Calling all 1st Ammendment moonbats ...

Rishi, you ignorant slut.

"You cross the line when you threaten, intimidate or harass, and that is when free speech is limited.”

islamists, are you taking notes?

They aren't too big on the "free" part of free speech.

This is the line they're going to take: We're going to muzzle you, kufr, because anything you say that's critical of Islam and Muslims is either incitement or defamation.

Totalitarians to the left and right of me. Luckily, I can shoot in any direction.

Islam makes no distinction between religion and politics, so CAIR is suggesting we eliminate free speech entirely.

So why hold a conference on how cartoons make the prophet look bad but no conference on how rioting and murder make Islam look bad?

I'm so glad I am out of college. I'd be cluebatting people like this on a regular basis.

Also taking resumes from NEA funded artistes who'd like to show their disdain for "organized religion" [a.k.a. Judaism and Christianity] by defiling Islamic icons.

Seriously, if life here is too offensive for them, may I suggest that they go back to their country of origin?

“You cross the line when you threaten, intimidate or harass, and that is when free speech is limited.”

As in Muslims rioting all over the world, yes.

The Real Chilling Effect has just begun.

they are scared to death of honest, open criticism
their religion will not stand up to free, open debate
the very heart of Islam is at stake, and they know it

What? Are we to give up freedom of speech for the sake of a crazed poet?

The Rangers
[37.36] And to say: What! shall we indeed give up our gods for the sake of a mad poet?

[Link: www.hti.umich.edu...]

Restricting Constitutional rights and freedoms = "broadening democracy"

They've got to be f*cking kidding.

We should just tell them

Feel free to move to Iran or Saudi Arabia, where execute you if you say something promoting the wrong sect of Islam.

That's what they're asking for isn't it? there are already a few countries that practice it. They just have to make sure to pick the right country. Don't want to accidently move to a country with laws supporting a different Sect of Islam now do we?

philidelphia commission on human RELATIONS?

i feel bad for laughing at that.

OT:

i've gotten a few emails from dial-uppers who are having issues getting LGF threads to come up.

any dialuppers here that have suggestions for them?

thanks, in advance.

This pretty much passes for mainstream thought at Ivy League universities today.

I wonder how they feel about David Irving?

Has anyone seen the link about Khaddafi predicting increase in Muslim violend in Europe and the submission of Europe to Islam? i am looking for a link to his statment.

Thank you!

America needs some good old fashioned informal Koran study groups

form one among your friends today!

#12 rayra 2/22/2006 09:56AM PST

Piss Christ.
Dung Madonna.

It's past time to destroy CAIR, by any means necessary.

I say we cover all CAIRistas with dung, and piss be up on them.

/Can I get my NEA funding now?

“The right to free speech is not absolute,” Rishi said. “It does not give a right to defame Prophet Muhammad or any other” religious figure.

I wonder how many liberal or left wingers buy this crap? How about colleges and universities?

Someone once said:

"By their fruits you shall know them."

Can't remember who said it.

And another reason to sh*t another jihad.

LGF loads super double plus ungood slow on a 56k phone modem. It almost acts like it loads twice now.

Not sure why, something changed with the server change.

Printing cartoons does not equal screaming "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

Or sadly, it does.

The thing we must realize is that when the crazy imams or multiculturalists lecture us on freedom of speech, it is a form of terror. Most people think terror is limited to suicide bombers and airplanes. It is not. Terror is spread when danish embassies burn in beirut - even when no one is hurt.

Terror is spread when freedoms are breached here in the US of A whether by a dhimmi NTY editor or a wobbly-knee college. Terror is spread when boycotts threaten private businesses. This IS a form of terrorism. And it is succeeding way too often.

“The right to free speech is not absolute,” Rishi said. “It does not give a right to defame Prophet Muhammad or any other” religious figure.

Yes it does you f*&king Islamist piece of sh&t!

#24 Obi-wan 2/22/2006 10:00AM PST

Someone once said:

"By their fruits you shall know them."

Can't remember who said it.

It sure as hell wasn't Mohammed.

Anti-apostasy in that "religion" makes it a predatory cultish pretence. This nonsense must be outlawed in America.

Why, sure it does Mazhar, F**K Muhammad.

Slightly OT:

Super "free speech," "I love Denmark," Mohammed, cartoons, and many more products at

[Link: www.cafepress.com...]

This whole thing is catching like wild fire. Let's keep it going.

They're trying to put us on the defensive, but have a little faith. Most people are not going to buy this "You offend me so off to jail you go" bullshit.

Things may change if lawyers find a way to make this litigation profitable.

Someone is standing the First Amendment on its head and doing a death spiral. And it isn't the folks who are supporting free speech, that's for sure.

CAIR is clearing the way to fully assault the freedom of speech and gutting the First Amendment. There's no doubt about it from where I sit.

I don't see an exception for blasphemy, nor do I see one for Mo or any other prophet, deity, exhalted One, etc.

I can't wait for the conference on which was the better military leader Jesus Christ or Mohammed (Pork barrel in Hades upon him). Of course there should be the discussion of how the Jewish people committed a horrific holocaust upon the Muslim world.
How about a discussion of Great Peace Activists of Islam.

“You cross the line when you threaten, intimidate or harass, and that is when free speech is limited.”

Correct. There are laws against that. So all these protestors should now be in custody.
There are not laws against offending someone. The right so to do is enshrined in the Constitution.

So. Miss or Mrs Rachel Lawton, I am not threatening you, but I have to tell you that you are a stupid, self hating, enemy loving, ignoramus, and I hope that some of your Muslim buddies catch you without your burkah in a dark alley one night.

The right to free speech is not absolute...

I wonder if CAIR and others have taken note of the McCain Campaign Censorship Act, and other such restrictions on free speech. Our own politicians are handing them they keys to the country, and not thinking that we'll be the ones locked out.

I'm usually a contrarian here at LGF, but I strongly believe in free speech. I believe that we all have the right to free speech, as well as the responsibility to be civil when someone else's free speech offends you.

You cross the line when you threaten, intimidate or harass, and that is when free speech is limited

Isn't that what these clowns are doing? How do "cartoons" threaten, intimidate or harass?

There will be more than a few Americans willing to give up their free speech to "make amends" (reparations?) to the poor Islamic victims.

They are only attackingus and rioting because of our oppressive American policies, white colonialism, the Crusades and...I"m sure I'm forgetting something. We deserve this. /sarcasm off

Thanks for teh Lesson Terrorists!

I knew College was usefull for something

a podium for islamsits to bash American freedom whilst using said same American freedom

Gee what a interesting juxtaposition and conundrum

Maybe we ought dig our heads deeper in the sand

Give them a 22nd arab state and another billion dollars of American citizen's hard earned taxed monies yeah!

Americans have known for a long time that there are limits on free speech. There's no shouting "Fire!" in a theater because it serves no purpose and can get people killed in a stampede. Expressing opinions on the nature of religion or a religious figure, however, is completely different. Unless God Himself walks into the editor's office and says, "No cartoons", there's no reason to suppress the Danish or subsequent cartoons.

Why is making fun of someone else's religion all of a sudden a bad thing? It may be bigoted if done in a condescending way, but personal prejudice isn't illegal, just stupid. Is CAIR really so politically powerful that our politicians should care about what they say?

“The right to free speech is not absolute,” Rishi said. “It does not give a right to defame Prophet Muhammad or any other” religious figure.

I plan on following up on this, but I'm curious - do you think Rishi is a naturalized American citizen? If not, I have a huge major f'in problem with "the green card gang" pontificating on our rights.

sloth

Printing cartoons does not equal screaming "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

Your enemies are now going to argue like hell that it does. What are you going to say to them?

“We need to analyze what democracy means and to recognize and represent not just the majorities but the growing minorities as well,” Philadelphia CAIR vice-chairman Sofia Memon said. “In view of this, we need to ask how to broaden our democracy instead of narrow it.”

When his forefathers were wandering around in the desert, not having a clue as to what oil was, our forefathers analyzed what democracy means.

My advice to this CAIR person:

Pack your bags and head back to where you have no clue and you can control the speech to your satisfaction. Otherwise, get with the program.

/knowing they just want no free speech for anyone except themselves...

One side prints insulting pictures.

The other riots, murders, stones, bombs, and issues more death threats per capita than in the history of time. And he labels the pictures threats and intimidation. Ha!

38 KK,

I wouldn't call you a contrarian, I'd call you a snot nosed, shit stirrer. However, I do agree with the rest of your post.

“The right to free speech is not absolute,” Rishi said. “It does not give a right to defame Prophet Muhammad or any other” religious figure.

Yes it does. So in exercise of my constitutionally guaranteed right, I state that I feel that the pictures hanging in the Vatican representing Mohammed (Pork Bacon Und Ham) having his entrails dragged out in the lowest circle of Hell for eternity are probably an accurate representation of the after-life of this pedophile rabble-rouser.

Is that defamatory enough for you? If not, then FOAD.

And in Philadelphia Pennsylvania of all places.

The founding fathers are rolling over in their graves….

Islam = A death cult

"Slander the Prophet Muhammad"? Last time I checked, he's been DEAD over 1300 years. And if his religious doctrine can't stand up to a few cartoons, it can't be too robust, can it?

There is not right to be unoffended. Free speech is protected precisely because someone will be offended. If there's no offense, then there's no need for protection.

#47 Murqtaad

See, I can't even AGREE with you guys without being insulted.

Good to see a College stand up against the Imperial
american concept of 'free speech' everyone knows the
religion of peace no not the buddhists are more tolerant
and we should all worship their every whim and violent
attack as intellectually superior than our dim wits

freedom of speech what is it good for?

Thanks UPENN for sponsoring such intelligent speakers
help us realize how silly our american freedom is oh and
thanks for using that same said american freedom to do so
- brilliant we shall discuss more over our lattes

Im ready to puke now - you sure this SPEECH wasnt in
IRAN? like the University of Tehran?

Well at least we know why PENN voted Kerry - you guys
have the brains of nats minus the gray matter

Boy this puts Jesse Jackson in a tough spot. He has used the whole "free speech is racist if I say it is", to threaten so many corporations and blackmail them into paying his hush money and now the Islamo nutsos have stolen his playbook. Speaking of Jesse where does he stand on this whole cartoon thing? He is a Revrund after all.

joshua

Is CAIR really so politically powerful that our politicians should care about what they say?

I'd say no. CAIR is influential not because CAIR is powerful but because meeting with CAIR (a brand with name recognition) gives politicians a way to cover their asses. It makes them look deliberative and sensitive.

It would be useful at this point for another Islamic organization (one loyal to nonviolence and pluralism) to take away CAIR's mind-share, to steal "American Islam" as a brand away from them.

SOME THINGS THAT ARE NOT ALWAYS PROTECTED:

Falsely yelling "fire" in a theater and causing injury.

Creating a disturbance public.

Libel, defamation, slander.

THINGS THAT USUALLY ARE PROTECTED:

Political speech, including political cartoons.

Humor and satire.

Telling the truth.

THINGS NOT IN THE U.S. CONSTITUTION:

Islamic law.

#34 lawhawk

CAIR is clearing the way to fully assault the freedom of speech and gutting the First Amendment. There's no doubt about it from where I sit.

CAIR is a wolf in sheep's clothing. The islamo-emperor is naked, and the dhimmis can't see it. Certainly an emerging "clear and present danger" to democracy.

“The right to free speech is not absolute,” Rishi said. “It does not give a right to defame Prophet Muhammad or any other” religious figure.

Truth is a defense to a charge of defamation. Just saying...

38 kk

Civility isn't a legal responsibility, just a matter of manners.

KK

See, I can't even AGREE with you guys without being insulted.

and we can't even post at your left wing sites, so STFU & STFD, child.

Cantwell, decided in 1940, was a Supreme Court decision that overturned the conviction of a Jehovah's Witness who had been convicted of "breaching the peace" for offending Catholics when playing a phonograph that "sharply attacked the Roman Catholic religion" on a street corner. The Supreme Court said that the State "cannot unduly supress free communications of views, religious or other, under the guise of conserving desirable conditions."

American Law Professor Calls for Punishment of Danish Editors

That clear enough for you, you damn Nazis?

#55 godfrey
CAIR NAACP is influential not because CAIR ACLU is powerful but because meeting with CAIR AARP (a brand with name recognition) gives politicians a way to cover their asses. It makes them look deliberative and sensitive.
Made some suggestions using my free speech rights.
/while I still can

OK. Here goes:

“The right to free speech is not absolute,” Rishi said. “It does not give a right to defame Prophet Muhammad or any other” religious figure.

Yes it does, buttwipe. And I, for one am intensely concerned about the danger coming from oppressive tyrants posing as religious leaders.

A death cult is not a religion. The prophet (yes. THAT prophet) is a false idol without merit. Feet of clay. Mind of a child. Piss be upon him and the pig he sleeps with.

There. What now? A rain of fire from heaven? A plague of locusts? How about cutting off some heads and burning a few schools? Ohhh I know: A car bomb. Now that will teach the non-believers!

Problems like this will likely be solved by a big orange ball unless a plague of reason strikes the mooslim world.

Co-existing with modernity does not mean one must cast away one's own beliefs. It is not important that a westerner (like me) makes fun of another's religion--this is a means of drawing someone into a logical debate. Beheading and rape in the name of a god is not part of logical debate, but it certainly iscriminal and anti-social and must be treated appropriately.

Now, kiss my ass and run along like a good little tyrant or you won't get to stone your sister tonight.

Dan Patterson
Arrogant Infidel

freedom for all speech except against the one and only
Prophet muhhamed and the real and only religion you will
all obey Islam

Also we want more anti-zionist conferences sponsored by
this great university you are much like us in Europe not
like dumb free americans - great to see submit to Islams
rule over your idiotic view of womens rights and freedom
of religion only islam can rule you all - women should be
behind burkhas good to a college finally agree with the
obvious role of broads

also we must stone all christians you understand.. and
you better give us more money quickly or else... he ha
just kidding we like your support of jihad agaisnt
America and all other religions

and lets divest from israel and give us as 22nd arab
state a few billion dollars more please thanks dhimmis
UPENN RULES!

Thanks for meeting our demands I mean requests - great to
see you are so tolerant of our intolerance very liberal of
you

#24 Obi Wan and #29 Gang of One:

It's a paraphrase of what Paul said somewhere in the New Testament, but it was discussing how you can tell someone had come to know Christ - it's in the personal adoption of the values and thoughts of Jesus ( you know, the guy who told us to "love your neighbors as yourself"). I can't find it at the moment...but it's in there.

In this case, we know "them" as they have adopted the values and thoughts of Mohammed, the one who went out into the desert and raided trader's caravans, making the captured people become his followers of die, then had his followers conquer most all of Europe by the sword.

In any case, what you say rings very, very true...nothing has really changed.

I wish I had known about this lil dhimmi/overlord party. I coulda been there in 30 minutes. Damn, woulda been fun...

just a grunt

You're right. That was a distinction without a difference. My bad.

Still, does CAIR really have a monopoly as the voice of "American Islam"?

KK

Butch up, cowgirl.

Free speech allows for ridicule and satire of the holy and revered. That's what free speech is all about: debunking the high and mighty, no matter who it is. That's one of the best ways of keeping them in line.

The right to free speech is not absolute

Sure, only islam is absolute, and invasion, and stoning women and honor killings.

Good man, he has serious values.

He just got in the wrong Country.

Philly Muslims are still really upset that the Inquirer won't apologize for their decision to republish the cartoons within their pages.

But instead of their anger turning into violent protests and demonstrations, we're all getting lectured and educated with a crash course on how great Islamic culture is. That's our penalty for defending freedom of speech.

Speaking as a resident of a nearby Philly suburb, I'd almost prefer the violence...

I suspect if we have President Hillary we will get Supreme Court Justice Mazhar Rishi

anti free speech islamic conferences

anti jewish islamic conferences

Under the guise of you guess it freedom of speech - interesting

"You cross the line when you threaten, intimidate or harass, and that is when free speech is limited."

This is my first post...be gentle... I am fascinated by one aspect of this whole cartoon ridiculousness, and want to know:

If it is against Islamofascist law to draw a picture of their 'peaceful leader', how do we know that the Mo in the cartoons is THE Mohammed?

If Islamofascists can tell that the Mo in the cartoons is the Mo, then there have obviously been representations in their "religion" before so that they know what he looks like, and that negates their argument of how offensive representation of him is...

If having any picture or depiction or representation of their 'peaceful leader' is against their RoP(MA), why is it not only acceptable but honorable to name any male child Mohammed?

Okay, I know...trying to make sense where none exists...

How about a cartoon showing Mohamed as a dick head.(Just trying out the 1stAmendment. Yup. Still works.)

You can freely send comments posted on the same article page

[Link: www.dailypennsylvanian.com...]

Wonder how long that freedom will last at UDhimmi

"...We need to analyze what democracy means and to recognize and represent not just the majorities but the growing minorities as well,” Philadelphia CAIR vice-chairman Sofia Memon said. “In view of this, we need to ask how to broaden our democracy instead of narrow it...”

What the hell is that supposed to mean?

Sounds like they're going to try to get other constituents amongst minority groups to bolster their position. Let them. More are beginning to see it our way and we've held the line so far, especially since we were under attack and didn't know it for a long while (not referring just to 9-11). Considering we were defending our version of democracy without realizing what was going on means we were stronger than we knew and now that we know? Fuggedabadit!

UPENN SHOULD BE RENAMED TO UDHIMMI

#66
Same here Murtaqq. Don't forget that UPENN is the same joint that expelled - man, I can't remember his name - back in 92 or 93 for "hate speech." He called a group of rowdy women, mostly black, outside his window who were keeping him up at night, "water buffalo."

Here's a cartoon for today: Oddly enough, I feel offended...

Clean up aisle #2.

#54 Just_A_Grunt

Boy this puts Jesse Jackson in a tough spot. He has used the whole "free speech is racist if I say it is", to threaten so many corporations and blackmail them into paying his hush money and now the Islamo nutsos have stolen his playbook. Speaking of Jesse where does he stand on this whole cartoon thing? He is a Revrund after all.

As one of the purported "leaders" of the black community, I sure as hell hope "The Revrhunnd" is concentrating his boundless rhetorical energy upon the situation in Nigeria. Islamofacism (as was the case during the rise of the Third Reich) does not make distinctions with respect to race or creed when all is distilled down to the apostate or the infidel. Where is the outrage there?

/*spit*

Does it occur to Rishi that if we accept his premise that the right to free speech is not absolute, he really has no recourse if we decide it's well time that he STFU and STFD?

BD_VM,

I remember it well. Has it been that long already? The student should have been awarded a trophy.

Judith,

get a broom. the post looks like money to me.

#81 Judith:

Huh?

#74 Rational Lady

Great initial post, BTW. I guess we have to respect the notion that they know MO when they see him? ;)

The hard core progressive types must be desperately trying to stop their heads exploding with all the contradictions over this cartoon affair.

Leftists and liberals, who have up till now been in the vanguard of ridding the state of every symbol of religion, will quite possibly be joining in calls for blasphemy laws along side their Islamic allies in the very near future!

“The right to free speech is not absolute,” Rishi said. “It does not give a right to defame Prophet Muhammad or any other” religious figure

Except the Jews of course. The continue to be fair game.

Being from Philly this is a disgrace that these Islmo-facists can try to get away with their bullshit here in the city that founded all of OUR core beliefs!

AAAHHHGGG!

UK: March for Free Expression

[Link: www.jihadwatch.org...]

A Rally in support of Freedom of Expression will be held in Trafalgar Square, London, UK between 2:00pm and 4:00pm on March 25th 2006. A direct response to the Danish Cartoons controversy, this rally aims to send a message to British politicians of all parties demanding resolute action in the face of violence, threats and intolerance. The statement of principle for the campaign is as follows:

"What is incredible is that such a demonstration needs to be undertaken in London, in 2006."

[Link: www.marchforfreeexpression.blogspot.com...]

March for Free Expression

What and When

A Rally in Trafalgar Square between 2:00pm and 4:00pm on Saturday March 25th 2006. Depending on estimates of numbers, the details of a march to Trafalgar Square will be announced on March 15th 2006.

Statement of Principle

The strength and survival of free society and the advance of human knowledge depend on the free exchange of ideas. All ideas are capable of giving offence, and some of the most powerful ideas in human history, such as those of Galileo and Darwin, have given profound religious offence in their time. The free exchange of ideas depends on freedom of expression and this includes the right to criticise and mock. We assert and uphold the right of freedom of expression and call on our elected representatives to do the same. We abhor the fact that people throughout the world live under mortal threat simply for expressing ideas and we call on our elected representatives to protect them from attack and not to give comfort to the forces of intolerance that besiege them.

There's no shouting "Fire!" in a theater because it serves no purpose and can get people killed in a stampede.

I have already heard Islamists in Canada arguing that those cartoons are the same as shouting fire in the theatre because the reaction of Muslims to such a grotesque insult is the same or worse than a stampede.

We need a new example.

Who needs Middle East oil when our Founding Fathers who set forth the principles of free speech are spinning furiously in their graves at this proposed perversion of the first Amendment.

The right to free speech is what the US Constitution Canadian Charter of Rights says it is. The press will NOT be hobbled for ISLAM WHICH IS A POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE THAT FIELDS ISLAMIC DEATH SQUADS TO INFLUENCE OTHERS, AT HOME AND ABROAD!

#92 mglazer:

I hope they get a really big turnout. I'm worried that they'll only get 1,000 or so and it'll send the wrong message. Everyone has got to get out there and show they've had enough.

judith

We don't need a new example. Muslims should behave themselves.

Why should anyone have to fear their reaction to insult? If Islam is really so superior, they should feel secure enough not to be bothered by those who satirize them.

Muslims are not in the position to dictate.

We should tell them to develop a thicker skin and grow up.

Silly Canadian. Would it have helped your humor-deficient self if he'd included the quotes on that comedic homage?

Yeah rayra, it would have. I've been called an ignorant slut and far worse by a few here who chose to disagree with me. No argument, no debate, no intelligent response, no even real reading of what I had actuallly wrote, just name calling and such. Charles was kind enough to remove that crap at my request.

So call me humor-deficient if you want. I had no idea this sort of comment was some kind of comedic homage and I still don't like that particular phrase being slung around in place of honest commentary even it is comedic homage. No one makes comedic homages about men by calling them by base gendered oriented names designed to imply a specific moral laxness associated with easy sexual access. It is an insult aimed very specifically at women and only women.

#93 Judith ,

That's an ass backwards analogy

Saying the reaction to art is intended harm (toons) is a lot different that the cause of speech is unintended harm (fire)

You are still responsible for your actions even if you were given orders or someone makes you feel bad

you can't blame your superiors or some emotional reaction as a justification for your criminal violence - learned that lesson in WWII

The fire example and violent muslims reaction to toons are not even close to synonamous

#70 world b. free

Man, that sounds even worse than a mandatory sexual harrassment seminar...

mglazer I agree 100% with you. The argument being made by the Islamist is total crap. I am just pointing out what they are saying. I am certainly not saying I personally think that way.

How about reading what I actually wrote?

“We need to analyze what democracy means ..."

In a nutshell democracy means sovereignty is vested in The People. That means that in the United States, We the People govern ourselves with laws that we create ourselves. Our laws are not dictated to us by medieval warlords, nor are they immutable pronouncements from the gods. We in the West long ago abandoned the rule of the High Priesthood. If We the People don't like a law we can change it. This is the fundmental disconnect between the Muhammedan world and the non-Muhammedan world and this ideological gulf will not be bridged in our lifetime. Shari'a is incompatible with democracy. Period. Islam is incompatible with democracy. Democracy cannot exist without freedom of expression. Freedom of expression is incompatible with Islam. Democracy and Islam are mutually exclusive.

The difference between shouting "Fire" in a theatre and publishing cartoons is this:

The reaction of people stampeding in a theatre when hearing a false shout of "Fire!" is reasonable. Shouting "Fire!" is both factually untrue and the proximate cause of any resulting harm. Therefore, a false shout of "Fire!" is not protected speech.

The reaction of many Muslims to the cartoons is unreasonable. The proximate cause of their violence is their propensity to violence, not the cartoons. Furthermore, the cartoons are expresing an opinion, not facts. Therefore, the cartoons are neither factually untrue (opinions aren't true or not true) nor the proximate cause of any resulting harm. Therefore, the cartoons are protected speech.

This isn't rocket science, but it will definitely go right over the heads of most libs and true-believer Muslims. But there it is...

CAIR board member Mazhar Rishi agreed. “The right to free speech is not absolute,” Rishi said. “It does not give a right to defame Prophet Muhammad or any other” religious figure.

Oh, yeah?
The day you (CAIR) defend against "piss christ" or "virgin mary-elephant dun" just as enthusiastically as cartoons, is the day I'll believe you.

Now, STFU.

moonbatbane-brilliantly written!

#101 Judith ,

Relax, I wasnt attacking you personally, I just said the analogy was backwards ass that is

Oh, yeah?
The day you (CAIR) defend against "piss christ" or "virgin mary-elephant dun" just as enthusiastically as cartoons, is the day I'll believe you.

Now, STFU.

I like that one too. Very good!

#98 Judith

No one makes comedic homages about men by calling them by base gendered oriented names designed to imply a specific moral laxness associated with easy sexual access. It is an insult aimed very specifically at women and only women.

Hold on. I'm furtively searching for my official University of Wisconsin, Madison handbook on politically correct etiquette and terminology. I’d like to add my own opinion here, but I don’t speak the language. My response forthcoming, maybe…uh…in a year or two? Sheesh.

CAIR board member Mazhar Rishi agreed.

No, dumbass. That's precisely what it DOES mean.
And it's also why you don;t belong in America or any other Western country.

It isn't illegal to yell FIRE! in a crowded theatre. WHEN THE THEATRE IS ON FIRE.

Is that popcorn I smell ?

Here is a prime example of Islamic free speech
The road to civil war in Iraq

Strange how insidiously Political Correctness merges with Islamic/religio totalitarianism.

Free speech contenances blasphemy, hate and calumny. That's the point.

Rishi and his stupid profit moo-ha-mitt can both go pound a 2x4 up their @zz.

#112 genard ,

They both are allies due to their shared common ideals and goals: hatred and destruction of America

mglazer, my hackles are settling. I had a crappy morning where I had to pull rank on someone being unreasonable and squash them then down hard. I hate doing that. The alternative would be to fire them on the spot and it may come to that yet, but I prefer a team approach and not a heavy handed top down body slam from almighty doctor.

I am going to withdraw and eat some choclate until I feel better. I am unduly cranky.

"We need to broaden our democracy," by narrowing our freedoms.

Spoken like a true Muslim.

These folks live an Orwellian world 24/7.

Mohammed sucks. So I think. And so I say. But as in my youth I see this as an example of 'fighting words'. Let the battle begin.

#98 Judith 2/22/2006 10:46AM PST

Please enter the 21th century, will you.
Slut has been gender-neutral for a dozen or more years now.
Personally I would like to add that the remark was way to friendly.
Free speech: you do not discuss it, it is.

Oh and by the way this little tidbit from Iraq concerning the violence over the blowing up their mosques'.

In Baghdad's Sadr City, thousands of Shiites, some brandishing Kalashnikov rifles, marched through the streets shouting anti-American slogans

Leave it up to the "religious" leader Al Sad Sack to to put the blame where it belongs. I wish we had taken this clown out when he first started spouting off.

#98 Judith

It is an insult aimed very specifically at women and only women.

Look at the bright side, you're not depicted as a moron in every commercial on TV.

The right to free speech may not be absolute, but is it the Government's place to regulate it? THAT path leads directly to censorship and tyrrany.

Public sentiment, not Government force, is the legitimate forum for any debate about what is and is not appropriate to say in public.

Of course, the Government could have a volcanic eruption of reason and tell the CAIR twits that if they REALLY want to fight duels defending Mohammed's honor, the Government won't stop them.

From fighting according to the code duello - or from losing.

On topic,

More Islamofascist spew from American academia, Seton Hall law professor: Danish newspaper should be prosecuted.

Under both these standards it appears to me that the Jyllands-Posten publication of cartoons satirizing the Prophet Muhammad with depictions and caricatures may very well be a violation of Danish Penal Code section 266b, if it can be shown that the editor knew that the religious sensibilities of Muslims would be deeply offended by the caricatures and that he intended to stir hatred and ridicule with their publication.

In September, Danish prosecutors, acting on a complaint by Danish Muslim clerics, nonetheless refused to authorize a criminal prosecution of the newspaper editor under section 266b. In my view, this was a patent abuse of their discretion and a blatantly political decision. They ought to revisit it. The issue should be decided by a Danish court. Danish prosecutors certainly must know Denmark is becoming a hotbed of skinheadism and anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant violence. [Really? Does he offer any proof? Of course not!] Do they want their newspapers to fan these flames? They should not wait until they have a situation like that in Rwanda before they act.

Rwanda? Threatening massive barbaric bloodshed, is he?

Lovely little country you have here, Mr Rasmussen. It's be such a shame if something was to happen to it...

john mccain is an asshole for what he did to free speach with his stupid/protect me campaign law.

it is like he and others in congress forgot their oaths to defend and protect the US Constitution.

and now we have these traitors in islamic clothing telling us what we have to do with our rights?

the war is comming, there just isnt any other way.

“The right to free speech is not absolute,” Rishi said. “It does not give a right to defame Prophet Muhammad or any other” religious figure.

Absolute rubbish. Don't tell me how to think, you freak.

103...If this is accepted legally as being the equivalent to shouting fire in a crowded theater, it will only encourage those who wish offending speech to be suppressed to become violent.. Because any violence associated with an unpopular expression would therefore meet the test……

Six local Islamic figures gathered Saturday for a panel to address the recent controversy over the Danish cartoons that negatively depict the Islamic prophet Muhammad

Islomao-facist version of a cluster -f**k, at the UoP no less, L³ berkley of the east coast, nothing new to see here...

&#968 peanut-butter-upon-him &#968
-- DRG --...
;>P

#65 Curt 2/22/2006 10:17AM PST
#24 Obi Wan and #29 Gang of One:

It's a paraphrase of what Paul said somewhere in the New Testament

Not Paul.

This was by the Big Guy Himself.

Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, Matthew 7

Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they?
So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit.
Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. So then, you will know them by their fruits.

I demand limits on the number of blithering-idiot Islamofascists (please excuse the redundancy...) that we allow into our country! Any number greater than zero exceeds that limit.

Islam, go back to the hellholes that shat you...

Kook sez:

“The right to free speech is not absolute,” Rishi said. “It does not give a right to defame Prophet Muhammad"

mohammeddance.com
 

Fire in a theatre implies danger. One is in no physical danger if ones religion is mocked. One is about physical harm, the other just about feeling offended.

People like to confuse being polite and kind with legal restrictions.

The question that we should be asking is why are they spending their resources trying to weaken the commitment to free speech on campuses? The reason is the same as why Marxists do the same. Universities are institutions of high leverage. These are the places where the next generation of judges come from.

If they can instill in the minds of these kids that multiculturalism and hurt feelings trump the right to free speech, then 20 or 30 years down the road, after 100s and 1000s of judicial assults on the First Amendment, it will become a dead letter just like the Tenth Amendment. That's why they're planting these seeds now, and that's why they have to be stopped now.

This has, of course, been the real point of the cartoon riots---to get the west to curb its freedom of speech, and to get it to stop criticizing Islam. It's not about religious sensitivities, it's about making us Dhimmis toe the Moslem line. (Well, that, and distracting our attention from the Iranian nukes, of course).

P.S. Does anybody REALLY think that a Jew, say, is going to be able to sue a Moslem for drawing a cartoon mocking Jewish symbols? (Which the Moslem world does all the time), or a Christian's going to be able to sue the author of "The DaVinci Code" for insulting Christianity? Nope, it's all going to be a one-way street; Islam is going to be the only religion defended by anti-blasphemy laws---not that most Jews and Christians really want to go around trying their neighbors for heresy and/or blasphemy---but you get the picture; we're all going to be forced to act like Moslems, whether we are or not.

Where's the ACLU on this?

P.P.S. Ya think the sort of guys who blew up the Bamiyan Buddhas really give a rat's patootie about respecting other religions?

Seems like a perfect threat to repost Zipperfish's slap at these morons.

Doh! threat = thread (almost Freudian, eh?)

I think it can be rightly said that multiculturalism seeks the death of democracy.

135 pdq332

Put quite succinctly. That is absolutely correct.

CAIR states we dont defame any other religion

OK

then please explain whats in the KORAN...

Like

Jews are Pigs
Jews are monkeys
Infidels are Dogs..

Kill all the People of the book
Kill all the Jews..

Wipe out dogs and cats...

Give me a BREAK..
Please i am not a stupid hollywood liberal...

Islam has NEVER EVER respected anything except

Killing
Murder
Assasinations
Child rape
Child abuse
Genocide
Be-headings
Suicide bombings
Blowing up childrens schools...

CAIR i wouldnt spend the Money to buy a Koran
To use as Toilet paper..

I would rather Buy ammunition for when the Muslim WHORDES come Crawling over the walls of our childrens schools...

All wearing suicide Vests..

We will need ALL the AMMO we can CARRY...

Put that into your child molesting prophets pipe and SMOKE it..

Geez. The world needs more Penn & Teller.

#127, Silhouette,

You stole the words right out of my mouth! When muslims try to defend their dead prophet (who prophecized nothing very accurate), it becomes obvious that he was little more than a charlatan, but a very charismatic, influential one. (Hint: think Satan). It has been said that Satan does not like to be mocked. Consider the reactions to the mocking of Muhammad in these cartoons. It seems to me that the irrational defense against that mocking is proof positive of the “prophet’s” affiliation with “he who shall not be mocked”. I have pity for their souls and if this is the time in history where the legacy of allah and his bestest profit are discredited, it is way overdue.

“The right to free speech is not absolute,” Rishi said. “It does not give a right to defame Prophet Muhammad or any other” religious figure.

In a twisted way, dispshit is right. The First amendment doesn't give anything.

It recognizes a basic human right. The right was always there. It can't be given, only taken.

And, by the way, it's not going to be taken, so learn to live with it or dig a hole, climb in, and pull your pathetic rage in over you, Mr. Rishi.

Some examples of Islam's respect for other religions

When the Moslems and Palestinians declared Jihad on the Christians in 1975 we didn't even know what that word meant. We had taken them into our country, allowed them to study side by side with us, in our schools and universities. We gave them jobs, shared with them our way of life. We didn't realize the depth of their hatred to us as infidels. They looked at us as the enemy not as neighbors, friends, employers and colleagues.

...The Lebanese civil war was not between the Lebanese, it was a holy war declared on the Christians by the Muslims of the Middle East.

They started massacring the Christians, city after city. Horrific events the western media seldom reported. One of the most ghastly acts was the massacre in the Christian City of Damour where thousands of Christians were slaughtered like sheep. The Muslims would enter a bomb shelter, see a mother and a father hiding with a little baby. They would tie one leg of the baby to the mother and one leg to the father and pulled the parents apart splitting the child in half. A close friend of mine was mentally disturbed because they made her slaughter her own son in a chair. They tied her to a chair, tied a knife to her hand and holding her hand forcing her to cut her own son’s throat. They would urinate and defecate on the altars of churches using the pages of the bible as toilet paper. They did so many things I don't need to go into any more detail. You get the picture.

link

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
Benjamin Franklin

We need to go back to our core.

They've chosen which side they're on.

Can you name a right outlined in the Constitution that is an absolute right? I can't. Freedom of Speech, while vital and important, is not absolute. We have laws against libel, slander, and threatening the President. Are these infringing on the Freedom of Speech? Of course they are.

The First Amendment says, "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech" but it has. Are the laws restricting libel, slander, and death threats against the President unreasonable? Or are they the camel's nose in the tent?

And don't even get me started on how the Second Amendment has been trashed. "shall not be infringed" my flabby pale buttocks.

Just think about this who gets attacked and booed off of stages in Colleges?

is it the muslim anti-jewish, anti free speech or the ann coulters pointing this out

What does that tell you

CAIR and muslims in america are so upset in about
People defaming their FALSE prophet that..

Well just read it.. for yourself..

[Link: www.dailypennsylvanian.com...]

My comments and views on the actions of
Muslims and CAIR in America to mee PROVE
beyond any shadow of a doubt that islam
Is a Violent Genocidal mass murdering Virus
That needs to be eliminated...

But dont believe me...
Read the article above then check out

www.memritv.org and see what islam dictates..
Islam and the Koran states..

Its ok to
Kill Jews, christians, non muslims

Defame Jews, christians, non muslims

Draw cartoons depecting Jews, christians, non muslims as apes and Pigs

Rape Jews, christians, non muslims

Behead Jews, christians, non muslims

Mutilate, burn alive, blow up, kill, destroy Jews, christians, non muslims

Oppress ALL who oppose the Islamic Armies..

Kill ALL whho DARE to oppose their countries from being over run by the Islamic Whordes...

But the muslims are complaining now
IN OUR own Universities
(which the Liberals and Democrats)
are Line-ing up by the busload
to LISTEN to these Islamo Nazis
DESTROY our own Constitution...
And the Liberals like CLinton and Jimmy carter
Are applauding. and even working with the Islamo nazis to turn over the cartoonists...

And NOT ONE of the Liberals or Democrats is
Daring to take a stand...
(they know that to do so)
would certainly result in a re-action
by the followers of the religion of pieces Islam... that would be MOST VIOLENT...

Right Now the muslims in America are saying
There is No freedom of speech when it comes
to telling the TRUTH about the

Mass Murdering
Child Molesting
Genocidal maniac
Psychopathic
Sucide Bombing.
Racist butcher.

FALSE Prophet Mohammed...

America are you AWAKE!
You dont have much time...

The democrats and Liberals are already
Betraying all of US!

142 Silhouette

Harrowing. Absolutely harrowing. You think they can no longer shock you, and then they prove you wrong.

---

By the way, is it any wonder that one of the most spirited defenses of free speech so far comes from Chris Hitchens, an avowed athiest? If criticism of religion is outlawed, what becomes of those who hold to no religion, in part because they believe all religions are full of absurdities? I am certainly not one of those people, but I would never hope to see the day that my athiest or agnostic friends are unable to explain why they think as they do, and that's exactly where this is headed.

Said it before: CAIR = Changing American Into Riyadh.

Who are they to teach us about the meaning of free speech? What is wrong with that picture?

/rhetorical question off

"... freedom to differ is not limited to things that do not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of freedom. The test of its substance is the right to differ as to things that touch the heart of the existing order." -- Justice Robert Jackson, writing for the majority in WV v. Barnette, 1943

“The right to free speech is not absolute,” Rishi said. “It does not give a right to defame Prophet Muhammad or any other” religious figure.

Prophet Muhammad -- you mean the murdering, thieving, plagiarizing, lying pedophile Muhammad, may he rot in Hell? I'll defame him all I want, I'm an American and it is my right.

Jackson remarked that allowing diverse and even contrary opinions would not cause our society to disintegrate, that making certain patriotic affirmations compulsory "is to make an unflattering estimate of the appeal of our institutions to free minds." Perhaps Rishi's estimate of his religion's appeal to free minds, and his society's propensity to disintegrate in the face of differing thoughts, is exactly right. If so the problem of Islam is solved with the disinfectant sunlight of reason and knowledge.

#139 Grandma

I think you got it right, Grandma. . .

#140 Merovign

So, if this Rishi guy says bad things about Jesus, or defaces a statue in a Hindu temple, he's willing to be stoned and/or imprisoned because he's defamed a religious figure, so he's getting his just deserts, cuz freedom of speech isn't absolute, and doesn't extend to religion---right?

(Heh, heh, heh, sez Fritzie the Talking Kamel).

re: the dung mary

people forget that it was not just dung but images of vaginas from pornographic magazines fluttering beside that icon of imperialism or whatever

you racists all dont understand that in africa, clipping from pr0n mags and mammal shit is the native meaning. you keep thinking in your ethnocentric box of paint! for shame!1

anyways, islam sucks; it cant survive as is. there are three strategies which face muslims:

1. integrate with the successful strategies of west and adapt your faith
2. parasitize onto the more malleable/flexible parts of successful western societies (i.e. the LLL gnobs) and prolong your life that way
3. remain in your failing states and hope your impoverished birthrates dont overwhelm your diminishing oil wealth

the utility of each strategy changes with the time scale, as well as the size of the population were dealing with. individual muslims may be more prone to choose 1. as the community network gets larger, 1, becomes nearly impossible, and 3 dominates, what with 2 being a product perhaps born of the tensions between 1 and 3 (the answer to the islamic dilemma: how can i get more stuff but still be a worthless human being?)

ok

if we takes these people a what they say, why do they have a right to say it as it offends me (and a lot others)?

d'oh

meaning = medium

shucks, there's that ethnocentric box again... : /

Sweet [bigoted word]-rapin' Rover! I go to lunch and BAM! Charles tips the hat!

Looks like LGF army of flying monkeys has successfully stormed the ivory tower of UPenn open post forum.

It's a nightmare!

/bliss

Let me put this in a perspective.
You can't yell "Fire" in a crowded theatre (if there really is no fire!) because reasonable people would assume that you are telling the truth and there may be a stampede.
Seems simple enough. But it depends on what a "reasonable" person is. It has much to do with social conditions and majority behavior. These can change.
For a muslim it is apparently reasonable behavior to go ape-shit over a cartoon. Maybe because they're nuckin' futz, or just don't know any better. Or whatever. Right now they're trying to make the case that this is reasonable behavior in American society as well.
And all they need is for the LLL, the MSM, the ACLU, and other influential groups to side with them because the want to spite George Bush and the evil republicans. Believe me, at the rate those guys deceive themselves, buying into a crock like the Muslims are selling wouldn't take a lot of effort. In fact, we've already seen both domestic and foreign statements from people who ought to know better to the effect that the muslims have a reasonable grievance.
Then all of a sudden the First Amendment shifts, "protecting" Mohammed because judges start defining Muslim freak-out behavior as normal.
It could happen, folks.

#139 Grandma

It has been said that Satan does not like to be mocked. Consider the reactions to the mocking of Muhammad in these cartoons.

I caught a snippet of a TV show as I was walking through the room the other day that made a very interesting comparison.

Islam is based on respect, whereas Christ was cursed, mocked, spit upon, shamed, humilated, taunted, and died a criminal's death.

Understandable then, that Christians tolerate mockery better, as our role model endured it and our goal is to be Christlike.

Compare to how Mohammed reacted to being mocked.

One Muslim scholar and jurist provides several examples of people who were killed for satirizing or making fun of Muhammad:

In a sound hadith the Prophet commanded that Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf be killed. He asked, "Who will deal with Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf? He has harmed Allah and His Messenger." ...

Similarly on the Day of the Conquest, he ordered the killing of Ibn Khatal and his two slavegirls who used to sing his curses on the Prophet.

In another hadith about a man who used to curse the Prophet, the Prophet said, "Who will save me from my enemy?" Khalid said, "I will," so the Prophet sent him out and he killed him.

'Abdu'r-Razzaq mentioned that a man cursed the Prophet, causing the Prophet to say, "Who will save me from my enemy?" Az-Zubayr said, "I will." He sent az-Zubayr and he killed him.

It is related that a woman used to curse the Prophet and he said, "Who will save me from my enemy?" Khalid ibn al-Walid went out and killed her.

It is related that a man forged lies against the Prophet and he sent 'Ali and az-Zubayr to kill him.

Ibn Qani' related that a man came to the Prophet and said, "Messenger of Allah, I heard my father say something ugly about you, so I killed him," and that did not distress him.

Ibn 'Abbas said that a woman from Khatma satirised the Prophet and the Prophet said, "Who will deal with her for me?" A man from her people said, "I will, Messenger of Allah."

link

“The right to free speech is not absolute,” Rishi said. “It does not give a right to defame Prophet Muhammad or any other” religious figure.

I love this. The more these guys tell the truth about their ideas the better.

Alminabedjahdi: "Iran will blow up Israel and the USA"

Bin Laden: "We'll kill you all".

Hamas: "We'll wipe Israel off the map"

Keep it up guys! Before long maybe even some diehard liberals will finally understand you mean just what you say...just like Adolf did.

#74 RationalLady

Okay, I know...trying to make sense where none exists...

You catch on fast. Welcome to LGF.

Concerning the prohibition of images of mo (and this is mere speculation on my part) it is likely that the greatly revered feared one was simply insuring there would be no Wanted Dead Or Alive posters on any kind of media circulated within his lifetime. And almost no chance for news-without-words reporting of atrocities reaching distant lands.

#147, 156, Silhouette,

The Lebanese civil war was not between the Lebanese, it was a holy war declared on the Christians by the Muslims of the Middle East.

And so it goes today. However, the followers of allah and mohammed are so blind that they think if they destroy the followers of a particular religion, they’ll come up as earthly winners. They haven’t yet figured out that an affiliation with a particular “religion” really isn’t the criteria with which to identify true spirituality. They are frustrated because they cannot wipe out any religion that isn’t Islam. But they fail to realize that there are those, like me, who can be regarded as irreligious, who don’t buy into their crap. There’s no organization or building in my life that they can attack to destroy my faith.

I have no animosity towards those of the muslim faith who truly want to be good, decent people. I will forgive them their ignorance in their blind faith in what can be best described as a deity with discreditable characteristics and a false prophet, regardless of all their religious laws about drawing pictures of him, who has been idolized nonetheless. For those who have other plans for my demise because of some god, I have self-defense issues.

My animosity lies with the deity allah, and his prophet. The last I heard, we still don’t have laws here in the US about deicide, and according to the leftists, the dead have no rights (that would include Muhammad, no?). So if I pray to my Almighty Creator asking for the destruction of a false god and his false prophet, I’ve committed no crime. Maybe my prayers have been answered in the flak about these cartoons, and He has used the followers of allah themselves to do just that; He’s shed the light of day on a schism that deserves it.

Haven't read this whole thread, so forgive me if this has been posted.

On the whole "shouting fire in a crowded theater" thing. The prohibition is on falsely shouting fire in a crowded theater, and knowing that there is no fire, thus knowing that you are purposefully lying in order to cause a panic.

Therefore, any argument that publising the cartoons is just like shouting fire in a theater (because muslims react with violence and anger) is a totally false analogy.

Claiming ole Mo was a pedophilic, war-mongering, thief who suffered from epileptic seizures isn't anything like "falsely" yelling fire in a theater, because I absolutely believe it to be true. If those who hear it riot and kill, its their reaction that is the problem and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

#133
YES! absolutely appropriate!

“You cross the line when you threaten, intimidate or harass, and that is when free speech is limited.”

Bill Handel. Michael Graham. Andrew Whitehead. Don Imus. Daniel Pipes.

All of them are victims of CAIR threats, intimidation and harrassment. CAIR can kiss my infidel ass. If I'm feeling kind, I'll draw Mo on it first.

#156 Silhouette -

Islam is based on respect

Not really, it's based upon self and submission to a set of religious ideals. This is what causes the breaches between the different sects / denominations.

So what’s the big deal with muslims about the cartoons? If muslims idolize their profit anyhow (and obviously they do), what does it matter if pictures are painted/drawn/characterized? Maybe muslims should find someone (other prophets) whose lessons they profess to admire (Moses, Jesus, etc.) who could really teach them something about true spirituality. Ol’ Mo’ broke every single one of the Ten Commandments, yet based his whole “religion” on the teachings of the Judaic-Christian prophets…..yeah, sure. This prophet grabbed at the legitimacy of the true spiritual leaders, but rejected their message. Case closed.

SlothB77 #27

Printing cartoons does not equal screaming "Fire!" in a crowded theater

Hate to be so blunt and insensitive, but I'm afraid printing cartoons of Mohammed is like screaming "Fire", or something more incendiary, in an insane asylum.

“The right to free speech is not absolute,” Rishi said. “It does not give a right to defame Prophet Muhammad or any other” religious figure.

We'll remember that the next time someone make fun or smear Jesus Christ, the Virgin Mary, Papa Smurf or Mickey Mouse.

The last place I'd look for free speech to be defended and the First Amendment upheld would be an American university.

"The right to free speech is not absolute," Rishi said. "It does not give a right to defame Prophet Muhammad or any other" religious figure.

In that case, it shouldn't give anyone the right to burn other countries' flags or leaders' effigies or chant "death to [country]" in public, either. But I'm guessing most Muslim countries don't want to relinquish that freedom of expression. Yet for many, allegiance to their country is their religion, their presidents are their religious leaders...shouldn't we respect their belief system as well?

“The right to free speech is not absolute,” Rishi said. “It does not give a right to defame Prophet Muhammad or any other” religious figure.

Ahhh! Yeah!

The right of free speech is absolute. That is the price of being informed and the price of freedom.

So I have a message for Mazhar Rishi and anyone who agreed with him: F*ck you and kiss my ass!

doubledips: Yet for many, allegiance to their country is their religion, their presidents are their religious leaders...shouldn't we respect their belief system as well?

Do the Muslims really respect ours? Do they have an obligation to respect ours?

We try to show respect and tolerance for anyone's faith, just as long as they aren't trying to impose their bullsh*t religious laws on us and expect us to respect and accommodate them.

Look at the history of the Jews: they have never, never impose their religious beliefs on any host society or country, all they ask of is respect, tolerance and live in peaceful existence.

“The right to free speech is not absolute,” Rishi said. “It does not give a right to defame Prophet Muhammad or any other” religious figure.

Actually, it does; it even allows you to defame the right to free speech!

From the article:

The discussion focused largely on the alleged marginalization of minorities in Western media and culture.

Translation: the dicussion was another campus politcial correctness jamboree where Leftists and Islamissa denounced genuine free spech and the priciples of intellectual Stalinism on campus were upheld.

Ouch! #173

Islamissa = Islamists

We need to analyze what democracy means and to recognize and represent not just the majorities but the growing minorities as well,” Philadelphia CAIR vice-chairman Sofia Memon said.

No.
They need to decide if they like what democracy means in the country that they have moved to, and go back to where they came from if they don't like it.

Here we go again, in the twisted ideology of Islamo-Fascism, any insult is considered a very serious affront to the status of the STATE. Since Islam is a combination of totalitarianism and religion, and cannot be separated, this is very similar to the Nazi defamation laws enacted by the German government.

Does this mean we can't call Muslims "Water Buffalo?"

#171 the_flying_pig

Look at the history of the Jews: they have never, never impose their religious beliefs on any host society or country, all they ask of is respect, tolerance and live in peaceful existence.

The Jews are civilized. Hell, they invented civilization.

The Muslims are the Jews' crazy cousin Larry.

“The right to free speech is not absolute,” Rishi said. “It does not give a right to defame Prophet Muhammad or any other” religious figure.

To quote the great Art Carney "It does unless I woke up in Russia this morning".

I hope these CAIR doofs realize that they are gonna be first up against the wall (any wall) should anything else go down stateside. That is unless the Feds let them fly out of the country in private planes.

“The right to free speech is not absolute,” Rishi said. “It does not give a right to defame Prophet Muhammad or any other” religious figure.

I don't remember that being in the 1st Ammendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Comgress isn't telling everyine else how to worsip what ever God they choose, Muslims are. Congress isn;t trying to stop free speech, Muslims Are. Congress isn't preventing peaceful assembly, Muslism don't beleive in peace. CAIR you are a bunch of fucking terroist sympathizers.

If you agree with wits0 that Islam must be outlawed and or agree with me that Islam must be investigated,delegitimatized, outlawed & deported and our right of free speech preserved at all costs, then sign these online petitions, email them to everyone you know and to your Representative, Senators and U.N. Ambassador John Bolton:Petition to Congress
Petition to the U.N.

I agree. Free speech ends when muslim media continue to villify Jews with nazi cartoons and propaganda every day of every year.

PS mohammed was a paedophile who shoved his donger up camels' asses. Shit in shit.

No one makes comedic homages about men by calling them by base gendered oriented names designed to imply a specific moral laxness associated with easy sexual access. It is an insult aimed very specifically at women and only women.

Judith, you erudite saint, you're not a man, so nobody as ever called you a prick, dick, schmuck or putz. Admitedly, the are not associated with easy sexual access, but they are gender oriented and insults aimed very specifically at men and only men. In fact, they are equivalents not of "slut" but worse, more akin to the c-word that may never be mentioned by someone with a Y chromosome. All of them are not only specifically gender oriented, they use slang terms for the penis as pejoratives. Could anything be more misandrist?

CAIR board member Mazhar Rishi agreed.

“The right to free speech is not absolute,” Rishi said. “It does not give a right to defame Prophet Muhammad or any other” religious figure.

Actually, Mazhar, it most certainly gives a right to defame any historical or religious figure. Free speech and freedom of religion means the freedom to disbelieve as well as to believe, to mock as well as to endorse. So as far as the First Amendment and thinking Americans are concerned, there is no legal difference between

Mohammed - PBUH

or

Muhamed - Peace Be Unto Him

or

Muchamed - Peas be unto him

or

Muhammad - Piss be unto him

They are all protected free speech whether you like it or not. Welcome to America, Mazhar.

How to educate CAIR on the 1st Admendment:

Adeeba Al-Zaman
Director of Communications
CAIR Philadelphia
1218 Chestnut Street; Suite 510
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Tel: 215.592.0509
e-mail

This has probably been asked many times before this but, since Muslims do not like Western values why are they so intent on moving into Western countries? I am not going to stop telling everyone who will read that I think Islam is a vile religion and is anti everything this country stands for, save the liberals political correctness crap that probably gives the CAIR bunch the feeling they can yell about restricting our freedom of speech. But no Arab is going to tell me anything, and if they don't like that they should either go back from where they came, or emmigrate to an Islamic country where they will be happy. I learned in college decades ago that they have no respect for women, and nothing has changed.

All this seething just proves that the best of 7th Century thinking just isn't ready for the 21st Century.

Anyway, I don't see this as a freedom of speech issue -- it's more a matter taste (or lack of taste).

You can't legislate good taste. Wasn't that what the Supreme Court said about the Larry Flynt case?

"The right to free speech is not absolute," Rishi said. "It does not give a right to defame Prophet Muhammad or any other" religious figure.

Audience members praised the panel as productive and important.

Just the latest example of what a cesspool of thought dominates the Penn campus. If anybody out there is old-fashioned enough to still be impressed by a Penn diploma, mine is for sale cheap.

Ted Dalrymple
has an interesting take on the 'necessity' for the cartoon kerfuffle.

Hmmm... absolute freedom of speech...

Hey wait a second. I thought they don't hate us for our freedoms!