This is very interesting if you are not a liberal demowishy washer that is

[Hyllyn]

http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi

And if it get moved to the archives you can read it here:

As my regular readers know, I've long been skeptical of the "Religion of Peace" moniker for Muslims — for at least 3,000 reasons right off the top of my head. I think the evidence is going my way this week.

The culture editor of a newspaper in Denmark suspected writers and cartoonists were engaging in self-censorship when it came to the Religion of Peace. It was subtle things, like a Danish comedian's statement, paraphrased by The New York Times, "that he had no problem urinating on the Bible but that he would not dare do the same to the Quran."

So, after verifying that his life insurance premiums were paid up, the editor expressly requested cartoons of Muhammad from every cartoonist with a Danish cartoon syndicate. Out of 40 cartoonists, only 10 accepted the invitation, most of them submitting utterly neutral drawings with no political content whatsoever.

But three cartoons made political points.

One showed Muhammad turning away suicide bombers from the gates of heaven, saying "Stop, stop — we ran out of virgins!" — which I believe was a commentary on Muslims' predilection for violence. Another was a cartoon of Muhammad with horns, which I believe was a commentary on Muslims' predilection for violence. The third showed Muhammad with a turban in the shape of a bomb, which I believe was an expression of post-industrial ennui in a secular — oops, no, wait: It was more of a commentary on Muslims' predilection for violence.

In order to express their displeasure with the idea that Muslims are violent, thousands of Muslims around the world engaged in rioting, arson, mob savagery, flag-burning, murder and mayhem, among other peaceful acts of nonviolence.

Muslims are the only people who make feminists seem laid-back.

The little darlings brandish placards with typical Religion of Peace slogans, such as: "Behead Those Who Insult Islam," "Europe, you will pay, extermination is on the way" and "Butcher those who mock Islam." They warn Europe of their own impending 9/11 with signs that say: "Europe: Your 9/11 will come" — which is ironic, because they almost had me convinced the Jews were behind the 9/11 attack.

The rioting Muslims claim they are upset because Islam prohibits any depictions of Muhammad — though the text is ambiguous on beheadings, suicide bombings and flying planes into skyscrapers.

The belief that Islam forbids portrayals of Muhammad is recently acquired. Back when Muslims created things, rather than blowing them up, they made paintings, frescoes, miniatures and prints of Muhammad.

But apparently the Quran is like the Constitution: It's a "living document," capable of sprouting all-new provisions at will. Muslims ought to start claiming the Quran also prohibits indoor plumbing, to explain their lack of it.

Other interpretations of the Quran forbid images of humans or animals, which makes even a child's coloring book blasphemous. That's why the Taliban blew up those priceless Buddhist statues, bless their innocent, peace-loving little hearts.

Largely unnoticed in this spectacle is the blinding fact that one nation is missing from the long list of Muslim countries (by which I mean France and England) with hundreds of crazy Muslims experiencing bipolar rage over some cartoons: Iraq. Hey — maybe this democracy thing does work! The barbaric behavior of Europe's Muslims suggests that the European welfare state may not be attracting your top-notch Muslims.

Making the rash assumption for purposes of discussion that Islam is a religion and not a car-burning cult, even a real religion can't go bossing around other people like this.

Catholics aren't short on rules, but they couldn't care less if non-Catholics use birth control. Conservative Jews have no interest in forbidding other people from mixing meat and dairy. Protestants don't make a peep about other people eating food off one another's plates. (Just stay away from our plates — that's disgusting.)

But Muslims think they can issue decrees about what images can appear in newspaper cartoons. Who do they think they are, liberals?

COPYRIGHT 2006 ANN COULTER

[Jim]

It's also completely a one sided uneducated guess at trying to prove a point.

[Mojo Toner]

This is a very sensitive matter, and i dobut it should be discussed tbh

[Taurendil]

Muslims are not all the same as all of the people aren't. Seeing those car-burners, ambassy-destroyers etc makes you think that all the muslims are like them. In my opinion this is wrong. Those people are criminals and should be treated as such.

Picturing an animal or eating pork for instance is just another thing! But portrayal of the God, let
alone in caricatures, does offend muslims. That's where the so-called political correctness is essential to my way of thinking.

Though, for many but not all people of the eastern islam culture it's difficult to understand that  all people of Europe or Denmark can't be guilty for they live in precious different world.

[Icy]

Its so stupid when these Muslim's get 'offended' by a cartoon.

The Cartoon was NOT at fault - The Muslim's are.  They look for any excuse to start a riot, they're evil, murderous monters.  By rights they should not be in Britain anyway, but when they in OUR country, telling US they're going to 'behead us'...thats five hundred steps too far.

These people should be killed, but failing that, shoved in jail for an eternity.

If someone puts a cartoon of say, a Wiccan God, I wouldn't use that as an excuse to start a massive riot.  Neither would most people.

But these Muslims are the scum of the Earth.  The Police should arrest them (or petrol-bomb the lot of them)

And when I say Muslims, I mean the extremists.  I am aware there are perfectly nice Muslims out there.

[In AmericEar]

.... *jaw drops to floor* I thought I had a strong opinion.


..... I do however believe that burning a building down was a little too far. I respect the other muslims who took to a calm walk through the streets with banners NOT threatening death.... I think they went about the issue a lot better

[Taurendil]

Its so stupid when these Muslim's get 'offended' by a cartoon.

The Cartoon was NOT at fault - The Muslim's are.  They look for any excuse to start a riot, they're evil, murderous monters.  By rights they should not be in Britain anyway, but when they in OUR country, telling US they're going to 'behead us'...thats five hundred steps too far.

These people should be killed, but failing that, shoved in jail for an eternity.

If someone puts a cartoon of say, a Wiccan God, I wouldn't use that as an excuse to start a massive riot.  Neither would most people.

But these Muslims are the scum of the Earth.  The Police should arrest them (or petrol-bomb the lot of them)

And when I say Muslims, I mean the extremists.  I am aware there are perfectly nice Muslims out there.

Muslims should be put to death?? Muslims are scum of the Earth?? I think that the term 'muslims' by no means can be applied when you mean extemists. After all even among extremists not all are muslims. Terrorism and extremism don't depend on nationality or religion, this is a mith.

[Blaen]

"Only in a world with religion can good people do evil things". No religion is anymore evil than another, they're all pretty crap.  Organised religion is all complete bollocks. It's times like these that I think Marx had the right idea, suppress the damn thing and use common sense. 

[Jim]

Aye, but Marx was only a theorist and attempts to suspress religion in the soviet union more less failed 

[Beleriel]

I think it is important to not over generalise really.

I can understand how upset you feel Icy and in some ways I can agree with your sentiments BUT I also have some friends who are Muslim and they are not like that at all.  It is the extremists you are talking about and most decent Muslims are appalled by their actions. 

You know, someone said something very interesting the other day which set me to thinking.  They said that the Muslims are going through their own 'Middle Age' and their own 'inquisition'.  When you think about it, it does mirror how Christianity was centuries ago.  I thought it was an interesting parallel to draw.

[Icy]

Before anyone rants back at me, I put at the end of my post I meant extremist Muslims.  No matter what you thinhk I meant, I stated what I meant 

And I am sorry, but I am not at fault when I say I don't want these people in my country.

A good example. 

Abu Hamza, the vile pig who should be sent straight into an active volcano.  His wife is given, I think, two council houses and a few hundred pounds of money a month.  Why?

I don't get that, and I was born here, I'm a British Citizen.  Why can't I get a free house and money given to me?

Wait, my husband isn't in jail for being a terror mongerer, is he?  Oh well

[Taurendil]

Why just not to say terrorists or extremists? Why to use 'muslims'?

And I am sorry, but I am not at fault when I say I don't want these people in my country.

A good example. 

Abu Hamza, the vile pig who should be sent straight into an active volcano.  His wife is given, I think, two council houses and a few hundred pounds of money a month.  Why?

I don't get that, and I was born here, I'm a British Citizen.  Why can't I get a free house and money given to me?

Wait, my husband isn't in jail for being a terror mongerer, is he?  Oh well

When you say 'these people' do you mean extremists or muslims?

I agree with you about that example, the UK has definitely wrong policy of immigration. Extremists must be excluded from society.

[Hyllyn]

I agree with you about that example, the UK has definitely wrong policy of immigration. Extremists must be excluded from society.

 [Pretends to be Jim and Phil]

 That in itself is rubbish and most uneducated and not short of being extremist in itself.[/Finished Pretending]

 Man pretending that stank 

 I think the exercise here is to see if people can actually make use of their freedom of expression without it starting a war.

 That person whom Beleriel quotes is me, I do think that they are going through their own Inquisition at an entirely different time. Not that if it was the other way round the West would fare any better but we all know that after the grip of religion is broken on a State then most enlightening things happen.

 It is only since the Church and organized religion in the west declined when we started to leave what people considered as the 'Dark Ages' and it is not because of the "Barbarians" that they were dark, but because of the oppression of religion (See Galileo and Copernico for an example of the bigotry of Organized religion in the West).

 So I don't think it is right whatever their religion decrees to try and pretend we are walking on egg shells so as not to offend them. Especially being over here they should show a level of respect for the hospitality they receive no matter how bad it be.
 
 I would like to think that to most muslims (it isn't the case as I know a fair few and went to school with a few as well who invited me along to their houses) there's a way in which we can treat them that doesn't have to imply we being inferior to them, as many of them by default consider us as infidels and therefore not worthy of respect or consideration, in fact we do not cause any offence if we don't attract their attention, otherwise we offend their every credo.

 Only a handful of them have shown me that it isn't that way, but then again they had been born from Muslim parents in Venezuela and fully embraced the culture, so I wouldn't know about absolutes in this case.

 

[Mithrandir]

"Only in a world with religion can good people do evil things". No religion is anymore evil than another, they're all pretty crap.  Organised religion is all complete bollocks. It's times like these that I think Marx had the right idea, suppress the damn thing and use common sense.

Abso-bloody-lutely! I couldn't agree more!


Personally I feel that although it is somehow "against" their wishes for there to be depictions of Mohammad (or depictions of Mohammad as a terrorist), I do think they have taken it as an excuse to attack the West, yet again. The author of that text makes a valid point - other religions don't go off on one when people do things that disagree with their feelings (although I heard a Catholic guy in Horsham yesterday saying that lesbianism was an abomination - although he wasn't rioting).

I also think that these people who have taken it as an opportunity to burn flags and the such like should remember and recognise our beliefs and rights - and that includes freedom of speech. They should have to accept that our values and societies are different to theirs (shame some Western governments don't do the same to them which is part of the problem), and that means that if a cartoonist wants to make a political point, he can and should.

I do agree, however, with the editor, who, even though he was Danish, made some valid points which can be applied to the UK. That is, Islam is sheltered from political attacks and points for some reason. (Although it seems as if everyone is apart from white, atheist, homosexual men.)

I also think Icy has (inadvertantly) raised a good point. That is that people in the UK get annoyed with Islam as a whole because they see these terrorist and extremists and people burning flags on the telly, but this somehow gets connected with immigration issues in the UK and how our "culture" is being destroyed by Muslims.

I think this thread should keep off the "Muslims are bad" and just focus on these cartoons...

[Icy]

Thats almost impossible, as the cartoons are directed to Islam, how can you steer away from it? 

And why did I say Muslim's instead of extremists?  Because I wanted too    If I state at the end of my post that I did not mean all Muslims, then whats the problem?  Lets stick to the debate and not what I said and what I meant, yes?

If these extremists (better word?) want to cause riots, burn flags and threaten Europe, fair enough....just DON'T do it in our countries!  Get out, go back to where you come from...THEN have a moan.

I think thats fair, don't you?

Call to undefined function tportal_version()