you were doing so well leaving it alone, As i said above its not as blatant/simple as that. but for this purpose I will say no
They really don't. A man drawing cartoons is probably the most irrelevant thing around. Calling for him to be killed is just pathetic. Ok, I get what you mean now. Thanks for clarifying. I disagree. The protest was an attempt to quash freedom of expression and freedom of religion. The cartoons weren't a threat or an incitement to violence, so I fail to see how the even pushed the boundaries of freedom of speech. The people that were arrested and imprisoned were calling for the artists head and threatening to kill people that published the cartoons. Abdul Mahid was jailed for two counts of soliciting to murder. Umran Javed and Mizanur Rahman were jailed on the same count, plus inciting racial hatred. Abdul Rahman Saleem was convicted for stirring up racial hatred. I don't think that you can equate this with asking for the cartoons not to be published and there was certainly a number of chants and placards glorifying and promoting terrorism at the march. Does Sharia not say that apostates should be put to death, then? I thought that it did. What does 'for this purpose I will say no' mean? It sounds evasive. You missed an earlier answer, by the way. I accidentally posted and then edited it. Post #133, if you're interested.
Did I miss it, or answered and not see the edit? I am sure I answered or at least responded to everything you wrote feel free to ask again, and i will respond if necessary
An opera isn't far less than some cartoons. Equally irrelevant, I'd agree, but not far less. Note the running theme in 3 of your 4 incidents? Religion. The Gerard Butler film that he's received threats over is actually based on a real story, too. Not sure what there is in it that's provoked people, actually. Yeah, I generally do disagree with death threats over cartoons. Funny that. It quashes freedom of religion by trying to enforce a tenet of faith upon those that don't share that faith. You don't want to portray images of Allah, as you believe it's idolatry? Fine. You don't want me to portray images of Allah? Not fine. Claiming that a negative reaction proves that the artist was wrong is ludicrous. That would prove that the EDL are right to go mental about Islam. The response was absolutely insane, frankly. So you don't think that threatening to kill people is wrong, then? Choudary was charged under the Public Order Act. We were talking about Choudary, but you mentioned people being arrested and imprisoned, so I discussed them, too. Down with Denmark? Really? A simple Google search reveals far more offensive placards and chants. I don't think anyone went to jail for chanting Down With Denmark, though I'd say that even that is an overreaction to one man making some drawings. What does it say? Fair enough. You answered and didn't see that edit, I think. You responded to the part that I accidentally posted.
Everyone complains about the Asians and eastern Europeans on the benefits.. Its the British people themselves who have too many on it. Sooner we admit that its not simply "foreigners" as the sun would love us to all believe, and really admit that the whole system itself is flawed there will never be any change. as for being ripped off, MP's and bankers are the biggest crooks around, but no body will do **** all about it. Enjoy moaning because it aint ever gonna change
Why do you think that papers like The Sun and The Mail portray low-paid foreigners as the problem? It's so that people don't look at the real problems.
I agree the issue often is that the people being referred to are not foreigners in that they are born and raised here. so you can have an 'abdul' or 'kweku' who is caught fiddling the system. but on exploration he is probably 2nd/3rd even 4th generation and therefore 'british' apart from name and a few other family traditions he is no more a foreigner than david cameron. only difference being colour in my experience most imigrants fiddlin the system ae not doing it for the gain we percieve for example i knew of some asylum seekers who would swa their food vouchers for cash. but the people making the money were the locals. so a £20 voucher would get the AS £10. some would do this because where they could redeem these vouchers didnt suit their dietary requirements etc. others would use the money to send to family who they left behind. technically a fiddle but hardly 'rewarding'
Even if the cartoons were intended to be offensive, that doesn't condone the reaction, which included tons of death threats, attempted bombings and suggested trade embargoes. A ludicrous overreaction to a bunch of drawings. So everyone should tip-toe around religious themes for fear of a massive overreaction, then? Why should they have to? If somebody thought that the Quran was offensive, should we ban it? You didn't have to watch anything. What was it about the 9/11 stuff that you found so offensive? They'll just kill you if you offend them. That's quite oppressive, actually. People are allowed to post potentially offensive material. If it's in poor taste or unwarranted, then there are legal channels to pursue a grievance. Threatening to kill people or trying to damn a nation over the actions of one artist is ridiculous. Those that were jailed were charged with soliciting to murder, for the most part. You don't seem to think that they should've been jailed though, for some reason. I didn't claim otherwise. I wasn't claiming that Choudary had any responsibility for these people, though it's interesting to note that Abdul Muhid, jailed for two counts of soliciting murder, was arrested again with Choudary at Stansted a few months later while out on bail. Abdul Rahman Saleem was the only person to receive a four year sentence as far as I can tell, so I'll assume that you're talking about him. It seems he was charged for chanting "Europe you will pay with your blood" and "Denmark, USA, 7/7 on its way" through a megaphone, according to his Wikipedia entry. I assume that you disagree. Are you actually trying to compare a man making 12 drawings with the deaths of nearly 3,000 people? Seriously? Get some perspective. http://www.not606.com/showthread.ph...ays-memorial?p=1295974&viewfull=1#post1295974
It's an opinion shared by anyone who isn't a theistic lunatic, frankly. That you believe that threatening to kill someone is a fair reaction to some drawings should worry you. People planted bombs and made death threats because a man drew some pictures. You're entitled to be offended. You're not entitled to act like a maniac. So you believe that the canon of your faith should be banned because it offends some people? Can you give me an example of someone in the UK making death threats against someone else and them not being arrested for it? If you didn't watch it, then how do you know it's content? I assume by "propaganda drivel" you mean the coverage of people mourning their dead? Freedom and democracy which they disagree with, incidentally. You also disagree with those who act illegally being arrested and imprisoned, saying it was unfair. Because the placards contained death threats. That's not just offensive, it's an offence. The woman was arrested for being part of an unauthorised protest within half a mile of Westminster, not for reading out the list. Umran Javed (a friend of yours?) was convicted after chanting "bomb, bomb, USA", "bomb, bomb, Denmark", "we want Danish blood!", "UK you will pay!" and "7/7 on its way!". What sentence were you expecting, exactly? Who were this father and son? Why do you think stealing is worse than death threats and stirring up racial hatred? I never suggested that. Choudary tends to spend a lot of time with people in banned organisations with links to terrorism, though. That doesn't look good, does it? So you don't disagree with the sentencing, but think that it was inconsistent with other sentences? Perhaps that's due to the high profile of the case and the international implications of the actions committed by those now in jail, rather than any racial or religious motivation? The war in Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Saddam Hussein was trying to sell oil in a currency other than the dollar and he was a dictator who massacred sections of his own countrymen. I guess you backed him too, though? The previous, edited questions.
