn to live with it"

This reply disgusts me and is the main problem with everything today.
So in your logic, you could say something to offend me? and its in my full right to go burn your mothers house down and kill her? because you said something to offend my delicate sensibilities.

I'm sick of this kind of **** being rationalized and justified.
If a Muslim were to depict Jesus I don't feel its my right to call for his/her head on a pike as a result.The reason why doing such a thing is the act of a extremist is because its ****ing extreme!!!

So unless the Wiki server is located in a Islamic country, which is subject to Islamic law, who the **** cares whats on it? some country's outlaw ****ography and thats all over the internet as well should we take all that down because of a few people?

Basically if the Islamic governed nations wish to have this content censored to "protect" its public then it can block the page nationally. Muslims living abroad if they don't value the same rights and freedoms that the native people they live with do they can ether leave or deal with it.

I can't believe you just said "well you can change it or else deal with the attacks .." that **** is mind blowing to me.
We are seriously are going to have to agree to disagree on this point


Or in your logic I shall play the reverse "after you blow up our embassies don't come crying to us when bombs start dropping in the wrong places by accident"

see how that doesn't work? how its an asshole thing to say and was downright wrong? see how its almost what you said but from another perspective?

Hopefully you do.
If I get a infraction for this post so bloody be it.

[Pars]

I have second Johnny H. Pretty much sums up my thoughts as well. Good rant.

[3rdMillhouse]

These *I'd rather not say this* should learn that, just because their prophet has forbidden them from representing iconic figures, doesn't mean people from other religions should obey.

[CYW]

damn johnny H...best damn rant i've heard in a long while!

[MG 3]

.......................................................................................
...................

I can't believe you just said "well you can change it or else deal with the attacks .." that **** is mind blowing to me.
We are seriously are going to have to agree to disagree on this point


Or in your logic I shall play the reverse "after you blow up our embassies don't come crying to us when bombs start dropping in the wrong places by accident"

see how that doesn't work? how its an asshole thing to say and was downright wrong? see how its almost what you said but from another perspective?

Hopefully you do.
If I get a infraction for this post so bloody be it.

I dont give a shyt about all that you wrote before the above and cool job on calling me names.

But its we who are left with the job of cleaning up the crap. Its we who die not you or the extremists. For all I care you do anything you want but all I want you to understand is that bombs dont blow in your streets or its not you who has the job of fighting his fellow countrymen.

Blah! Its a free forum. Do what ever you want ppl.

MG 3

[CYW]

I dont give a shyt about all that you wrote before the above


yes, yes...i clearly see your well structured argument there my friend....

[Zoomie]

But its we who are left with the job of cleaning up the crap. Its we who die not you or the extremists. For all I care you do anything you want but all I want you to understand is that bombs dont blow in your streets or its not you who has the job of fighting his fellow countrymen.
So you'd rather cave in to extremists? How delightful. :roll:

[MG 3]

yes, yes...i clearly see your well structured argument there my friend....

I ment do what ever you want, draw whatever you want where ever you want..........

BTW whats written below it is more imp but whatever. :cantbeli:

[MG 3]

So you'd rather cave in to extremists? How delightful. :roll:

Nope but I wouldnt mind them bieng weakened instead of their propoganda growing stronger.

[CYW]

and the stuff that was written above which you chose to ignore was more important too

[marius]

I ment do what ever you want, draw whatever you want where ever you want............

does that include torching embassies as a way of stating your opinion or do you see a difference?

[rebornmaster]

i think they need to get over it and let wikipedia have what ever they want

[MG 3]

^^^ We got ourselves a real winner here. Son mind posting a few more words so we might expand our vocabulary.

[Johnny_H02]

I dont give a shyt about all that you wrote before the above and cool job on calling me names.

But its we who are left with the job of cleaning up the crap. Its we who die not you or the extremists. For all I care you do anything you want but all I want you to understand is that bombs dont blow in your streets or its not you who has the job of fighting his fellow countrymen.

Blah! Its a free forum. Do what ever you want ppl.
You're right, it is a FREE forum and I will post my opinion freely provided it does not conflict with the forum rules.

MG 3

I don't believe I called you any names, closest thing to it was

see how that doesn't work? how its an asshole thing to say and was downright wrong? see how its almost what you said but from another perspective?Saying "bow to the demands of a few people who are offended or else pay in blood" is an asshole thing to say, regardless of intention.
I have no quarrel with you good sir, but your point was not well received.

Why should I have to conform to Islamic law and tradition if I am not Islamic? Sure its not the nicest thing for me to draw a picture of The Prophet knowing that Islamic people would be offended but in North America being offensive is almost satire more often than not. Everyone has to deal with someone having a different point of view, yet myself and others like me where I live have to respect and live with the point of view of others.Why is this such a hard concept?

[marius]

...Everyone has to deal with someone having a different point of view, yet myself and others like me where I live have to respect and live with the point of view of others.Why is this such a hard concept?

Perhaps the reason to some of the confusion surrounding what is appropriate in the civilized world arises from the difference between 'respect' and 'tolerance'. The idea that you can 'respect' the point of view of all other is logically flawed - you can behave civilized and tolerate different opinions and practices, it is however impossible to respect everything.
If the intention of respect is not tolerance then you would be forced to respect pedophiles, nazis, arsonists, extremists and what have you.

[Johnny_H02]

I truly believe I Respect and tolerate other peoples opinions, hence why I engaged in a discussion about it.If MG3 believes that displaying images of the Prophet is reason to grant validity to attacks or imply that if attacks occur as a result of this sort of imagery being displayed.At best all I can do as someone who respects other peoples points of view is project my own point of view with discussion.

Thats the concept I am trying to drive home.He said something I didn't agree with, so does that give me the right to attack him? or attack others of any sort of Ethnic or professional group he shares in common because I don't share in his views?

The statement he replied to my post with indicates he feels its justified to do so, which is abhorrent in my humble opinion.

[tbk107]

I truly believe I Respect and tolerate other peoples opinions, hence why I engaged in a discussion about it.If MG3 believes that displaying images of the Prophet is reason to grant validity to attacks or imply that if attacks occur as a result of this sort of imagery being displayed.At best all I can do as someone who respects other peoples points of view is project my own point of view with discussion.

Thats the concept I am trying to drive home.He said something I didn't agree with, so does that give me the right to attack him? or attack others of any sort of Ethnic or professional group he shares in common because I don't share in his views?

The statement he replied to my post with indicates he feels its justified to do so, which is abhorrent in my humble opinion.

You are surprised that someone from Pakistan feels it's ok or at least justifiable to use violence against someone they don't agree with or who might have offended them?

[MG 3]

I truly believe I Respect and tolerate other peoples opinions, hence why I engaged in a discussion about it.If MG3 believes that displaying images of the Prophet is reason to grant validity to attacks or imply that if attacks occur as a result of this sort of imagery being displayed.At best all I can do as someone who respects other peoples points of view is project my own point of view with discussion.

Thats the concept I am trying to drive home.He said something I didn't agree with, so does that give me the right to attack him? or attack others of any sort of Ethnic or professional group he shares in common because I don't share in his views?

The statement he replied to my post with indicates he feels its justified to do so, which is abhorrent in my humble opinion.

I never said that I was for attacking but was pointing to the fact that it would happen and ppl would die on both sides. All i wanted was that you by which I mean we the mainstream world try to take one step back to calm down the situation. But this does not mean giving in to AQ & Co.

Funny you thaught that I would be attacking cause uasually guarding embassies comes under our IS duties.

[Laworkerbee]

I dont expect you ppl to understand but I just wanted to forward my point of view and this is one of the most liberal things that you will hear coming out of the muslim world.

I understand where you are coming from Buddy.

[Johnny_H02]

I never said that I was for attacking but was pointing to the fact that it would happen and ppl would die on both sides. All i wanted was that you by which I mean we the mainstream world try to take one step back to calm down the situation. But this does not mean giving in to AQ & Co.

Funny you thaught that I would be attacking cause uasually guarding embassies comes under our IS duties.

I never assumed or said you were attacking anything. I agree that some calm is needed but its hard to be calm when even the smallest of things to one side is such an egregious and insulting offense to the other.

When someone says "if you do this don't go crying when your embassies" are bombed. It is a pretty bold statement its saying that if people display pictures of the Prophet, then they deserve what they get and have no leg to stand on to be outraged by the fact they or their allies were attacked as a result.

I do apologize if you thought my intent was to paint you with this brush, it certainly wasn't however you did endorse that mentality even if it wasn't your intention with that statement.

You seem like a good enough guy and you are just pointing out what you think is right, I may have mis-understood your intentions and if that is the case you have my sincerest apologies.
Cheers!

[MG 3]

I never assumed or said you were attacking anything. I agree that some calm is needed but its hard to be calm when even the smallest of things to one side is such an egregious and insulting offense to the other.

When someone says "if you do this don't go crying when your embassies" are bombed. It is a pretty bold statement its saying that if people display pictures of the Prophet, then they deserve what they get and have no leg to stand on to be outraged by the fact they or their allies were attacked as a result.

I do apologize if you thought my intent was to paint you with this brush, it certainly wasn't however you did endorse that mentality even if it wasn't your intention with that statement.

Cheers!

Come on mate, its not a little thing. Anything to do with Islam for us is uasually tad bigger than the sun.

Well you know these ppl love to blow stuff up. What I was saying that these things will lead to those things happening. Its sort of like we killed Baitullah's son the other day and boom we had a suicide attack on our Div HQ in kohat.
Now this was a must but in the picture situation if you rolled back on this, it gives us Muslims ammo against the extremist. Then we can say, that look the west isnt bad they just have a different way of doing things.

[MG 3]

I understand where you are coming from Buddy.

Thanks mate!

[ex1cdo]

But with freedom comes responcibility. You depict something which leads to global problems and hurts other ppl beliefs than sure do what ever you want. But then dont cry when you get attacked or your embassy burns.

A belief system that is so insecure that it feels violence is an appropriate response to hurt feelings needs a whole lot of maturing before it is taken seriously.

[Johnny_H02]

Come on mate, its not a little thing. Anything to do with Islam for us is uasually tad bigger than the sun.

Well you know these ppl love to blow stuff up. What I was saying that these things will lead to those things happening. Its sort of like we killed Baitullah's son the other day and boom we had a suicide attack on our Div HQ in kohat.
Now this was a must but in the picture situation if you rolled back on this, it gives us Muslims ammo against the extremist. Then we can say, that look the west isnt bad they just have a different way of doing things.

I do agree, there is a fair bit of fear mongering in the western media, and that mongering gives the extremists what they want. You are certainly correct in the sense that violence begets violence regardless of who's intentions are more righteous. I think we simply or I might have just misread your point and I took it out of context.

So I apologize for launching off at you, it was unnecessary.

[Mr.Flint]

This pic seems to be very relevant to the topic, and a good answer to MG 3
http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l235/mr_flint/1b016872.gif

My point is, if muslims do not want to be "provoked" they honestly should start looking at themselves... because cowing to their demands because it supposedly will help against the terrorists, frankly is BS...

How will it help if Britain will allow Muslim medical workers, not to wash their hands above the wrists?

[duhblow7]

http://cdn-www.cracked.com/articleimages/wong/insult_islam.jpg

my applicable image

[4X4Driver]

I understand what you're trying to say also MG3. But there are some ppl here sincerely can't understand what you're sayin..don't blame them for this...that's just the way it is.

[Johnny_H02]

This pic seems to be very relevant to the topic, and a good answer to MG 3
http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l235/mr_flint/1b016872.gif
I wouldn't say so, seeing as it paints all Muslims with a broad stroke.
I have known all kinds of Muslims that are regular everyday working people, that have no desire to make me believe what they believe and vise versa.Most of them didn't have any prejudice towards Jews one way or another for better or worse.

There are some who propagate that double standard illustrated in that cartoon, but double standards of all kinds are enforced even in western society.

[MG 3]

I do agree, there is a fair bit of fear mongering in the western media, and that mongering gives the extremists what they want. You are certainly correct in the sense that violence begets violence regardless of who's intentions are more righteous. I think we simply or I might have just misread your point and I took it out of context.

So I apologize for launching off at you, it was unnecessary.

We both got off on the wrong foot. It scares me at times to think where we are headed for. Believe me that it will get a lot worse than it allready is before it gets better.


This pic seems to be very relevant to the topic, and a good answer to MG 3
http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l235/mr_flint/1b016872.gif


I dont care about the rest but that pic only implicates Pakistanis for something the Iranians and Euro-Muslims do.:roll: and dude arent Danes taller?


I understand what you're trying to say also MG3. But there are some ppl here sincerely can't understand what you're sayin..don't blame them for this...that's just the way it is.

I know. But talking some more only helps to get the point across.

[Laworkerbee]

I know. But talking some more only helps to get the point across.

Exactly, talk it out Bitches :hug:

[MG 3]

Exactly, talk it out Bitches :hug:

I think we should post the meaning for the word FORUM in the rules.

[shocker1]

I get upset at insults to my religion. I make it known here how I feel when that happens. It is how you act upon the insult that describes personal character. I will gladly endure such insults so long as my freedom to speak against it is preserved and the right to criticize my religion must also be preserved. From a Christian POV all the insults can not hurt my God, by going and advocating violence for insults. I would be going against my own beliefs that when a burden of anger causes hatred in my heart, I should seek forgiveness for such thoughts. The best men seek out forgiveness for their enemies even when the enemies are seeking violence on you. Such is the way to lift a burden of hatred from my heart. Hatred is a cancer that is more dangerous to mankind than any enemy.

[dedbunniez]

I get upset at insults to my religion. I make it known here how I feel when that happens. It is how you act upon the insult that describes personal character. I will gladly endure such insults so long as my freedom to speak against it is preserved and the right to criticize my religion must also be preserved. From a Christian POV all the insults can not hurt my God, by going and advocating violence for insults. I would be going against my own beliefs that when a burden of anger causes hatred in my heart, I should seek forgiveness for such thoughts. The best men seek out forgiveness for their enemies even when the enemies are seeking violence on you. Such is the way to lift a burden of hatred from my heart. Hatred is a cancer that is more dangerous to mankind than any enemy.

Amazing post. And right on from the Christian stand point.

[Clayton Gold]

I understand what you're trying to say also MG3. But there are some ppl here sincerely can't understand what you're sayin..don't blame them for this...that's just the way it is.

These are the type of posts that are making people angry and offended.

Insinuating that your argument is the only right one, is acting the same as the extremists.

Everyone likes to speak of "tolerance", but many refuse to accept that for tolerance to work properly - it has to go both ways.

[Dercius]

Everytime I go to a foreign country, (somewhere around europe, middle east, north africa and South america) I do not try to force them to change their culture and laws just because I am moving in or passing by. Even if I dont share their beliefs, I accept that its their country, and that they have their laws. I lived abroad for a few years, and I always complied with local laws even when they were a nonsense according to my beliefs. And if I considered that they were unbearable I just didnt even go.

Thats what lots of muslims need to learn, you can not impose your point of view against the law and culture of the country you are going. Its as easy as that, if you dont like it, you leave it or you shut up and learnt to live with it.

Im tired of this argument, is always the same ****. And it always comes from the same side. You dont see a single christian-catholic, christian-ortodox church in Saudi Arabia(Im not even mentioning a jewish synagogue LOL). As far as I know it is forbidden by law, what will muslims living abroad say if the concept of reciprocity is ever applied????

[Createdeemcee]

Woot to Wiki!!

[Calanen]

But with freedom comes responcibility. You depict something which leads to global problems and hurts other ppl beliefs than sure do what ever you want. But then dont cry when you get attacked or your embassy burns.

So putting a picture of a religious figure, in a western encylopaedia, is a good reason to burn an embassy? Don't you think there needs to be a sense of proportionality here?

[Elemental666]

I dont give a shyt about all that you wrote before the above and cool job on calling me names.

Yeah, lets get back to this post for a second. So Johnny_H writes a rant about how he feels about your post, that said the following:


...But then dont cry when you get attacked or your embassy burns.


This is a pretty much the opposite of what his principles and beliefs are (correct me if I'm wrong Johnny), and I'm sure he found your post offensive.

And you say that you don't give a shyt about it. So answer this, why on earth, would he, or anyone else for that matter, give a damn about what is offensive to you or your religion?

[4X4Driver]

These are the type of posts that are making people angry and offended.

Insinuating that your argument is the only right one, is acting the same as the extremists.

on the contrary, I was sincere when I said "some ppl simply can not understand" I ment, not understanding the reasons why these savages acting like this is because simply you're not a muslim. As a muslim (a secular Turkish one) I can understand the reasons why they're acting like this, but I certainly DON'T approve it. It's just a matter of being "one of them"


Everyone likes to speak of "tolerance", but many refuse to accept that for tolerance to work properly - it has to go both ways.

...and that's my way of showing tolerance; Telling another muslim not to blame you for not being able to understand it (for the reasons I explained above). I would tell this to an extremist who is getting ready to be violent also. I would tell him to show understanding to these drawings, because in their societies there is no law against things like this and it's their society.

I hope this post won't be misunderstood too.

[Johnny_H02]

Yeah, lets get back to this post for a second. So Johnny_H writes a rant about how he feels about your post, that said the following:



This is a pretty much the opposite of what his principles and beliefs are (correct me if I'm wrong Johnny), and I'm sure he found your post offensive.

And you say that you don't give a shyt about it. So answer this, why on earth, would he, or anyone else for that matter, give a damn about what is offensive to you or your religion?

I don't want to speak for MG3 but I don't think he was advocating such a thing, that was my initial reaction as well. However I'm convinced if that were his point, that people bring these attacks on themselves then he would have re-iterated to that effect.

We in the west are very close to making Islam the new Boogey Man for this generation, It used to be the Communists, now its Radical Islam.If we keep adding fuel to the fire, lending credence that Muslims as a whole not as few will attack us in the west when we do things that they don't like.When we do get attacked we will start painting people of that faith with a broad stroke.

He lives in the front lines of it all, Pakistan is one of the hot beds for these guys and he lives there. So a suicide bombing on the news to us which is tragic could be only a county or block away in his case.A guy cannot even run down a train tunnel with a backpack on in the west without taking his life into his own hands, somehow I doubt the security is that tight Islamic terrorists/Radicals can blend with the populace more in a Islamic country than they can in the west, at least visually.

So pissing off extremists directly effects his life more so than any of us.
Just look at the title of this thread for example "MUSLIMS ENRAGED OVER WIKI1!!" who's enraged

Target:To tell wikipedia editors to respect other peoples religion
Sponsored by: Faraz Ahmad
In Islam pictures or Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and other holly figures are not allowed, but on wikipedia they has published some pictures that are showing not only a body with white face but an image that has a complete face.. that is even not allowed by ****AT fact of Islam.
i request all my brothers and sisters to sign this petition so we can tell wikipedia to remove them.Does this qualify as enraged? All I see is a message asking that the images be taken down. I too drew the initial conclusion that MG3 was saying "oh well don't cry if your embassies get bombed" and I don't really think that was the point he was trying to emphasize. It wont simply be a terrorist attack carried out by criminals when ht happens, because we have crafted this new enemy and dehumanized an entire faith of people it will be a Muslim Attack on us.
See where I am going?

MG3 correct me if I am wrong.

[Lazy Lob]

We in the west are very close to making Islam the new Boogey Man for this generation, ..........

And we do this all on our own? We never seem to get anything right.

[Gurdil]

dumberland has no borders

[filochard]

The more you give to religious extremist, the more they want. That's endless. Better ignore them that's just superstition anyway.

[WKD]

Well...everyone but modern society. The message I think it would send is that Wiki needs to conform to religious sensibilities.


I'd just like to quote this post.

Living free is not about conforming to other people's religious sensibilities.

[Rebel 7]

The majority of the people that would understand the sensitivity of the issue are religious people themselves. Everyone else wouldn't know why all the fuss "over an image" because they simply don't hold a religion as sacred or on the same level as others. Someone's view towards God and their religious backbone usually defines their sensitivity to such issues. Others who don't share such sensitivities consider anyone chastising them (for insulting God or religious figures) as a dictator who is stepping on their right of freedom of speech. Likewise (a close analogy), someone who has had a horrible mother and no real relationship with their parents growing up and no real guardian would not be so sensitive to insults against the mother, whereas someone with a good upbringing and close relationship with his mother and father, would be highly offended against even the smallest insult against the mother or father. Hence the insults and attacks on people trying to explain why having an image of prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is unacceptable. Most making these remarks aren't even religious themselves, so how would they understand why Muslims (yes even the moderate ones like myself) would find the image showing the face of any prophet unacceptable. You simply wouldn't understand why, and would backtrack to an argument claiming that it takes away from your "freedom of speech"...the trademark of any failed argument where bigotry meets common sense...and an excuse used by groups ranging from the KKK to the Westboro Church.

To those not aware, let me explain why the image of prophet Muhammad (pbuh) or any prophets (Moses (pbuh), Jesus (pbuh), etc.) is unacceptable to Muslims. In Islam, God is to be worshipped, since no one has exact details of what the prophet's looked like, it was forbidden to draw their images so that people would not turn those images into idols to worship thus moving people away from the message of Islam and one towards misinterpreted messages of people who now were worshipping prophets rather than God.

MG 3 made some very good points, if but anyone could see beyond their shallow view of the situation.

This isn't about us vs. them. I do not know of ONE Muslim that would find the image of any prophet acceptable. That includes me. Am I them? The reason why Muslims are more sensitive towards images of prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is because other prophets (such as prophet Jesus (pbuh)) have images and Christians approve of it because it is considered the symbol of Christian faith, and other religions with othe prophets. Muslims know that prophet Jesus (pbuh) to Christianity and prophet Moses (pbuh) to Judaism is what prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is to Islam, so if Judaism or Christianity approves of images of their respect figurehead, Muslims will understand although they will avoid drawing the images themselves. Hence, the focus and controversy over images of the prophet of Islam and not the other prophets.

Yes, there are morons out there who have insulted Jews, drawn negative images of Jews or called the US "The Great Satan".....but what it boils down to is this.....even these extremists (in their extreme ignorance) will NOT insult Judaism, Christianity, Jesus, Moses, etc. because of the fact that those religions and those figures are considered sacred in Islam as well. When the West turns around and an artist or a handful of people on a forum cheer on the fact that "an image" now will insult the "extremists" what they don't realize in their own ignorance is that it is not the extremists they are insulting, but rather ALL Muslims that are being offended by this image and the fact that people are carrying this brazingly ignorant and ironic "display of courage" and using "freedom of speech" as an excuse to justify it.

Freedom of speech is insulting dead American soldiers and their families, freedom of speech is calling someone a "mother f__ker", freedom of speech is calling all Muslims terrorists and all Jews evil, freedom of speech is drawing an image of Prophet Muhammad knowing full well the intent is to offend as it serves no other purpose, etc. etc. What it boils down to is what you are sensitive to. If you feel the extremists are out of line, that is fine, so do I. However, if you believe that the moderate and well-minded Muslims and others should respect your sensitivities, it would be wise to respect their sensitivities as well, even if you have no understanding or comprehension of such sensitivities. It is a "thank you"/"you are welcome" approach to life, and no one loses in the end but the extremists and ignorant (on both sides) who stick out like a sore thumb on the map of civility.

I don't wish to start a flame-fest and a lack of time made me rush a reply here (I am late now). Forgive me for any mistakes or lack of further explanation.

Regards,
Rebel 7

[budgie]

Forget that. The petition is misconceived. Why should Wiki obey some aspect of Sharia law? They can have their own Sharia wiki where everything is banned if they want.

A petition is a request not a demand. It does not require obedience. Compliance is optional.

Considering the mad calls for death that resulted from the cartoon controversy a while back I find the Islamic world's restraint commendable this time. They're simply asking, in a civilised manner, that their views be respected. Remember wikipedia is a community-based site. Muslims use it too. As members of the community there's no harm in asking, even if the answer in the end is 'no'.

[Hollis]

A petition is a request not a demand. It does not require obedience. Compliance is optional.

Considering the mad calls for death that resulted from the cartoon controversy a while back I find the Islamic world's restraint commendable this time. They're simply asking, in a civilised manner, that their views be respected. Remember wikipedia is a community-based site. Muslims use it too. As members of the community there's no harm in asking, even if the answer in the end is 'no'.


Well said, sort of my thoughts on this issue.

[Johnny_H02]

And we do this all on our own? We never seem to get anything right.
I don't think we do, I am just trying to be objective lol.
I don't think MG3's point was to advocate attacks or justify them.
Call it reading between the lines.

[Laworkerbee]

A petition is a request not a demand. It does not require obedience. Compliance is optional.

Considering the mad calls for death that resulted from the cartoon controversy a while back I find the Islamic world's restraint commendable this time. They're simply asking, in a civilised manner, that their views be respected. Remember wikipedia is a community-based site. Muslims use it too. As members of the community there's no harm in asking, even if the answer in the end is 'no'.

Again well said!

I'm not comfortable agreeing with you so often during an election cycle :|

[ex1cdo]

A petition is a request not a demand. It does not require obedience. Compliance is optional.

In that case, perhaps the language of the petition ought to have been moderated. The only request was to co-religionists to sign the petition "... so we can tell wikipedia to remove them."

Sounds a bit like an emphatic demand to me.

[MkH]

The muslim community peacefully requests the Wikipedia staff to remove the picture.

Or have their heads cut off.

[ed316]

They are doing it peacefully and I applaud them. They have a right to peaceful petition so I don't see anything wrong with it.

[CPL Trevoga]

I would put a warning to Muslims users of Wiki for that page. This link contains images of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) or something like that. Clicking on the link is haraam and you will burn in Hudud.

[budgie]

In that case, perhaps the language of the petition ought to have been moderated. The only request was to co-religionists to sign the petition "... so we can tell wikipedia to remove them."

Sounds a bit like an emphatic demand to me.

Now you're splitting hairs. We could argue about the semantics but the language doesn't seem as strong to me as it apparently does to you. Likewise in the context any difference between the two words is marginal and quite possibly unintended.


The muslim community peacefully requests the Wikipedia staff to remove the picture.

Or have their heads cut off.

See? That's a real difference...


I would put a warning to Muslims users of Wiki for that page. This link contains images of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) or something like that. Clicking on the link is haraam and you will burn in Hudud.

A warning doesn't have to take the piss.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

However, if you believe that the moderate and well-minded Muslims and others should respect your sensitivities, it would be wise to respect their sensitivities as well, even if you have no understanding or comprehension of such sensitivities.

It's not like we don't understand or comprehend - on the contrary, this is water that passed under our bridge hundreds of years ago. And as such, we now consider such beliefs to have no place in a contemporary civilization. Been there, done that - tried it, didn't like it, had a reformation with about 1/3 of Europe going under the sword in the process just so we can offend the crap out of each other.

Bear in mind that we get outraged at all sorts of things in our own society - but we long ago established social contracts wherein liberal egalitarian principles required that we leave it to each person to express themselves to the fullest extent possible. Even if it is distasteful, against scripture, or just plain stupid. Piss Christ comes to mind - that one was a dandy. Hey, it's on Wiki too.

Both the internet, and unvarnished representations of history are part and parcel, indeed direct results of our civilization, and therefore I find it odd that we would be expected to roll back the clock on certain aspects that other non-mainstream cultures disapprove of. Depictions of Mohammad did exist, and they do exist, and IMHO we should not vacuum them from the face of history for the sake of somebody's religious dogma.

If they don't approve of it, I'm totally fine with that, and I understand. In fact I expect it. They can plead their case and see if it's good enough to warrant removal of the picture. I don't like that they're upset - I don't like to upset anybody, I'm a pretty agreeable guy. But that's how we are here, that's how our culture is. Unless the pictures violate our secular laws, I don't see why we should impose external values on ourselves. They're just gonna have to get with the program like the rest of us. Otherwise...where does it end? At what point could we finally say "enough"?

[junglejim]

I think a lot of people here need to separate what happened in the past with regards to the actions of the Muslim world to the cartoon of mohmmed and with this petition. Its a petition its like me saying "Hey man could you hide that **** mag in the closet cause it really offends me" as opposed to banning you from my house cause you brought a **** mag.

Again they are asking nicely this time, wether wiki takes it down or not really isnt a big deal. However, this can be used by some radicals to say "See you asked them nicely and they laughed at you, they only fear us when we bomb them."

I know that for most here its about our freedom to do whatever we want. Well, we also have the freedom to be polite and respectful and if our muslim friends and brothers would feel better if we stop drawing or painting a picture of their prophet, whats it gonna cost us? They arent asking us to take pictures of Jesus, buddha, David koresh down.

[Calanen]

I know that for most here its about our freedom to do whatever we want. Well, we also have the freedom to be polite and respectful and if our muslim friends and brothers would feel better if we stop drawing or painting a picture of their prophet, whats it gonna cost us? They arent asking us to take pictures of Jesus, buddha, David koresh down.


How about, they live their lives they way they want, and we live our lives the way we want. Appeasement of unreasonable demands never stops. The demands just increase.

[Euroamerican]

A petition is a request not a demand (at this time). It does not require obedience (yet). Compliance is optional (....for now)

Sorry, when I hear this sort of phrase, a little bird starts singing words, like the ones in parens above, in my head.

It reminds me of a video I saw a couple of years ago on PBS'es Frontline of two Dutch muslims discussing why they didn't like certain things in Dutch/Western culture. They said it was just a little ignorance or misunderstanding of their faith by the non-muslims. I can't remember the exact phrases they used, but there was a chilling underlying tone in their explanation: "understanding" implied the introduction of sharia law.

No thanks...

[Freedom-Fries]

Muslims need to wake up

and GTFO of the Dark Ages

The Islamic society was once a center for learning, culture, writing, art etc. They once produced great buildings and beautiful art.
http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/islamic_mo_full/
You could draw and paint Muhammed but the society got hijacked by extremists and ever since all they have been know to produce are extremists groups, mud huts in the sandbox, ugly paintings that look like carpets and suicide bombers

Muslims were allowed to pained the Prophet for hundreds of years, modern prohibition on images of Muhammad came from a bunch of retarded extremists who took upon themselves to make some bizarre interpretation of chapter 42 of the Koran and the EXTREMISTS (not the Muslim people) then declared all images of Muhammed were BANNED

Jihad in the Modern Age is pushing Muslim society back into the Dark Ages

Will wikipedia be banned across the muslim world ?

[Lazy Lob]

I don't think we do, I am just trying to be objective lol.
I don't think MG3's point was to advocate attacks or justify them.
Call it reading between the lines.

But that may be our downfall. Are we being too objective as a culture? When the rest of the planet runs on what seems to be pure subjectivity are we being too accommodating?

You’ve obviously buried the hatchet with MG3 but I still find his comment on the burning of embassies utterly appalling even though he wasn’t advocating it. I know that is the reality of the situation but I think on matters of such violence there’s only one side.

His argument about the front lines is more or less a red herring.

[Johnny_H02]

It's not like we don't understand or comprehend - on the contrary, this is water that passed under our bridge hundreds of years ago. And as such, we now consider such beliefs to have no place in a contemporary civilization. Been there, done that - tried it, didn't like it, had a reformation with about 1/3 of Europe going under the sword in the process just so we can offend the crap out of each other.

Bear in mind that we get outraged at all sorts of things in our own society - but we long ago established social contracts wherein liberal egalitarian principles required that we leave it to each person to express themselves to the fullest extent possible. Even if it is distasteful, against scripture, or just plain stupid. Piss Christ comes to mind - that one was a dandy. Hey, it's on Wiki too.

Both the internet, and unvarnished representations of history are part and parcel, indeed direct results of our civilization, and therefore I find it odd that we would be expected to roll back the clock on certain aspects that other non-mainstream cultures disapprove of. Depictions of Mohammad did exist, and they do exist, and IMHO we should not vacuum them from the face of history for the sake of somebody's religious dogma.

If they don't approve of it, I'm totally fine with that, and I understand. In fact I expect it. They can plead their case and see if it's good enough to warrant removal of the picture. I don't like that they're upset - I don't like to upset anybody, I'm a pretty agreeable guy. But that's how we are here, that's how our culture is. Unless the pictures violate our secular laws, I don't see why we should impose external values on ourselves. They're just gonna have to get with the program like the rest of us. Otherwise...where does it end? At what point could we finally say "enough"?

That sums up exactly how I feel about the entire situation succinctly.
Although I think my launching off at MG3 was uncalled for. And to clear up my stance for Lazybob I think MG3 was saying that its inevitable that radicals will attack as a result of example: depicting pictures of Muhammed.

Not that he agreed with it one way or another, again I could be wrong and I really don't want to speak for the guy.

[Asheren]

At this rate in ten years we won't be able to buy bacon because a muslim might see us eating it and he will feel offended.

[T3ngu]

At this rate in ten years we won't be able to buy bacon because a muslim might see us eating it and he will feel offended.

Just like Christmas is banned in state schools in Australia. Offend someone, oh no!

[MG 3]

I don't want to speak for MG3 but I don't think he was advocating such a thing, that was my initial reaction as well. However I'm convinced if that were his point, that people bring these attacks on themselves then he would have re-iterated to that effect.

We in the west are very close to making Islam the new Boogey Man for this generation, It used to be the Communists, now its Radical Islam.If we keep adding fuel to the fire, lending credence that Muslims as a whole not as few will attack us in the west when we do things that they don't like.When we do get attacked we will start painting people of that faith with a broad stroke.

He lives in the front lines of it all, Pakistan is one of the hot beds for these guys and he lives there. So a suicide bombing on the news to us which is tragic could be only a county or block away in his case.A guy cannot even run down a train tunnel with a backpack on in the west without taking his life into his own hands, somehow I doubt the security is that tight Islamic terrorists/Radicals can blend with the populace more in a Islamic country than they can in the west, at least visually.

So pissing off extremists directly effects his life more so than any of us.
Just look at the title of this thread for example "MUSLIMS ENRAGED OVER WIKI1!!" who's enraged
Does this qualify as enraged? All I see is a message asking that the images be taken down. I too drew the initial conclusion that MG3 was saying "oh well don't cry if your embassies get bombed" and I don't really think that was the point he was trying to emphasize. It wont simply be a terrorist attack carried out by criminals when ht happens, because we have crafted this new enemy and dehumanized an entire faith of people it will be a Muslim Attack on us.
See where I am going?

MG3 correct me if I am wrong.

Very right. You now get the exact point that I was trying to make. And the title is a bit over the top when the pitition is peaceful and is bieng done over a debate.


Yeah, lets get back to this post for a second. So Johnny_H writes a rant about how he feels about your post, that said the following:

This is a pretty much the opposite of what his principles and beliefs are (correct me if I'm wrong Johnny), and I'm sure he found your post offensive.

And you say that you don't give a shyt about it. So answer this, why on earth, would he, or anyone else for that matter, give a damn about what is offensive to you or your religion?

I was trying to say "do what ever you ppl want. My religion lies within me and in there it can never be desecrated." It was fustration that had gotten the best of me, hence the harsh language.
Apologies Johnny H.


The majority of the people that would understand the sensitivity of the issue are religious people themselves. Everyone else wouldn't know why all the fuss "over an image" because they simply don't hold a religion as sacred or on the same level as others. Someone's view towards God and their religious backbone usually defines their sensitivity to such issues. Others who don't share such sensitivities consider anyone chastising them (for insulting God or religious figures) as a dictator who is stepping on their right of freedom of speech. Likewise (a close analogy), someone who has had a horrible mother and no real relationship with their parents growing up and no real guardian would not be so sensitive to insults against the mother, whereas someone with a good upbringing and close relationship with his mother and father, would be highly offended against even the smallest insult against the mother or father. Hence the insults and attacks on people trying to explain why having an image of prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is unacceptable. Most making these remarks aren't even religious themselves, so how would they understand why Muslims (yes even the moderate ones like myself) would find the image showing the face of any prophet unacceptable. You simply wouldn't understand why, and would backtrack to an argument claiming that it takes away from your "freedom of speech"...the trademark of any failed argument where bigotry meets common sense...and an excuse used by groups ranging from the KKK to the Westboro Church.

To those not aware, let me explain why the image of prophet Muhammad (pbuh) or any prophets (Moses (pbuh), Jesus (pbuh), etc.) is unacceptable to Muslims. In Islam, God is to be worshipped, since no one has exact details of what the prophet's looked like, it was forbidden to draw their images so that people would not turn those images into idols to worship thus moving people away from the message of Islam and one towards misinterpreted messages of people who now were worshipping prophets rather than God....................

Very nicely done!!

[MG 3]

But that may be our downfall. Are we being too objective as a culture? When the rest of the planet runs on what seems to be pure subjectivity are we being too accommodating?

You’ve obviously buried the hatchet with MG3 but I still find his comment on the burning of embassies utterly appalling even though he wasn’t advocating it. I know that is the reality of the situation but I think on matters of such violence there’s only one side.

His argument about the front lines is more or less a red herring.

All I did was point towards the fact that it would be un-stoppable when it could all be prevented by the west showing a bigger heart.

My English isnt that good so pls elaborate on "red herring".:oops:

[9mmRifle]

http://www.ciai-s.net/islamic_conference.jpg

why are so many muslims always angry at something ?

[Laworkerbee]

Muslims Enraged at Wikipedia

They can't win, start a petition and the press calls Muslims enraged :roll:

[Clayton Gold]

on the contrary, I was sincere when I said "some ppl simply can not understand" I ment, not understanding the reasons why these savages acting like this is because simply you're not a muslim. As a muslim (a secular Turkish one) I can understand the reasons why they're acting like this, but I certainly DON'T approve it. It's just a matter of being "one of them"

Its not an issue of understanding, I just can't accept that argument.

You are essentially saying -unless westerners "change our ways", we can expect to be attacked by radical muslims. So therefore, we should comply.

I don't particularly appreciate being told to submit, or else.


...and that's my way of showing tolerance; Telling another muslim not to blame you for not being able to understand it (for the reasons I explained above). I would tell this to an extremist who is getting ready to be violent also. I would tell him to show understanding to these drawings, because in their societies there is no law against things like this and it's their society.

I hope this post won't be misunderstood too.

Apologies if you thought this par of my post was directed at you. It was just a random thought that I put out there. The way I see it - for a group demanding so much tolerance for their ways, it sure does not seem to be returned in kind.

[9mmRifle]

Here it is
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/2/removal-of-the-pics-of-muhammad-from-wikipedia
Sign up



the signs in the petition bears the testimony the fact that Muslims all Over the world are harassed and depressed by this WIKI move to not allow removal of pic in the name of freedom of expression.I request wikipedian administrators to allow the removal of pics in Order to maintain the dignity of Muslims feelings as No expression can allow to abuse someone’s Prophet.Shabiha


I fear that this arbitrary Step of wikipedians to not allow the removal of Pic may Lead to Confusion and Unrest in the Muslim world.

Muslims Enraged by BlaBla

News at Eleven

http://www.theaugeanstables.com/wp-content/images/2e15ad1.jpg

[California Joe]

I think we should post the meaning for the word FORUM in the rules.

The FORUM works fine.

Petitions: Good

Mental demonstrations and beheadings and threats of death and fatwas etc.: Stupid

[4X4Driver]

Apologies if you thought this par of my post was directed at you. It was just a random thought that I put out there.

No problem..apology accepted. I'm glad you understood what I'm trying to say here. :)

[Lazy Lob]

All I did was point towards the fact that it would be un-stoppable when it could all be prevented by the west showing a bigger heart.

Dilated cardiomyopathy kills. Try it for yourselves it may cure some of that divine arrogance ;-)

[Calanen]

All I did was point towards the fact that it would be un-stoppable when it could all be prevented by the west showing a bigger heart.

My English isnt that good so pls elaborate on "red herring".:oops:

No - its not heart that some in the muslim world want us to show, it is cowardice. To bend in the breeze and be cowed by the underlying fear of an unreasonable and irrational violent response when any of their demands are not met. To accept any and all demands based on the implicit threat of further violence if those demands are not adhered to.

Heart means saying "Énough'' and '"We are not afraid of you." And to cave into demands, will just lead to further demands, until the West is actually run by a government of Islamic clerics on speed dial, where our politicians and other institutions constantly ask the islamic world for permission to live our lives the way we want to.

[Afro-European]

What's wrong with those people??? Wiki should stand the ground.

[JKD]

It's an online petition. A request. I must have 'signed' half a dozen of them over the years for various things. I never felt I was "enraged" or "demanding" anything by doing so and in fact it generally just leaves you with a pissing into the wind sort of feeling. They were well within their rights to ask and Wiki was well within it's rights to say no.

[Asheren]

Just like Christmas is banned in state schools in Australia. Offend someone, oh no!

I don't care that much about x-mas but if they ban a bacon ill start my own terroris organisation. p-)

[caksz]

Asking for moderate muslims to suppressed the extremist and at the same time fuel up more fire on issue that anger all the muslims :P

[Nephilim]

hilarious...

wonder when theyll be enraged over their own stupidity...

that painting is propably from their own cultural literature...

[MG 3]

Dilated cardiomyopathy kills. Try it for yourselves it may cure some of that divine arrogance ;-)

Knowing that we'll be going to heaven, arrogance is part of the package.p-)