Speakeasy forum

General discussion

muslums havent any humor

by Mark5019 / February 2, 2006 4:05 AM PST

Rage at Drawings Spreads in Muslim World

The Associated Press
Thursday, February 2, 2006; 2:00 PM

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip -- Armed militants angered by a cartoon drawing of the Prophet Muhammad published in European newspapers surrounded EU offices in Gaza on Thursday and threatened to kidnap foreigners as outrage over the caricatures spread across the Islamic world.

More than 300 students demonstrated in Pakistan, chanting "Death to France!" and "Death to Denmark!" _ two of the countries where newspapers published the drawings. Other protests were held in Syria and Lebanon.

Officials in Afghanistan, Iran and Indonesia condemned the publication. In Paris, the daily France Soir fired its managing editor after it ran the caricatures Wednesday.

A Jordanian newspaper took the bold step of running some of the drawings, saying it wanted to show its readers how offensive the cartoons were but also urging the world's Muslims to "be reasonable." Hours later, the owners of the weekly, Shihan, said they had fired its editor and withdrawn the issue from sale, and the government threatened legal action.

Foreign journalists, diplomats and aid workers began leaving Gaza as gunmen there threatened to kidnap citizens of France, Norway, Denmark and Germany unless those governments apologize for the cartoon.


Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: muslums havent any humor
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: muslums havent any humor
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Forget about their sense of humor....
by hh / February 2, 2006 4:14 AM PST
Collapse -
Well you fail to recognize the fact that
by Self-Destruction / February 2, 2006 1:59 PM PST

Christianity (or preferably the Catholics) was the most corrupt religion to date.

You know what they did during the Middle Ages?


If it wasn't for the printing press, who knows where we would be right now.

So really a bunch of hypocritical Muslims isn't really a big deal. Besides that article can have bias and I have never heard of those issues occur.

This is why I am a Protestant ;).

Collapse -
OTOH, Mark is outraged by a Washington Post cartoon...
by Dave Konkel [Moderator] / February 2, 2006 9:38 PM PST

I guess whether it's justifiable outrage or a lack of humor all depends on whose ox is being gored! (Personally, I think both are over the edge).

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
The difference is...
by EdH / February 2, 2006 9:48 PM PST

as far as I know Mark (or anyone) isn't marching on the Washington Post offices with automatic weapons, burning the place down and demanding that such cartoons never be published.

It's okay to be outraged at something; not okay to threaten violence.

It's not so much that Muslims have no sense of humor; they may lack a tradition of free speech.

Collapse -
No "may" about it, EdH!
by Dave Konkel [Moderator] / February 2, 2006 9:50 PM PST
In reply to: The difference is...

>> they may lack a tradition of free speech.<<

Collapse -
P.S. Ask Linda Rondstadt, Tim Robbins, and the Dixie Chicks
by Dave Konkel [Moderator] / February 2, 2006 10:02 PM PST
In reply to: The difference is...

about the tradition of free speech in this country, EdH!

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
Free Speech cuts both ways, Dave
by EdH / February 2, 2006 10:07 PM PST

Protesting the protestors is legit too.

Collapse -
Free speech or forced speech, Dave...
by J. Vega / February 3, 2006 1:31 AM PST

Dave, if a group like the Dixie Chicks says something that a station thinks might be offensive to its listeners should that station have the right to not play their music or are you saying that that station should be forced to continue to play their music?
In your posts, you have made reference to Orwell's book 1984, and it seems to me that this would be somewhat like the screens in that book. Big Brother says something and the citizens are required to have it on their appartment screens vs. the Dixie Chicks say something and because of the use of the words ''free speech'' the citizens are forced to be exposed to them on their TV screens, radios, etc.
Let's play senario: For this one, let's pretend that a member of NAMBLA hit the Powerball lottery for 200 million dollars. If he decided to spend that money having a commercial made expousing legalizing sex between grown men and male children and then buy time to air it, should stations have the right to refuse to sell him time or should any station that that NAMBLA member wished to buy time on be forced to sell it and air that commercial under the words of ''free speech''? In a sense, making ''free'' speech ''forced'' speech if the subject is controversial and therefore automatically kicks in ''free speech'' because it is controversial.

Collapse -
The difference between the two
by Diana Forum moderator / February 3, 2006 6:22 AM PST

Protesting the war is not illegal. Sex between an adult and a minor is.


Collapse -
But is advocating it illegal?
by Evie / February 3, 2006 6:25 AM PST

If it is, Ruth Bader Ginsburg might have some splainin' to do!

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) What decision favored pedophilia?
by Diana Forum moderator / February 3, 2006 6:56 AM PST
Collapse -
Are you not aware that Ginsburg has advocated the ...
by Evie / February 3, 2006 8:17 AM PST

... age of consent be lowered to the age of 12 or 13? That's what NAMBLA advocates.

Collapse -
No I didn't
by Diana Forum moderator / February 3, 2006 9:50 AM PST

The US has a confused relationship with kids. The courts don't know how to treat them. At one time they were put into Juvie and released at 21.

Now a 12-year-old can be tried as an adult but his/her mother is the one who decides whether a plea agreement is taken or not. They can't sign a contract but can be put in jail for the rest of their lives.

I don't think the age of consent should be 12 or 13 and don't think that age should be tried as adults.


Collapse -
I don't disagree with anything you've said here ....
by Evie / February 3, 2006 11:28 PM PST
In reply to: No I didn't

... but it wasn't really the point of my previous post. In J's scenario he was talking about the implications if we were to sanction essentially forcing private media outlets to "air" certain content. On what grounds could we then expemt them from such a mandate if they are merely advocating a change in the law? Don't get me wrong, I'm well aware that NAMBLA crosses the line (hard to prove because that part is largely underground) promoting pedophelia, but it's "media face" is a lobbying body advocating lowering the age of consent.

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) NONE of them were censored Dave
by Evie / February 3, 2006 4:50 AM PST
Collapse -
There are different levels of censoring.
by Terry Browne / February 3, 2006 11:05 AM PST

Our way (The US way) is more sofisticated but ends up the same way.

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) I suppose you're crying in your milk for Tom Cruise too
by Evie / February 3, 2006 11:20 AM PST
Collapse -
Since I don't read about celebrities
by Terry Browne / February 3, 2006 11:36 AM PST

mainly because most of them (and that includes Tom Cruise) are of no interest to me, I have no clue what you mean.

Collapse -
Don't read
by marinetbryant / February 3, 2006 12:34 PM PST

Sir, that seems to be the problem.

Collapse -
People's magazine or any other
by Terry Browne / February 3, 2006 12:45 PM PST
In reply to: Don't read

celebrities' magazine is not what I read. if there has been an article about Cruise in another publication let me know.

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) But you're up on the Dixie Chicks and Linda Ronstadt??!
by Evie / February 3, 2006 12:53 PM PST
Collapse -
That's nonsense.
by Kiddpeat / February 3, 2006 10:20 PM PST

What is being censored in the US that in any way resembles what the Muslim world is advocating and doing? How does this US censorship work?

Collapse -
Ahhhh Yes, the old bit about the public having an OBLIGATION
by Kiddpeat / February 3, 2006 3:48 PM PST

to patronize a business they don't like. Anything less is censorship. Right DK?

Collapse -
I believe we should refrain from offending other religions
by hh / February 2, 2006 10:38 PM PST

The same way I believed back during Guliani administration as the New York mayor, a museum in Brooklyn had picture of Mary covered in elephant dung, which I found to be in very poor taste and outright inflammatory. The museum insisted it was art! Please!!!!

I believe the caricature of Mohammad is in bad taste and inflammatory. But my point is, the Muslims who never fail to denigrate other religions and other beliefs, who are calling for extermination of a people and religion, who are mocking and offending other people, who are trying to convert the whole world to their radical Islam way of life, are full of chutzpah and hypocrites. Maybe a little dose of reality will do them some good! Don't hold your breath.

Collapse -
and dk i guess
by Mark5019 / February 2, 2006 10:43 PM PST

when the radical muslums behead school girls where was there outrage, and when the bomb schools where was there outrage?
they get upset when some one draws a cartoon how sad it took a cartoon to upset the muslum world.


just funny when its a muslum beheading people i dont see them jumping up and saying how bad it is.

talk about 2 faced

Collapse -
and this says it better
by Mark5019 / February 2, 2006 10:56 PM PST


We wake up this morning to see video on CNN showing rampaging Muslims around the world. In Europe, the Middle East, the Pacific Rim ... Muslim Mobs spreading mayhem. It seems that these mighty mad Muslims are rioting and firing their ever-present AK-47s into the air because of cartoons. Yup ... this latest epidemic of Muslim outrage comes to us because some newspapers in Norway and Denmark published some cartoons depicting Mohammed. In fact ... here is one of my favorites!

Admit it, this turban/bomb thing could be the next big fashion hit on the Muslim street!

Muslim outrage huh. OK ... let's do a little historical review. Just some lowlights:

Muslims fly commercial airliners into buildings in New York City. No Muslim outrage.
Muslim officials block the exit where school girls are trying to escape a burning building because their faces were exposed. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims cut off the heads of three teenaged girls on their way to school in Indonesia. A Christian school. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims murder teachers trying to teach Muslim children in Iraq. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims murder over 80 tourists with car bombs outside cafes and hotels in Egypt. No Muslim outrage.
A Muslim attacks a missionary children's school in India. Kills six. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims slaughter hundreds of children and teachers in Beslan, Russia. Muslims shoot children in the back. No Muslim outrage.
Let's go way back. Muslims kidnap and kill athletes at the Munich Summer Olympics. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims fire rocket-propelled grenades into schools full of children in Israel. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims murder more than 50 commuters in attacks on London subways and busses. Over 700 are injured. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims massacre dozens of innocents at a Passover Seder. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims murder innocent vacationers in Bali. No Muslim outrage.
Muslim newspapers publish anti-Semitic cartoons. No Muslim outrage
Muslims are involved, on one side or the other, in almost every one of the 125+ shooting wars around the world. No Muslim outrage.
Muslims beat the charred bodies of Western civilians with their shoes, then hang them from a bridge. No Muslim outrage.
Newspapers in Denmark and Norway publish cartoons depicting Mohammed. Muslims are outraged.
Dead children. Dead tourists. Dead teachers. Dead doctors and nurses. Death, destruction and mayhem around the world at the hands of Muslims .. no Muslim outrage ... but publish a cartoon depicting Mohammed with a bomb in his turban and all hell breaks loose.


Collapse -
Love this
by Diana Forum moderator / February 3, 2006 6:52 AM PST

Don't forget Muslims killing Muslims that are just trying to earn a living and provide for their families - no Muslim outrage.


Collapse -
very true there the peacefull
by Mark5019 / February 3, 2006 7:47 AM PST
In reply to: Love this

people make a mockery of there religion its ok to kill but heaven help you draw a cartoon:(

Collapse -
Got it all mixed up.
by Terry Browne / February 3, 2006 9:59 AM PST

This has NOTHING to do with their actions. It's about a Danish news paper's lack of respect, no matter what a minority of the Muslims have been doing before.

Collapse -
so in your eyes its ok to bomb
by Mark5019 / February 3, 2006 11:04 AM PST
In reply to: Got it all mixed up.

kill behead for a cartoon??
thats what you think is ok??
then that religions a sick one if thats ok by there god!
and any muslum here that dosnt beleave that if i offended you just now sorry but your to quiet in your outrage

Popular Forums
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
Laptops 21,181 discussions
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
Phones 17,137 discussions
Security 31,287 discussions
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
Windows 10 2,657 discussions


Help, my PC with Windows 10 won't shut down properly

Since upgrading to Windows 10 my computer won't shut down properly. I use the menu button shutdown and the screen goes blank, but the system does not fully shut down. The only way to get it to shut down is to hold the physical power button down till it shuts down. Any suggestions?