The cartoon row is back...!?!?

[Skybird]

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/839

No comment needed. :dead:

[Polak]

I will comment this, in Polish...
Swiat leci na pysk. :nope:
(The world is falling on its face)

[Konovalov]

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/839

No comment needed. :dead:

Deeply thoughtful analysis.

[Skybird]

What kind of analysis could be needed here? the stories being told (UN logo, even more so: Burger King) speak for themselves - and pretty loud so.

[Konovalov]

How many Muslims were up in arms about these stories? 100, 1000, a million? I didn't see mass demonstrations. These stories date back 6 to 11 years ago. The only person who brought this cartoon row back as you titled your topic is you.

[Skybird]

Obviously the protest and/or boycotts had been massive enough that huge corporations saw the need to invest substantial sums in dealing with the fallout.

Today's Western public is more sensible on these issues, that's why we take more note of such events today.

In Amsterdam (or Rotterdam) they are raising a huge mosque. For the construction works, a christian cross of a church on the other side of the site had to be removed, temporarily. The church is there, and was there. Some days ago there was a comment on radio, saying that first Muslim voices are to heared that demand that not only the huge crucifix should not be errected again in it's old position after the construction works are done, because it would be offensive to do so, no - some seem even to say that the chrurch should de dissappear now, too.

You see, the stories around symbols will not end that soon in the future.

BTW, I am wondering, how archaic and primitive must an ideolgy be in order to be offended by profane things like this? Neither christianity nor Judaism nor Buddhism nor hinduism nor humanism nor communism nor socialism, nor you-name-it would cook up so easily because Nike designs a logo that by accident share some vague similiarity with one word from it's scriptures. Even Jews are said to buy paper with suqares, although the swastike is to be seen in the pattern. Some of these guys really are in need to learn to control their temper.

But the Islamic symbol in the UN logo is still there.

[Konovalov]

Obviously the protest and/or boycotts had been massive enough that huge corporations saw the need to invest substantial sums in dealing with the fallout.

Evidence please of such "massive enough" protests/boycotts? I thought it would have been obvious enough to back up your assertion with evidence.

In Amsterdam (or Rotterdam) they are raising a huge mosque. For the construction works, a christian cross of a church on the other side of the site had to be removed, temporarily. The church is there, and was there. Some days ago there was a comment on radio, saying that first Muslim voices are to heared that demand that not only the huge crucifix should not be errected again in it's old position after the construction works are done, because it would be offensive to do so, no - some seem even to say that the chrurch should de dissappear now, too.

Please provide evidence of where in the Holy Qu'ran that it explicitly supports such a silly argument of the cross should not be put back up and is offensive because a Masjid is right next door?

[Skybird]

Obviously the protest and/or boycotts had been massive enough that huge corporations saw the need to invest substantial sums in dealing with the fallout.

Evidence please of such "massive enough" protests/boycotts? I thought it would have been obvious enough to back up your assertion with evidence.

Ask the marketing directors of the affected companies. If they had to withdraw designs for products, have to call back several hundred thousand units of a finished product, and have to change logos in product designs, messing up a complete marketing campaign, then all this costs money in the range of several million dollars. For example in case of the 800.000 Nike shoes, let's assume a price of 100 bucks per piece (there are sport shoes that cost twice as much), results in 80 million dollars loss - just for the shoes themselves. Transportation, marketing, new design costs even not calculated. Image loss, time delays even not considered. I'm sure they wasted all that money all for nothing, becasue they were bored. How could one assume there was pressure or protest… :roll:

In Amsterdam (or Rotterdam) they are raising a huge mosque. For the construction works, a christian cross of a church on the other side of the site had to be removed, temporarily. The church is there, and was there. Some days ago there was a comment on radio, saying that first Muslim voices are to heared that demand that not only the huge crucifix should not be errected again in it's old position after the construction works are done, because it would be offensive to do so, no - some seem even to say that the chrurch should de dissappear now, too.

Please provide evidence of where in the Holy Qu'ran that it explicitly supports such a silly argument of the cross should not be put back up and is offensive because a Masjid is right next door?

Who cares if the Quran has to say anything about such a specific details?that is not the deciding thing. You are trying to distract attention, by limiting the focus to that of a microscope. And anyway, chances are you would find a comment on such a special detail not in the Quran, but the Hadith. The important thing is that the Quran teaches the overcoming of non-Islamic culture, in many text passages explicitly and beyond doubt demands the submission of non-Islamic people and cultures, and authorizes the use of violence in case of resistance to Islam, of apostasy. If Islam (or Quran) really is so tolerant:

1. why not only this demand by speakers of Muslim communities that the cross keeps away after construction,
2. but also no substantial, forceful attempt of the Muslim community to prevent those Muslims claiming that demand in the name of Islam from doing so??? Too busy with springtime’s homework?

Truth is: if these communities do not care to do something about this, then it is because they do not see a provocation taking place that needs them to defend “true Islam” against those who “abuse” it. It also means that they do not really care for the Christian community that hosts them. Whi9ch is only logically, since chriszians and Jews are dhimmis only, anyway.

3. If there are so many Muslims sharing your mindset, why do they care so little to make themselves heared and make sure their opinion is what determines and forms the shape of Islam? Why allow them a minority to speak for them? I see little ncouragement in the Quran to do so, that’S why it is that way.


I also must remind you of the ongoing systematical hindering, repressalias and pressurizing of foreign religions inside Muslim countries. I repeatedly wrote about this.

Show me/us, that the clear majority of Muslim communities is that caring for their Western hosts and are as reasonable as you try to give an impression you are. Then I am willing to rethink my position towards Islam, but wouldn’t consider it to be Islam as it is defined by Quran, Hadith, Muhammad. I judge it not on the basis of what it says, and claims to be, and wishes it would be, but what effects it causes in the reality I live in, and the history I can read books about. As long as this change in behaviour of communities does not happen, I stick to my opinion of it: that it is a selfish, hostile conqueror, being fixated to exclusively Islamic understandings of terms like value, morale, and belief, and with no concept of a tolerance that reaches beyond “Islamic rule and dominance”.

[Konovalov]

All of that and you couldn't provide simple direct answers to either question. Again please point me to the passages, any passage, be it in the Qu'ran or amongst the Hadiths which support this wacky argument that says a cross is offensive because it is alongside a Mosque and must be torn down. Don't change the topic with all this long winded stuff. Wishy washy wishy washy. So again where is the evidence to back up your claims?

[TteFAboB]

Those that make war against Allah and His apostle and spread disorder in the land shall be slain or crucified or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or be banished from the land. They shall be held up to shame in this world and sternly punished in the hereafter." (Sura 5.33-34)

From the words of Saudi Prince, Islam is being attacked, "they" are trying to empty Islam of its meaning. Cutting off a cross seems to suit fine a moderate's non-silly Muslim demand. More on the matter of cutting things off, like a mere cross:

"Allah revealed His will to the angels, saying: 'I shall be with you. Give courage to the believers. I shall cast terror into the hearts of the infidels. Strike off their heads, strike off the very tips of their fingers!' That was because they defied Allah and His apostle. He that defies Allah and his apostle shall be sternly punished by Allah." (Sura 8.12-13)

And when there's a Mosque involved:

[2.190] ...fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you...[2.191] And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers."

"Muster against them all the men and cavalry at your command, so that you may strike terror into the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others besides them who are unknown to you but known to Allah." (Sura 8.60)

No need to be under attack either, they can take the initiative:

"Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites, and deal harshly with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate." (Sura 9.73)

They can't put the cross back because the expertise lies in destruction only:

"When We resolve to raze a city, We first give warning to those of its people who live in comfort. If they persist in sin, judgement is irrevocably passed, and We destroy it utterly." (Sura 17.16-17)

"We have destroyed many a sinful nation and replaced them by other men. And when they felt Our Might they took to their heels and fled. They were told: 'Do not run away. Return to your comforts and to your dwellings. You shall be questioned all.' 'Woe betide us, we have done wrong' was their reply. And this they kept repeating until We mowed them down and put out their light." (Sura 21.11-15)

"When you meet the unbelievers in jihad, chop off their heads. And when you have brought them low, bind your prisoners rigorously. Then set them free or take ransom from them until the war is ended." (Sura 47.4)

"Mohammed is Allah's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another." (Sura 48.29)

Perfect material to brainwash moderate non-silly people into demanding crosses to be taken down, in the least.

Mr. Konovalov, do you have any evidence the Immans from the boycotters and the anti-cross crowd are peace-loving people, who preach peace, and not the above, and if not simply ignoring the above, preaches against it or the contrary to it?

I believe it is more likely for organized actions, such as a crowd banding together against raising a cross, to be motivated and driven not by a lovely Imman, but by the contrary. There were cases of Immans being replaced/arrested/deported for inciting hatred and violence, do you know the Imman of these people? When was the last time he impressed you with his talk about how these verses are all mistakenly interpreted?

[Skybird]

All of that and you couldn't provide simple direct answers to either question. Again please point me to the passages, any passage, be it in the Qu'ran or amongst the Hadiths which support this wacky argument that says a cross is offensive because it is alongside a Mosque and must be torn down. Don't change the topic with all this long winded stuff. Wishy washy wishy washy. So again where is the evidence to back up your claims?

I don't know, and I don't care. That Islamic communities do nothing substantial to prevent this demand is the only deciding thing there is, Konovalov. Tell me, where is the sura that explicitly says that if there ever will be a mosque errected and facing a church, after construction is done any removed christian symbols are no object for demanding they should be kept away? and assuming there would be such a sura (I'm sure there isn't) - what does this change in the bahvior of the majority of the Muslim community in that place?

Again, you are distracting attention away from the important thing - that Muslim communities do nothing substantial to prevent their Muslim speakers demanding that the cross should stay away, and the church eventually should go, too.

Are you the only true interpret of Islam, Konovalov? If you are, explain this too us: why do these communities not draw conseqeunces from your true understanding of Islam, if that true understanding is so much widespread and common good in these communities, as you seem to imply?

It seems they do not care for your view that Islam should not demand the cross being kept away.

This behavior is the issue - not if and where and what the Quran has to say on such a highly specific detail from practiocal life (again, chances are that a comment on this would be found in the hadith, not in the quran). Maybe the quran is of interst for you. It certainly is not for us.

Speak by deeds, dear Muslim communties in our middle, not by words. Words are cheap. They can lead wrong.

[STEED]

BORING :zzz:

[Konovalov]

More cut and paste hack job Bobafett. It would really help if you quoted larger sections such as the preceeding ayah and one after perhaps with an overview of that particular Surah.

In any case I can't see in any of the verses quoted by you, anything that supports the idea that a church next to a mosque with a cross is offensive and should be pulled down.

[Konovalov]

Oh, so now we change the topic to where is the outrage in the Muslim community yada yada yada. Yes you are right Steed. Bloody boring. :zzz:

[TteFAboB]

More cut and paste hack job Bobafett. It would really help if you quoted larger sections such as the preceeding ayah and one after perhaps with an overview of that particular Surah.

In any case I can't see in any of the verses quoted by you, anything that supports the idea that a church next to a mosque with a cross is offensive and should be pulled down.

I was expecting you to assist me, show some solidarity towards my cut and paste infidel hack job, clear my mind and remember me why none of that, or even better cut and pasted jobs could not convince a bunch of folks to keep a simple cross down. I wonder why it is illegal, in Saudi Arabia for instance, to raise a Church, a Cross and spread Bibles. Certainly, there's nothing offensive in a Cross itself, the problem must be something else, hmm, I wonder what that could be.

But, you are probably too busy already working towards your Imman-man-ship and reverting brainwashed Muslim Youth to the true Islam to bother talking to an infidel about Islam. I understand, it is repulsive to see the Koran cut and pasted by my dirty hands. Sorry, next time I'll find myself a Muslim mediator, and speak only what you want to hear, from my proper condition of a future dhimmi, I submit, this post, that is.

[Skybird]

If that cross-mosque-issue is no big deal for Islam - I wonder why Islam is demanding the cross to be put down. This is what Konovalov does not answer.

Konovalov also does not adress why the vast majority of muslim communities remain inactive about this thing, why they tolerate their speakers to make a big deal of it, and why they do not actively take care of the christian majority around them who do not understand why the guest that they accepted as a guest now tells them that they should retreat in their own living place and withdraw their own temples.

Why this silent acceptance of a row, Konovalov, if it is all that unimportant for Islam? The communitx in that city easily could have avoided to find themsleves in the centre of this negative interest, by calling back their speakers when they started to get loud, and actively demanding that the cross and thechurch stay were they are, and by saying loud they consider themselves guests in a foreign house, and thus regard it as their duty to behave and accept local rules, traditons, and cultures. You demand evidence from me that the Quran backs this special event. what did you hope to proove by that? I demand evidence from you that this event is not the latest example in a century-long tradition of Islam's silently or violently fighting-down of foreign religions and cultures. And don't come to me with that Quran. give us a factual evidence that what is taking place there is not in the name of Islam, as "defined" by Quran, Hadith, Muhammad and this man'S biography (I mean the historical biography, not the Sira). I hear Muslims say that it is in the name of Islam, and I hear no objection by a majority of Muslims. So why should I conclude by that behavior they show, that they are not silently agreeing with their speakers, at least that they do take care if their faith is hijacked by them? Solid and effective deeds that made a difference, please, no words.

[Konovalov]

I was expecting you to assist me, show some solidarity towards my cut and paste infidel hack job, clear my mind and remember me why none of that, or even better cut and pasted jobs could not convince a bunch of folks to keep a simple cross down.

You could have fooled me. Forgive me if you come across just a touch sarcastic here.

I wonder why it is illegal, in Saudi Arabia for instance, to raise a Church, a Cross and spread Bibles. Certainly, there's nothing offensive in a Cross itself, the problem must be something else, hmm, I wonder what that could be.

You will find no argument from me on Saudi Arabias policy. I am as yet to find an adequate explanation on this as I am to the Taliban style rationale that music should be banned when a guy sings out the adhan (call to prayer).

But, you are probably too busy already working towards your Imman-man-ship and reverting brainwashed Muslim Youth to the true Islam to bother talking to an infidel about Islam. I understand, it is repulsive to see the Koran cut and pasted by my dirty hands. Sorry, next time I'll find myself a Muslim mediator, and speak only what you want to hear, from my proper condition of a future dhimmi, I submit, this post, that is.

Whatever Bobafett. Whatever. :roll:

[Konovalov]

If that cross-mosque-issue is no big deal for Islam - I wonder why Islam is demanding the cross to be put down. This is what Konovalov does not answer.

In so many of your posts and your writings you say, I'm paraphrasing here, "Islam, as I define it is the Koran, Hadiths and itself thru history." Based off your definition and in my view it isn't Islam demanding the cross be put down. I simply know of nothing in the Qu'ran or Sunnah which supports this whole stupid argument. It is a group of people supposedly demanding the cross be put down. I don't know these people. I don't know this community. Instead of answering my simple couple of questions you try to change the topic. I asked these simple questions and requested theological evidence that supports your assertion and you can't offer any so instead you go off on one of your long winded tangents. :zzz:

[joea]

:huh: :damn: :damn: :doh: :dead:

[Konovalov]

:huh: :damn: :damn: :doh: :dead:

Just do what I do and take a couple of Nurofen or whatever is your preferred painkiller of choice. :D :up:

[Skybird]

You avoid the questions, Konovalov. See, I can play that game as good as you do. So will you please stop avoiding the question. Why should we conclude that if the vast majority of Muslims does not protest against what is said and done in their explicit name nevertheless is not in the name of Islam? First you do not like that I tell you you are no Muslim. Now maybe you want to tell me that I am guilty of taking Muslims as Muslims if they claim to be Muslims? So why is a motive that is is given in the name of Islam not Islam, if the community of Islam has no problem with accepting it to be a given motive of Islam? I could vary the question in many ways, but it remains the same question in principle. And you still do not answer. If that cross-mosque-issue is no big deal for Islam - I wonder why Islam is demanding the cross to be put down.
Why does the vast majority of muslim communities remain inactive about this thing, why do they tolerate their speakers to make a big deal of it, and why don't they take care of the christian majority around them who does not understand why the guest that they accepted as a guest now tells them that they should retreat in their own living place and withdraw their own temples.
I could start ripple-fire Koran-quotes myself, on it'S demand that the infidels must be fought and made surrender by all violance needed, I have it on HD or orinted out on paper, and it all has been collected by me, it is no list copied from the internet, but what would it be good for? You will say that you understand the same Quran differently, and probably deal with me like with TteFAboB after he posted some quotes.

As I said the number or red marked quotes in my book-version of the Quran by far outnumbers those with green markings. And that although that translation is sad to be an extremely cleaned and tame one. Many violent passages in other translations are not poresent in it, to make Islam more acceptable for us poor Westerners.

Well, and something else: what Is Islam - if not understood on the basis of Quran (that includes Sharia as a "conditioning" tool to help man to stay focussed exclusively on it's rules), the Hadith, and the life of Muhammad that is the example Islamic social life and Ummah is oriented at until today...? How can you define Islam not on the basis if this? It IS the most elemental, essential basis of Islam. If you leave it, you do not talk of Islam anylonger. I never have red any competent author who did not line this out. Take away Quran, and Mhammad, and Hadith, and medina-model - and you have anything but not Islam left. Some thing on your mind, some fantasized self-made system of thoughts and images inside your head, maybe even making sense, and leading you in your life - but not islam as it had been sown out bei Muhammad, and lived through history. so another question of mine: are we talking about the real, the true, the historical Islam, or are we taliikgn about a fantasy of yours (which must not necessarily be a bad thing, but you should rename it accordingly, then)? You may have noted that I made a sharp difference between chruch and Christian message, between Jesus teachiungs and the old parts of the bible. But where could you step away from Muhammad? How could you avoid the highly articifical and often changed form of the Quran, and for what alternative understanding? Even sufism is heavily deopendant on it.

I know a thing or two on Islam, but I do not know what the heck you are talking about. It is not the "Islam" that is meant when saying "Islam". Which is a compliment, really.

[Konovalov]

The 7th post of this thead I asked those two simple questions. Your post following this, the 8th, gave something approaching of an answer to the first and avoided the second on the church-mosque issue and then proceeded to ripple off a series of questions back at me.

We had this debate 12 months ago where I provided dozens of links listing condemnation of varied barbourous acts. As I said I cannot comment on this community in the Netherlands making such a ridiculous request. I don't know these people. Would you like me to fly over there now and confront them? I will end with a bit of local history from where I live here in the UK. When my extended family emigrated here from Kashmir back in the late 50's, the local Church was offerred to the new Muslim community as a place of worship until years later when a Mosque was built. The Muslim community here had no problem with being in a church, had no problem seeing Christian symbols such as crosses, and had no problem praying in a Christian church.

[Ducimus]

In my minds eye, i picture a world where Islam was never thought up or invented. Such a lovely world it could have been. Such a Pity.

Im a little tired of hearing about Islam, and Muslims. Everythign i hear and see only reiforces a very negative view that has been years in the making.

[TteFAboB]

I don't know these people. Would you like me to fly over there now and confront them?

I never asked that. But you went exactly to the point.

I could pick up a "theology of freedom" Bible (what a disgrace to all that is decent) and claim all Bishops and Priests should work to implement socialist economical reforms or revolutions, and claim that Jesus was a socialist and that his message was of economical importance.

Actually, I don't have to, it's already being done, the Bible emptied of all spirituality, reduced to a materialistic garbage, Marxism avant la letre, being sold and used out there with nothing but bad intentions.

So, your point, is mine.

You cannot tell what is the motivation behind these people. Just like you can claim it's definitely not from the same Islamic source you hold dear, you can't tell they aren't being, what was the euphemism again? unfairly invoking the name of Islam, or whatever. What if they are? What if they are doing a poor cut and paste hack job? That was the point, wasn't it? And there we have it, no embassy-burning protests against this band of rogue Muslims who are not representing the true nature of Islam, which is an offense to the Prophet too isn't it? Blasphemy, isn't it?

I have no illusions that a Muslim can't touch, kiss and even carry a cross on his back, and I ask nothing of you, first because that would be silly, who are you to face the historical figure of Islam alone anyway? And also because you leave nothing to be desired and should serve as an example to the more, primitive, tribalistic, Muslims. The problem starts when Mr. Imman starts hacking what there is of peacefull in Islam, and inciting a gang to violence and hatred, and just like the Catholic Church is reluctant to ultimately expell once and for all, and ban, and burn, and crucify all heretics from within, what action can another Muslim take when his heretics are an organized violent gang?

Organize aswell and defend, if not a Church against a mob, the right principles to be upheld and maintained.

Of course, depending on how you look at it, and you personally must be tired of it, one would argue who is the proper Muslim and who is the heretic, but that is to be decided between the two factions. I suppose the final victor will be considered the true Muslim.

[Skybird]

The questions were so simple, and still no answer why Muslims in that place do not engage in effective action to prevent what is going on IN THE NAME OF ISLAM. Who is interested in some minor local demonstration (that does not compare innsize to the uproar cuased by the Danish cartoons anyway) in other countires about an event in Belgium? O asked why the people there do not do anything. Why they do not get demkanded by global Ummah to do something. Ummah is all one great happy family, isn't it :smug:

I tell you a simple explanation, Konovalov: your perception of what Islam is, is too reasonable, too Westernized. You use tools that are too advanced for a too primitive problem. 21st century meets medieval. Both does not match, both are not on the same level. A categorial error of first order, Kant maybe would call it (I always mess up his categorial errors...). That's why you don't get beyond the discrepancy between what you see Islam like, and what Islam sees itself like, and you even do not realize that discrepancy, thus labelling your view of Islam the self-understanding of Islam in general. And this is why you cannot answer that simple question. You maybe are beyond Islam - and even do not realize it, like a child that has learned to swim, but does not know, and thus does not dare to let go the grip in the wall of the swimming pool.

You are too good for Islam :up: That's how I think about you. But that way you nevertheless can do damage without even realizing it, and help spreading a thing that is bad, and do so with only the best intentions.

I leave here, there is nothing more to say. There is a possebility that in the future some events will influence you in that way that you suddenly realize all this, and then this confusion maybe will no longer bind you. But neither can nor will I help in that. It's your life, not mine.

No hard feelings, good luck! ;)

Skybird

[Ducimus]

http://cagle.msnbc.com/news/MoussaouiLifePrison/images/wells.gif

With that, im going to leave this alone. I have said entirely too much as it is already.