Jesus and Mo (peace be upon them)
This is a press release from One Law for All
HOLD THIS DATE – 11 February 2012
A Day to Defend Free ExpressionOne Law for All is calling for a rally in defence of free expression and the right to criticise religion on 11 February 2012 in central London from 2-4pm.
We are also calling for simultaneous events and acts in defence of free expression on 11 February in countries world-wide.
The call follows an increased number of attacks on free expression in the UK, including a 17 year old being forced to remove a Jesus and Mo cartoon or face expulsion from his Sixth Form College and demands by the UCL Union that the Atheist society remove a Jesus and Mo cartoon from its Facebook page. It also follows threats of violence, police being called, and the cancellation of a meeting at Queen Mary College where One Law for All spokespersonAnne Marie Waters was to deliver a speech on Sharia. Saying ‘Who gave these kuffar the right to speak?’, anIslamist website called for the disruption of the meeting. Two days later at the same college, though, the Islamic Society held a meeting on traditional Islam with a speaker who has called for the death of apostates, those who mock Islam, and secularist Muslims.
Whilst none of this is new, recent events reveal an increased confidence of Islamists to censor free expression publicly, particularly given the support received from universities and other bodies in the name of false tolerance, cultural sensitivity and respect.
The right to criticise religion, however, is a fundamental right that is crucial to many, including Muslims.
Clearly, the time has come to take a firm and uncompromising stand for free expression and against all forms of threats and censorship.
11 February is our chance to take that stand.
You need to be there.
Enough is enough.
74 Comments
How hypocrite these self styled defenders of freedom are.
Ahmad Deedat… remembers …. he said we wanted to advertise an event in the Times. And he got blocked.
When government tried to block a visitation from …. Geert Wilders – there was uproar of freedom of speech….
Whereas Zakir Naik is successfully blocked. Not that I am in favour of Naik … in anyway …. but fair is fair. So what crime did Naik commit that Wilders hasn’t?
——
Make no mistake … only purpose of this website is to be anti-Islam and spread hate about Muslims… in any way & shape possible.
Sometime it copies material Christian sites… work of dear Robert Spencer and co.
And some time its author/s remember that they are Secular and Atheist.
All the in the name of being anti-Islam… that is the unifying factor.
—–
At least come out openly say it…. rather than hiding like a coward.
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
How hypocrite these self styled defenders of freedom are.
Ahmad Deedat… remembers …. he said we wanted to advertise an event in the Times. And he got blocked… the reason… dark forces of freedom.
When government tried to block a visitation from …. Geert Wilders – there was uproar of freedom of speech….
Whereas Zakir Naik is successfully blocked. Not that I am in favour of Naik … in anyway …. but fair is fair. So what crime did Naik commit that Wilders hasn’t?
——
Make no mistake … only purpose of this website is to be anti-Islam and spread hate about Muslims… in any way & shape possible.
Sometime it copies material Christian sites… work of dear Robert Spencer and co.
And some time its author/s remember that they are Secular and Atheist.
All the in the name of being anti-Islam… that is the unifying factor.
—–
At least come out openly say it…. rather than hiding like a coward.
Incitement of hate … if it wrong for Muslims then it is wrong for non-Muslims.
What “incitement of hate”? Jesus and Mo? LOL On the other hand the Muslim who entered the meeting at Queen Mary took photographs of those who attended told them he knew who they were and where they lived and would “hunt them down” if they said anything about his “holy prophet” That alone would do more to incite hatred against Islam and Muslims than any number of “Jesus and Mo” cartoons.
Hate on hate….
Explain?? What did I say that was hateful?? Now I know from your other posts that I’m wasting my time and its rather like having a discussion with a set of dining room furniture but please do enlighten me.
Explain?? What did I say that was hateful?? Now I know from your other posts that I’m wasting my time and its rather like having a discussion with a set of dining room furniture but please do enlighten me.
My dear why make it so personal… the reference of was of the above clash…. one hate I pointed out. The other you…
And you have already passed judgement… yet you still chose to comment and ask a question. A childish mistake…
—–
This whole site is gathering of HATE. That is er….. obvious. Secularism/Atheism is simply a guise…. else teachings of Robert Spencer are given their full due.
—–
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
This might be a useful read
What hate did you point out?? Jesus and Mo or a meeting at QM?? Not in the same league as threatening s a group of people with physical violence. Maybe you think any criticism of your faith is hateful??
What hate did you point out??
If you read the above it is obvious….
—–
But I would like to refer you to this:
Well if you regard that as hateful Amin you must have lived a very sheltered life.
“Well if you regard that as hateful Amin you must have lived a very sheltered life.”
The intent my darling…. the intent. Hate is hate. This site is hate…..
—–
Else why depend on lies of Robert Spencer to explain your beliefs… the claim you are secular/atheist/agnostic – ex-this and ex-that.
Drawing pictures of Mohammad is not ‘incitement to hate’
Any claim that it is, is simply an attempt to project the blasphemy death and murder taboo onto non Muslims, and it will fail.
Everyone who wants to; non Muslims, liberal dissenting Muslims alike, are free to say what they want about Mohammad, depict him as they please, and think and say what they want to about Islam and the Quran.
We are free born people with free consciences and no amount of whining by blasphemy projecting chauvinists, and their sympathetic enablers amongsome parts of the Left in the name of ‘multiculturalism’ will ever change that.
In cases such as this are the police actually doing anything to prosecute the Islamist groups who are seeking to prevent free speech at universities and elsewhere? If the police will not take an interest in the issue of free speech, surely the threats made should lead to some kind of action being taken against the perpetrators?
Drawing pictures of Mohammad is not ‘incitement to hate’
Per se…. no. But the intention of the one drawing and the purpose they are used… does. For example the reason being displayed on this site …. is “hate”
Inherent hypocrisy is a huge issue…
Go to someone like Daniel Pipes website. he on one hand has all the collection anti-Islam propaganda…. but dare you say anything about Judaism and Christianity. He will use free speech too… but discard it at the first hurdle.
—–
Everyone who wants to; non Muslims, liberal dissenting Muslims alike, are free to say what they want about Mohammad, depict him as they please, and think and say what they want to about Islam and the Quran.
It doesn’t quite work like that…. there is no absolute free-speech. Take the famous danish case… there the purpose was anti-Muslim hate… the same paper had declined to print Jesus cartoons… but clearly
In that instance ….. newspaper is an institute, an organisation. It has a responsibility… else no one would’ve known the danish cartoonist. No one was impinging on his free speech.
We are free born people with free consciences and no amount of whining by blasphemy projecting chauvinists, and their sympathetic enablers amongsome parts of the Left in the name of ‘multiculturalism’ will ever change that.
Yet this is intended to be leftist website… or had you actually not noticed…
But this is why the hate speech works…. a Right winger coming to Left wing defense … united for a common enemy…
Amin
Your chauvinistic bigotry and far-right supremacist hatred of free conscience will never prevail. Reconcile yourself to it.
I have been called many things …. but right wing….
Making an argument personal is illogical … this might be worth a read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
—-
I have clearly exposed that this ‘freedom of speech and etc’ only stretches to being anti-Islam.
“I have been called many things …. but right wing….”
This is a really common reaction.
Most people pushing the Islamist agenda are the last people top realise that their brand of theocratic supremacist politics is far-right religious extremism.
This is probably because most come from South Asian backgrounds. And most people, particularly Asians (Pakistanis, Indians, Bangladeshis) believe that they belong to the left-wing simply because Asians have been traditionally associated with the left.
What a ridiculous irony!
Right wing is an appropriate description for those who would try to deny or stigmatise free speech in the way that religious literalists do.
Right wing is an appropriate description for those who would try to deny or stigmatise free speech [...]
Soviet Union? East Germany? Red China? Cambodia? Cuba? North Korea?
[...] in the way that religious literalists do.
What self-anointed “leftists” are hysterically calling “far-right” is actually far left. That’s why getting into bed with Islamist thugs is so congenial to them.
Most people pushing the Islamist agenda are the last people top realise that their brand of theocratic supremacist politics is far-right religious extremism.
What does the word “Islamist” mean. Is that a new word for “Muslim”. A forced label…. a bit like “nigger” used to be…?
The real funny thing is … right wingers are the ones that push this word so loudly…
A neat western classification…. so which wing are you promoting
Anyways …. this site skips from pushing agenda of Robert Spencer to Richard Dawkins… matey that is is such an impressive range.
All in the name of being Anti-Islam….
This is probably because most come from South Asian backgrounds. And most people, particularly Asians (Pakistanis, Indians, Bangladeshis) believe that they belong to the left-wing simply because Asians have been traditionally associated with the left.
The above is nothing more than a silly stereotype…. why don’t you look it up… do you know how many million of people are South East Asian?
How many …. religions and sub-cultures they belong to. And you think they are all “right-wing”.
———
Excuse me …. but you seem a little *confused*
Oh …. and why dont you use your own name. What are you so afraid of?
Suzy… you sent me this hatemail… but on what basis? What did I do to you….?
Where ….. would you care to illustrate? See… people who have anger problems – have this in-built intuition… like a bull who see red…. whomsoever they perceive to be against them… they lash out. Without bothering to …. finding out.
Sorry …. but with those vile words … cruel insults…. and I am meant to believe you stand for “free conscience”? Ah no….
————-
Sort yourself out dear…. you cannot even talk to someone who doesn’t share your views… see … Given the above evidence you don’t stand for “free speech, conscience”
It is unity in being anti-Islam/Muslim. If you had the power you would eradicate me….
“What does the word “Islamist” mean.”
A Muslim who has problems accepting and getting their head around European Enlightenment values.
“The above is nothing more than a silly stereotype…. why don’t you look it up… do you know how many million of people are South East Asian? “
It was a stereotype but one that is breaking down. I will bet money that you regard yourself as a left-leaning liberal and consider the “right-wing” as anathema although your values and opinions are completely located in the religious far-right. That is the irony.
Thank you…. see the same terms means so many different things…. depending ho you asked. Quick Conclusion: That is forced label…. and it is wrong. And even more than wrong it is extremely dangerous… and it is hatred… deep hatred. The kind you get from Bin Laden…
I mean do you label everyone rejecting West as something…. or other. What is a Jew that doesn’t sign up to “European Enlightenment values”?
—–
Nope…. don’t regard myself as liberal at all. And I don’t think you know anything about my religious values…..
Stereotype are mostly wrong….
———
And why are you so afraid to use your own name?
Just look at the views of people that wrap themselves with so called enlightened values… yet the hate…..
The presumptions, prejudice, stereotypes and insults… I dont hold them values. Dear me no.
The Spittoon recognises the need to address rising levels of racism, antisemitism and anti-Muslim bigotry without resorting to unhelpful and trivialising accusations of “Islamophobia”.
This is a joke…. this site is anti-Muslim bigotry. It accepts the term “anti-Semitic” – although it used wrongly… Arabs too are Semitic. Not only the Jews.
Yet has problems with the term “Islamophobia” – which Muslims at large tend to use.
—–
And that is equality… how?
Let me unpack it for you.
Islamophobia could be hatred or fear of Islamic doctrine or ideology. Islamophobia may be practiced legitamtely as a criticism of Islamic beliefs which lead to supremacist tendencies. Islamophobia could also be sectarianism and as such is also practiced by many Muslims – it could be defined as Sunni hatred of Shia or Shia hatred of Alawis or Sunni hatred of Ahmadis.
Anti Muslim bigotry is hatred of Muslims as a code for racist hatred.
“Nope…. don’t regard myself as liberal at all. And I don’t think you know anything about my religious values…..”
You’ve made them manifestly clear in your comments. You seem to have a major problem with freedom of expression if the subject moves to the subject of Islam.
“I mean do you label everyone rejecting West as something…. or other. What is a Jew that doesn’t sign up to “European Enlightenment values”?”
A Frum.
“And why are you so afraid to use your own name?”
I don’t care if Amin is your real name or not. I don’t particularly care who you are and I don’t expect you to about me either.
You’ve made them manifestly clear in your comments. You seem to have a major problem with freedom of expression if the subject moves to the subject of Islam.
How and where…. I have problem with adulterous hate… and this site is that. Its objectives appear devious and untruthful.
Europe historically has very large body of work – where criticism of Islam is concerned – Academic and otherwise. Westerners study Islam far more than Muslims study the West.
I have not called for this site to be shut down or anything… and I am engaging
And I have right ot express my views…. or don’t I.
I stay away from personal remarks…. which many commenting here don’t.
So…. your conclusion is wrong and baseless. And you do have trouble with making judgments. Stereotyping south-east Asians…. a gigantic group.
And forcing labels on people…. that is not very “freedom or liberal” like.
———–
I don’t care if Amin is your real name or not. I don’t particularly care who you are and I don’t expect you to about me either.
I find your use of the word “Avicenna” as devious. There is lot of cowardice on the Internet… the question isn’t about caring. One of honesty and …. morality…. truth…
Your definition is wrong…. and it doesn’t add up.
“Islamophobia could be hatred or fear of Islamic doctrine or ideology.”
“Anti Muslim bigotry is hatred of Muslims as a code for racist hatred.”
——
Islamophobia could also be sectarianism and as such is also practiced by many Muslims
This you made up… no it couldn’t. The two are separate.
———-
I don’t for one minute think you stand for any “enlightened values”. This site spreads and is for plenty of “anti-Muslim” hatred. Now its not hard-core…. but it certainly there.
Those who are open about their hatred for Islam…. are far less dangerous…. those who hide it well…..
———
This site has borrowed shamelessly from works of Robert Spencer… why. They are wholly inaccurate.
Then this targeting of individual …Muslims…. on ridiculous basis…. what for?
Unity in being anti-Muslim.
—–
You haven’t understood what Islamophobia is. You are blind to the hatred Muslims have of other Muslims and the history of Muslims which is replete with Muslims persecution of other Muslims. Until you recognise that, you are simply an advocate of that persecution.
You seem to be interested only in throwing accusations and insults around. It’s all very well shouting “Islamophobia”, “Anti-Muslim hatred” and “Robert Spencer” but what exactly are you referring to? Without real discussion and analysis, real examples, citations, links and all of that it seems you’re just interested in stigmatising. That is not real debate and it does nothing for your side of the argument either. The ideas discussed here might be anathema to you, but calling it “anti-Muslim hatred” simply because you might not accept it is unhelpful.
I have asked you before… please refrain from making assumptions and petty judgements. Those that are prejudice and nothing more.
Many people don’t comment on whats actually been written – but hey write about views they have already formed …. and think that this person necessarily conforms to them. That is ignorance, wrong and prejudice. It shows lack of intelligence to hold a conversation.
—-
If all you want to do is “slag me off” – then be my guest. However, if you want to hold a meaningful discussion then try to avoid such pettiness.
No one is slagging you off Amin, but it looks like you’re the one who is demanding to be the only one allowed to do the slagging off!
“No one is slagging you off Amin, but it looks like you’re the one who is demanding to be the only one allowed to do the slagging off!”
How and where exactly … have I demanded such a thing…. please point it out from my comments?
The person “Avicenna” repeatedly makes it personal…. rather than attacking my views.
Also …. “Suzy” – scroll up and read….
——
See a bit of honesty …. and why are my suspicions up that you are the same person who was “Avicenna” now you are “Abul Kalam”.
I might be stupid but I am not that dumb
——
It must be your persecution complex, LOL.
It must be your persecution complex, LOL.
Wow! Such intelligence…. what did say about answering with set comments… sorry but you are 100% same person as “Avicenna”
He/She makes same kinds of judgements…. and petty personal attacks. What use was the above comment? None…. if you’ve not got anything to say… better not to say anything.
You have already got it figured ….huh – it doesn’t matter what a “Muslims” says…. you already got set of labels to pin on him. And you call that you Western Enlightenment…
…. Jeez O’
—–
United in anti-Muslim hate… under the guise of “freedom”.
The only rhetorical weapon Islamists have left in their box is to decry all who confront and scrutinise them, or criticise Islam as being ‘united in anti Muslim hate’ and that kind of cowardly rhetoric. The last cries of the naked emperor.
“The only rhetorical weapon Islamists have left in their box is to decry all who
confront and scrutinise them, or criticise Islam as being ‘united in anti Muslim
hate’, racism. The last cries of the naked emperor.”
The forced label again… who exactly are you referring to as “Islamist” what for, and what does it mean.
See …. no one is Muslim… now a forced label from West… “Islamist”… what kind of criticism is this?
If you re-print works of Robert Spencer under guise of Secularism/Atheism/Agnosticism – then that is unity in anti-Muslim hate.
Try to see whats going on… rather than replying with set answers.
—–
Again … rather than attacking why my views are wrong… you chose to make it personal. This clearly shows … you haven’t bothered to follow the debate… just get your attack in ….
…. ohh he fucking Islamist…. get the bastard….
nah doesn’t work like that….
——
PS … “Avicenna” “Abul Kalam” or “Charley Varrick”
Come on… how dumb do you think I am… using name of 73 crime film huh….
—
Even I know how much traffic this site gets….
Who gave these kuffar the right to speak?
Who gave these kuffar the right to speak?
Now you teasing me… if you fancy me that much… just ask me out. Male or Female…. I ain’t one to complain
“Again, this is not about lacking cultural sensitivity or discrimination as the pathetic UCL Union thinks. It is not about racism and ‘Islamophobia’. It is not our fault for raising the issues. We are not to blame for ‘provoking’ the Islamists; they need no such provocation…
It’s about being able to criticise and speak out against that which is taboo and the barbarism of our century. Free expression is all we have at our disposal to do so.
Stand up for it and refuse to budge or there will nothing left when they are through with you.”
Maryam Namazie
What did I say… channel hop from one aspect to anther…. unity is being anti-Islam. Sometimes quote Robert Spencer
Why don’t you try for a little truth…. you haven’t even figured out what you are called. Even the names you adopt are …. pro-voca-tive
—–
You are just one person …. over and over again.
—–
And you couldn’t even define “Islamist”.
—-
Go figure…. as you dont even know who you are aiming at…
Why are you ‘grown-ups’ terrorising students?
A lot of what you see as wrong in life today, is a consequence of you not having the balls or the skills when you were young.
kiddie fiddlers the lot of you.
prove your points in venues that you fully pay for.
Because Universities are the one place that you will exercise the right to complete free speech and no-holds barred debate because they are part and parcel of the idea of scholarship. (If you don’t like that idea, go get your education from Saudi Arabia).
Without that, the university has forfeited its founding principle. As products of British universities, we have a duty to protect it from obscurantists and violent scoundrels.
“kiddie fiddlers the lot of you.”
That would only apply if you have the mental age of 5, which is obviously true in your case.
“prove your points in venues that you fully pay for.”
British tax payers fund your education. Don’t forget that.
Amin, some Muslim freedom of speech;
Read More http://www.examiner.co.uk/news/local-west-yorkshire-news/2012/01/24/protests-over-muslim-exhibition-in-huddersfield-86081-30184678/#ixzz1kQASrM9b
John…. and …. what is your point?
—-
People protesting… so what? – No one was hurt or threatened according to report. That is the correct way…. if you do not like something you have the right to denounce it.
That too is exercise of freedom of speech. Why did you point this out?
“We believe that it is time the Muslims of Huddersfield did not allow a local group to use our name to hold any future exhibitions…”
Sounds like a veiled threat to me.
Also what about expression of hate? You complain of this site as hateful, what feelings do these protestors exhibit you think? Yeah I know, its OK if Muslims do it.
Sounds like a veiled threat to me.
A veiled threat… yet they know they can do nothing… else they would be punished.
Also what about expression of hate? You complain of this site as hateful, what feelings do these protestors exhibit you think? Yeah I know, its OK if Muslims do it.
Again read your own words…. if that isn’t prejudice, stereotype and hate against about 1.75 billion people then what is?
I was referring to your attitude how you downplayed the whole incident just because Muslims are involved. Look at your own hypocrisy. A threat is a threat and in this case likely an incitement to take some illegal action as they can not stop the exhibition through legal means. Some nutcases do take these things seriously; just because there are laws against it doesn’t mean some Muslims are not willing to go ahead with acts of terrorism given encouragement. These Muslims are obviously trying to stir trouble.
Yet you continue to downplay it. You are a typical Islamist bigot through and through.
But John is simply pointing out the hate speech directed at the Ahmadi Muslims by Sunni Muslims in Huddersfield. That’s a reality. Why are you trying to ignore it?
I was referring to your attitude how you downplayed the whole incident just because Muslims are involved.
Did you bother to read the article…. where does it say anyone was threatened? Where … point it out… if anyone HAS down played this incident …. its THE ARTICLE YOU SENT ME THEN.
See numerous times – I have challenged accusations… no one bothers to reply back… why they are FALSE in the first place. You just wanted to accuse me
That Article SIMPLY TALKS ABOUT ANGRY MUSLIMS PROTESTING…. AND THAT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
EVIDENCE?
Look at your own hypocrisy. A threat is a threat and in this case likely an incitement to take some illegal action as they can not stop the exhibition through legal means.
EVIDENCE? THAT ARTICLE DOESN’T SAY ANYTHING OF THE SORT… ELSE WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE FOR MAKING SUCH ACCUSATION…. WITHOUT EVIDENCE IT IS YOUR OWN BIAS AND HATE AND PREJUDICE… WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE….?
That Article doesn’t even GIVE one single person making THREATENING REMARKS …. so what else do you want me to say….?
And also rather than making the Accusation of my Hypocrisy …. also do point out where am I being HYPOCRITE?
Some nutcases do take these things seriously; just because there are laws against it doesn’t mean some Muslims are not willing to go ahead with acts of terrorism given encouragement. These Muslims are obviously trying to stir trouble.
What do you mean ….. OBVIOUSLY. There is no room for assumption here… provide evidence….
Yet you continue to downplay it. You are a typical Islamist bigot through and through.
See this is what it all comes down to …. you wanted me to label with this… without shred of evidence… and that is HATE… nothing more.
I have said or done NOTHING against you… threatened no one…. etc.
Yet …. you are the same ONE person that keeps labeling me with this… by changing your name OVER and OVER again….
That is all evidence from above…
————
Mark of a Coward…. you make it personal… and that is what you are waiting for. Nothing else.
I point to you…. this is illogical. Attacking the person… rather than the argument.
——
If you care for a read….
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
But John is simply pointing out the hate speech directed at the Ahmadi Muslims by Sunni Muslims in Huddersfield. That’s a reality. Why are you trying to ignore it?
He isn’t simply pointing this out… and his name isn’t even John.
We are talking about one specific incident…. he in evidence gave an article…. which does not record any incident of “hate speech”
Else….. If I have missed something then please do point it out….
—–
That article simply says … angry Muslims protested against Ahamdis… That is is it. There is no mention of violence or threats…..
—–
If you have any more evidence then lets see it…. else …..
I think this is JUST ONE person… and he makes the same accusation …. against me. And that is all he is interested in.
Forcing labels on someone is hate….
—-
Why is it so-called defenders of freedom make such vicious personal attacks?
Do you support the right of Ahmadi Muslims to hold their exhibition in Huddersfield?
“Do you support the right of Ahmadi Muslims to hold their exhibition in Huddersfield?”
Well… yes.
Hysteria, slander, bigotry and supermacist special pleading – Amin is exemplary.
There is no such a name as “Charley Varrick” – its name of a film.
Hysteria, slander, bigotry and supermacist special pleading – Amin is exemplary.
Sentences like that make you look bad…. what ever your name is.
Else care to point out all your allegations… with evidences from what I have said? Who have I slandered…. which bigotry … against whom? And I don’t even know what supremacist special pleading even is….
——
See why is it – those that will say they somehow defend freedom… yet cannot even refrain from Personal Attacks themselves…
Yet doing so is clearly ILLOGICAL.
——
See you there.
Guys let me give you a tip – Amin is not worth discussing or debating anything with, his statements are completely illogical, self-contradictory and in most cases only there to distract from the real issues. He is also clearly a very sad and lonely individual.
Guys let me give you a tip – Amin is not worth discussing or debating anything with, his statements are completely illogical, self-contradictory and in most cases only there to distract from the real issues. He is also clearly a very sad and lonely individual.
Would you care to point out any illogical and self-contradictory statements?
You have had great trouble so far… you pop up after sometime make these kinds of statement… personal attacks against me.
Yet you are the same person who keeps changing hi name… and even posting same kind things about me….
Yet … without shred of evidence.
——-
This is admittance of defeat… you have nothing more to say.
He is also clearly a very sad and lonely individual.
Yes…. clearly. I completely AGREE!
—-
Well, I for one am interested in knowing: what degree of criticism of Islam does Amin consider permissible, anyway? I think that cuts to the heart of the matter.
Let us suppose, for example, that Muslim’s all over the world united in an effort to deprive women of their rights; that is, to explicitly denounce any personal autonomy, and to induce horrible, disgusting punishments for the slightest violation of whatever rules the male Muslims considered to be legitimate inferences from the Koran and Hadith.
In this situation, would it be permissible to protest, to make cartoons like the one made by the 17 year old, to say that Islam, insofar as it provided a theological or political basis for the rules enforced as described above, was destructive, or oppressive, or unjust, or evil?
2nd scenario: suppose that Islam really IS unjust, or oppressive, etc. (I’m not saying that it is, just inviting you to participate in the thought experiment). In THIS situation, is it permissible to criticize it, like the 17 year old does?
Finally, and more generally, to what extent is criticism permissible at all? Is ALL criticism also hate-mongering? And if not, what, EXACTLY, provides the distinction?
I don’t play such games. The above is a closed hypothesis. People introduce these to trap someone one in an argument….
See, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out that you already got your mind made up… irrespective to what I say. You have a “point of view” that you want to express.
This has got nothing to do with finding my views… you could ask about them a lot more simply and in a straight forward manner.
This is about expression of your views… so go right head. Shoot…
You are mistaken: I do really want to know. My efforts above are an attempt to clarify the situation; I’m not trying to trap you, just to get at the heart of the situation.
And you’re also mistaken that your views on this issue are apparent from the above posts; they’re not, at least not to me.
Why don’t you just answer the question? I thought you were in favour of honest, open debate.
I invite others to respond: do you think my post cuts to the heart of the matter? Or, alternately, how many of you think it’s a ‘game’? I’m very interested in Amin’s answer; is anyone else?
Does anyone else find it significant that he WON’T answer?
“Does anyone else find it significant that he WON’T answer?”
Answer to what … exactly. Ask me an answerable question… I’ll answer.
Don’t play games.
“And you’re also mistaken that your views on this issue are apparent from the above posts; they’re not, at least not to me.”
And how did you come to this? And which issue are you after.
If you want it in another way, then … I don’t get your question.
I’m not playing games. It’s really quite simple: I’d like you to respond to the 3 situations I outlined above. I believe that doing so will cut to the heart of the matter.
I’ll repeat the 1st question:
Let us suppose, for example, that Muslim’s all over the world united in an effort to deprive women of their rights; that is, to explicitly denounce any personal autonomy, and to induce horrible, disgusting punishments for the slightest violation of whatever rules the male Muslims considered to be legitimate inferences from the Koran and Hadith.
In this situation, would it be permissible to protest, to make cartoons like the one made by the 17 year old, to say that Islam, insofar as it provided a theological or political basis for the rules enforced as described above, was destructive, or oppressive, or unjust, or evil?
Why won’t you answer? You keep attacking me for no reason (“Don’t play games”; “You already got your mind made up… irrespective to what I say”), but you consistently fail to respond to my query.
“You keep attacking me for no reason (“Don’t play games”; “You already got your mind made up… irrespective to what I say”), but you refuse to respond to my query.”
That is not attacking you .. but your motives.
And I don’t get your question. Re-phrase & ask it again …. else I cannot answer that.
This is getting a little silly.
Telling me that I’m ‘playing games’ is attacking ME, not my motives. Why don’t you try owning up, instead of evading? And how do you presume to know my motives, anyway? You’ve made up something about me, then told me off for what you made up.
The question is VERY simple. It’s printed clearly in black and white. Why don’t you just answer it?
And how do you presume to know my motives, anyway?
Use of the word VIOLENT… when I point to an illogical fallacy to some.
“Does anyone else find it significant that he WON’T answer?”
Oh you were in with this one straight away… why?
“The religious mindset does this to people, i.e. makes a virtue out of
not-thinking-for-yourself.”
“…within the parameters of your agenda,”
————
Your question with the hypothetical situation… I simply refuse to answer. To me it is unanswerable.
“Use of the word VIOLENT… when I point to an illogical fallacy to some.”
It’s not your pointing out errors that make your responses violent; it’s your ad hominems. Faulty logic, Amin: straw man argument.
““Does anyone else find it significant that he WON’T answer?”
Oh you were in with this one straight away… why?’
How does this imply my motives? Again, unjustified. I guess it’s fun to make things up.
‘“The religious mindset does this to people, i.e. makes a virtue out of
not-thinking-for-yourself.”
“…within the parameters of your agenda,”’
All of this was posted AFTER you told me I’m playing games, not before.
You are a liar, Amin. And only cowards don’t admit their mistakes.
it’s your ad hominems. Faulty logic, Amin: straw man argument.
huh? … I didn’t get this… why would pointing to this be faulty logic?
How does this imply my motives? Again, unjustified. I guess it’s fun to make things up.
Crowd mentality… getting back up for an attack. Why rely on audience anyway….
————————
All of this was posted AFTER you told me I’m playing games, not before.
You are and were playing games…. also this was on a different comment. Plus what you said … and that doesn’t even go together.
You are a liar, Amin. And only cowards don’t admit their mistakes.
Would you care to give me a lie…… that I have told? And which mistake are you referring to…. see I had you judged pretty well as it goes…. past experience. Always tread cautious…. didn’t take long for the hysterics.
More importantly, let me draw attention – that is, let me draw EVERYONE’S ATTENTION, to the fact that Amin refuses to answer a direct question, a question that gets right to the very heart of the matter, that addresses the basis of this post, that asks when, if ever, we are permitted to criticize Islam. This question, at least the way I’ve formulated it, serves to elucidate the Muslim attitude toward free speech,even among moderates (or those posing as moderates).
It is VERY significant, in my opinion, that Amin won’t answer. Let me say here that Islam, at least in the Aminian version, is a worldview that uses obfuscation and evasion, that won’t engage in open, honest debate, that hides in obscurity and rhetoric, that opposes open discussion, that won’t admit it’s faults (or even the possibility of faults), that its foundation is hypocrisy and cowardice.
I propose that Amin should be ignored. There’s absolutely no point in engaging with someone who refuses to engage with any semblance of intellectual honesty, or courage.
I invite other responses. Hereafter, however, Amin’s posts are insignificant.
I don’t actually have to answer anything… I am not obliged in any such way. Also I have explained my objections to it – also that I don’t even know how to answer it. And I have said clearly… I don’t play such games. Giving a hypothetical scenario to illicit a particular response.
Also I don’t think there is anyone else ….
I have got nothing to do with no ….. “American Islam”
I propose that Amin should be ignored. There’s absolutely no point in engaging with someone who refuses to engage with any semblance of intellectual honesty, or courage.
Ah…. we have already had that…. so you are probably that same person as above… in the same way and manner as before…
See i was 100% right … you are playing games. You had this agenda… and I judged it from the word go…..
You had your prejudice and hate that you wanted to offload – personally against me and against Islam. You have been doing it… repeatedly.
You made it personal…. you called me a liar but couldn’t justify it… and then which mistakes….
there we have it…. I had you figured perfectly well….. and you have no justifications for your current hysterics either.
————
Now you will change your name and post again…. for what? And you “engaged” with me…. not the other way around.
This person “Gray” obviously had an agenda. It was easy to detect it….
He had a “set” point of view that he wanted to air. But I don’t play such games. He had wanted to know my views… all he had to do was ask.
Predictably, he went the way many do… hysterical and tired old accusations and insults. It is last domain of ignorant – to rant and rave.
———————————————————————————————–
There is, of course, one last “violent” thing left to do:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
“An ad hominem (Latin for “to the man” or “to the person”), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it. Ad hominem reasoning is normally described as a logical fallacy.”