19 Responses to “Danish cartoons raise the ire of Islamofascists”

1. Paolo Merolla Says:
   February 4th, 2006 at 3:49 pm

   Italian newspaper “Il Foglio” has a Danish flag painted, it completely covers the first and the last page of today’s issue (like a poster). There’s written only “Let’s buy Danish”.

   Thanks as always.

2. Stop The ACLU Says:
   February 4th, 2006 at 4:30 pm

   Danish Embassy Set Ablaze: Can We Co-Exist?

   CNN

   The demonstrators were protesting offensive caricatures of Islam’s Prophet Mohammed that were first published in a Danish newspaper several months ago.
   Witnesses said the demonstrators set fire to the entire building, which also houses …

3. Cao Says:
   February 4th, 2006 at 6:36 pm

   Ringraziarla per venire qui e la lettura, Paolo. Per favore di scrivere nell’italiano, ho bisogno di praticare.

4. Ms. Underestimated Says:
   February 5th, 2006 at 5:07 am

   WANTED - DEAD OR ALIVE

   Much has been said about the Muslim outrage over cartoons of Mohammed, and I’d like to remind everybody why I’m offended; but not by the Mohammed cartoons. Many Americans, as Pres. Bush has stated, have a pre-9/11 mentality.

5. Ms. Underestimated Says:
   February 5th, 2006 at 5:12 am

   Oh, the Muslims are Offended? (VIDEO)

   Jonathan Hunt of Fox News was recently in Copenhagen, Denmark, where he met with a Muslim leader, who said that Western Countries SHOULD change THEIR rules to adapt to Muslim culture! Whaaa???? Jonathan proposed the question, should the people of anoth…

6. Robert's Blog Says:
   February 5th, 2006 at 4:37 pm

   Muslim Cartoons and the US State Department

   The Danes have stones. The only Nazi-occupied country during WW2 that refused to turn over their Jewish citizens — the King of Denmark actually wore a yellow Jewish star in solidarity — the Danes are at it again.

   …

7. Paolo Merolla Says:
   February 5th, 2006 at 5:20 pm

   Certamente la prossima volta scriverò in italiano. Devo dire che già lo parli abbastanza bene (certo meglio di quanto io parli inglese!), e sono felice di questa tua scelta di imparare la mia lingua. Ciao e grazie.

8. Cao Says:
   February 5th, 2006 at 5:36 pm

   Buono~ Scrivo l’italiano col piacere e lo sguardo inoltra a praticare l’italiano più nel futuro. Lei scrive degli inglesi buoni, ciò non sarebbe un’inquietudine.

9. » Blog Archive » It’s Dhimmi Week: Everyone Grovel To The Nice Islamofascists Says:
   February 6th, 2006 at 3:35 pm

   […] (Welcome readers from our good friend Cao’s blog) […]

10. A.Sinan Says:
    February 8th, 2006 at 4:04 am

    “In Islam, an artistic representation of the human form is forbidden.”
    It’s very wrong. There’s no rule about the human form’s artistic representation. The true rule is : “In Islam, an artistic representation of the Prophet Muhammed is forbidden.”

    Please respect our religional rules as we respect yours. I truly disagree what Arabs do with using violence and burning embassies. Islam forbids violence. Why they’re acting like that? I couldn’t understand.

    Thanks for giving me an opportunity to express my opinions.

11. Cao Says:
    February 8th, 2006 at 5:35 am

    Artistic representations of the human form are forbidden in Islam

    I will research that in the Quran and Suna and quote the exact passages where Robert Spencer came to that conclusion.

    pictures of Muhammad are especially taboo

    But he also points out what you said.

    Actually, Islam is not the ‘religion of peace’–the Qu’ran repeatedly tells the ummah to kill the unbelievers wherever you find them…

    “…slay (enemies] wherever you find them!” — (4: 89).

    “…instill terror into The hearts Of The unbelievers: smite ye above their
    necks And smite all their finger-tips off them” [Qu’ran 8:12]

    Yeah we’ve already seen the aftereffects of this and imams declaring war against the West–the religious flavor of the narrative in the Nick Berg tape REALLY drew my attention…

    The author of the text makes reference to the ‘patience’ of slaughtering, Nick Berg is just an example.

    While parts of the video of the gruesome murder of the American radio tower contractor have been broadcast internationally, strangely, the Arabic message accompanying it has not been scrutinized by the Western media.

    While many have heard Berg introduce himself and his family, fewer have heard the longer, Arabic-language message from the killer. The message itself has little to do with Berg.

    The author goes to great pains to convince the Ummah (the body of Muslim believers) that the time for negotiations with unbelievers is over, and was not impromptu, but a carefully crafted message. The author of the text is probably an imam or scholar or someone who studied in a maddrassa. (As was proven last week, Zarqawi’s holy man, Shami was probably the one who wrote this text.)

    “Are you not fed up with the jihad of the conferences and the battles of giving sermons?” the speaker said. “Has the time not come for you to lift the sword with which the master of the messengers was sent?”

    This reference to Islamic conferences is ridiculing the notion that holy war can be waged with sermons and teachings alone. He uses this as a pun. Jihad is supposed to be for the purpose of killing the non-believers and the scholars are using it simply to kill their own ideas. The battles of giving sermons is another pun: The scholars are putting the battle in words when it needs to be in real life in their hands.

    This is a full call to arms: Lift the sword. The ‘master of the messengers’ refers to Allah, that is, in the writers mind all the messengers of the past were given the ability to fight the non believers and so to the Ummah has it today.

    “And we hope, that you will not place yourself in a dilemma (after seeing) what we will do, as you usually do to please the American,” continues the Arabic speaker in the tape.

    He is clearly offering direction about the way of jihad today – through the example of beheading Berg.

    The author introduces his soliloquy by demonstrating he is not nationalistic in his approach, but rather honoring Islam. It is a religious salutation – one designed to show he sees himself as a champion of Allah.

    He cites Surah Al Tawbah 9.5 of the Quran, a verse dealing with the battle between the Mushriq (non-believers or pagans) and the Ansar (believers). He is addressing only the Ummah, the body of Muslim believers. It is not a message for non-Muslims. What is about to be shown is for their benefit. But it is a message that non-Muslims MUST HEAR.

    It is a message of rejoicing, glad tidings and jubilation, not one of anger, he says.

    “The tide has turned, and like the battle of Badr, where Muslims were outnumbered, Allah has given them victory,” he says. “Two reasons are given for this rejoicing: The daylight has now come forth, and the winds of victory have come upon them.”

    All the glory is given to Allah in the message. The victory is at hand, was predestined. The author of the message, is aware that some in the Islamic world are uncomfortable with seeing pictures of Muslims tie bodies around cars and dragging them through the streets of Fallujah.

    The author wishes to comfort those fears and explain that this all was planned in advance and that instead of being uncomfortable, people should rejoice.

    The speaker also directly addresses young people in the maddrassas who are watching the jihad across the world – simply studying Islam on the sidelines and not joining in the killing.

    “And how can a free Muslim sleep close-eyed whilst seeing Islam being slaughtered, and he sees the bleeding of honor, and the images of shame, and the news of satanic abuse on the people of Islam, men and women, in the prison of Abu Ghraib,”

    he says.

    To the writer, what is happening across the world is that Islam itself is under attack. The pictures are simply a part of that attack.

    “So where is the jealousy, and where is the zeal, and where is the anger for the religion of Allah?”

    the speaker asks. “And where is the jealousy over the honor of the Muslims, and where is the revenge taken for the honor of the Muslim males and females in the prisons of the crusaders.”

    He implores the elders and the teachers to recognize that the real energy of jihad and Islam is within the youth.

    “Has the time not come for you to learn from them the meanings of tawwakul (reliance on Allah), and to seek guidance from their actions lessons in sacrifice and forbearance, until when will you remain like the women, not knowing better than to wail, and not knowing a path except the path of screaming and crying?”

    exhorts the speaker.

    Interestingly, the speaker references United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan and Arab League Secretary General Amr Musa.

    “So this (scholar) appeals to the free-men of this world, and the other seeks tawwasul (help) from Kofi Annan, and a third calls for help from Amr Musa, and a fourth calls for peaceful demonstrations,”

    relates the speaker in the tape.

    But all these scholars are all mistaken. They must not have read Surah 8.35, which is a call to arms. His solution, therefore, is to encourage the scholars to go back to the Quran, which calls for the rising up of the youth and the Ummah to fight and kill.

    The speaker describes what is about to happen – the beheading of Berg – as an act of supreme mercy.

    “Those who are about to do this act are not savages, but actually are merciful,” and the example is what happened at the battle of Badr, where the prisoners were all slaughtered – killed with patience.

    The Great Battle of Badr took place on the 17th of Ramadan, two years after the Hijra. This was the first battle that the believers ever engaged in with the disbelievers, and it is, by far, the most famous and most renown. What to do with the prisoners was a major issue for Muhammed and comes out in 8.67-68 in the Quran:

    “It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he had made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land. You desire the good of this world (i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives), but Allah desires (for you) the Hereafter. And Allah is Almighty, All Wise. Were it not a previous ordainment from Allah, a severe torment would have touched you for what you took.”

    Prisoners of war constituted a problem awaiting resolution because it was a new phenomenon in the history of Islam. Muhammad consulted Abu Bakr and Umar bin Al-Khattab as to what he should do with the prisoners. Abu Bakr suggested that he should ransom them, explaining this by saying: “They are after all our relatives, and this money would give us strength against the disbelievers, moreover, Allah could guide them to Islam.” Umar advised killing them, saying, “They are the leaders of Kufr (disbelief).”

    The Prophet preferred Abu Bakr’s suggestion to that of Umar’s. The following day, Umar called on Muhammad and Abu Bakr to see them weeping. He showed extreme astonishment and inquired about the situation so that he might weep if it was worth weeping, or else he would feign weeping.

    “As for you O dog of the Romans Bush, then have tidings of what will displease you, and await with the assistance of Allah for hard days, and you will regret – you, and your soldiers – on the day you set on the soil of Iraq,”

    the speaker continues.

    President Bush is seen as the leader of the Romans, a veiled reference to the Christian concept that the Romans killed Jesus of Nazareth with the help of the Jewish authorities. The usage of this phrase in an Arabic environment is most likely due to the popularity of the “Passion of the Christ” movie, via which the authors may be suggesting that Bush, like the Romans, are led by Jews, and that Islam is now being sacrificed.

    The speaker also addresses another world leader – Pakistani President Pervis Musharaf:

    “And another message for the treacherous stooge, Pervis Musharaf, then we say to him: We are in the highest of desires, awaiting your soldiers. For by Allah, we will seek them before the Americans, and will avenge for the blood of our brothers in Waana and other than it.”

    Having attempted negotiation – the exchange of Berg for prisoners at Abu Graib – the speaker states the only way left is to kill. Thus, the only payment now that is valid is blood.

    “So kill the mushrikeen (unbelievers), wherever you see them, take them, and sanction them, and await them at every place,“

    says the speaker.

    I believe people need to be warned of this danger. Obviously Nicholas Berg was not.

    At least one U.S. military intelligence source agrees. He says the lesson of the Berg murder is simple: If you are about to be captured by Islamist terrorists–resist, at all costs.

    “Not even one more American should be killed in this manner,” he says. “Better to die fighting back than to be another example.”

    He cited a report about an al-Qaeda training video discovered in Afghanistan. Analysts who viewed the tape and shared it with law-enforcement personnel around the U.S. concluded that Osama bin Laden’s terrorists are not only planning attacks with weapons of mass destruction but are preparing to kill Americans with drive-by shootings and home break-ins, through ambushes of law-enforcement officers and targeted assassinations on golf courses.

    They plan kidnappings in the U.S., too, warn the experts. But they will not be seeking ransoms. Analysts point out that all scenarios involving prisoners and hostages ended in execution. None included plans for negotiated settlements for escape by terrorists.

    “They plan to kill the prisoners and die in place,” wrote John Holschen of Insights Training Center, who produced a report on the tape for military and law-enforcement officials.

    The Berg video narration climaxes with the citation of Surah al Tawba 9.5.

    A call to kill all non-Muslims and those they perceive challenge Islam. By concluding with this ayat, he wants the Ummah to know that Nick Berg is not being killed simply because he is a prisoner. He is being killed because he is not a Muslim.

    NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
    

12. A.Sinan Says:
    February 8th, 2006 at 7:59 am

    Luka 19:27 “But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.”

    Luka 12:49 “I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled!”

    Matthew 10:34 “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.”

    I used your perspective to understand The Holy Bible.(i wish i told what i really want to say successfully). And please don’t try to explain the verses of Holy Bible to me. I really know what they mean.

    Please read the Siyer (The Prophet Muhammed’s Life) and Tafseer (The Deep Explanation of The Holy Qur’an) as you read the Holy Qur’an.

13. Lisa Gilliam Says:
    February 8th, 2006 at 12:46 pm

    A.Sinian why are you using those scriptures?I also no what they mean,but,do you see Christians going around now killing folks because they don’t happen to be Christians?No! And maybe if the muslims would practice what they preach to everyone else we wouldn’t be in this mess!The Muslims have been proven to have thin skins an thick skulls,our Dhimmi’s have bent over backwards even to the point of *** Kissing you and where has that gotten us?you still aren’t satified,also you don’t tell other countries how to cater to your needs especially,when you have been on their welfare doles for I don’t know how many years!You accomodate your life to them,not the other way around.When you start condemning your fellow muslims for constantly comparing us to dogs and pigs,then you will get my respect but until that time,forget it!:mad:

14. Cao Says:
    February 8th, 2006 at 5:33 pm

    That’s interesting. You quote the Bible but ask that I not explain to you what the verses mean.

    Well I quoted the Qu’ran and ask that you not explain it to me, and then we’re all even.

    No holy Christian man-preist pastor or otherwise is asking the body of Christ to kill all the unbelievers…yet that’s what the muslim holy men are doing, and they’re quoting the Qu’ran, the Sunnah and Surra, etc., as the reason to do so.

    Bin Laden quotes them, Zarqawi quotes them, and Zwahiri quotes them as the reason to slay the infidel….so I can’t swallow that Islam is a ‘religion of peace’ because the Danish flag burnings across Europe, the burning of Christian churches and the killings of non believers including the bombings in London and 9/11 is what I have to go on.

    We are just defending ourselves from head hacking Islamofascists who have already said they are after world conquest.

15. Paolo Merolla Says:
    February 9th, 2006 at 5:34 am

    Dear Mr. Sinian ,

    So you knew it! I’m waiting for a Muslim to shoot me in the back.

    My Arab friends (one is a Muslim) loves me because I’m a catholic and I don’t care (and they don’care I spent 4 hours a day in a Church), they love me because they are normal, which means happy they were created.

    You’re mad (they never told me: The true rule is : “In Islam, an artistic representation of the Prophet Muhammed is forbidden.”: it may be true, though they respect me) (I have Jesus and St. Ciro and the Holy Virgin represented as soon as you enter my room).
    Hmmm, they’re sane, happy, alive and wishing to live long ’cause life is beautiful, sometimes full of sorrow, but a free gift.

    See European paper’s cartoons if you need to laugh about Jesus Christ, many many people print those things everywhere, tons of people lauhg about the Christ in Europe (we don’t kill’em, nor think anything wrong, we pray for them when we’re good, I’m bad so I pray just a few minutes a day for those who offend). He died for our sins. He DIED. WE’re saved (He didn’t want to die, though He did what He was told by the Father).

    quoted from you: Islam forbids violence.
    Hope you don’t read but think like that.

16. Cao Says:
    February 9th, 2006 at 6:08 am

    Sinian. Sinan. hmmmmm.

    Paolo, non penso che parlare alle persone matte valga il nostro tempo perché alcune persone non pensano oggi che Cristiani siano ragionevole. Ci chiamano i fascisti ed i razzisti e le altre cose odiose. Sappiamo che non questo è vero ma non penso che possiamo convincere loro di questo.

17. Thought Leadership Says:
    February 13th, 2006 at 5:57 am

    Thoughts on an Islamic Prophet…

    I respect Muslims and any religion that acknowledges there is just but one God. I also have respect for free speech and not letting free speech be controlled by terror. I believe the Danish people should be proud to freely speak their minds, and I ho…

18. Lisa Gilliam Says:
    February 13th, 2006 at 6:32 pm

    :twisted:I know one thing if the tell me I can’t have Snoopy or his brother Spike around there will be hell to pay!:mad:

19. Cao Says:
    February 20th, 2006 at 7:34 am

    This entire charade is every bit as orchestrated as the Al Aqsa Intifada, and every bit as phony. Muslims are probably truly outraged, but that outrage is being orchestrated purely for political reasons that have nothing to do with the name of Islam.

    From LauraMansfield.com:

    The Muslim world is screaming over the “desecration” of the image of one of the Prophet Mohamed. They cite various quotations from the Qu’ran and the Hadith that prohibit the displaying of images of the Prophet Mohamed.

    And the quotations that they cite do certainly prohibit that the Prophet Mohamed be portrayed in any illustration or statue.

    But it doesn’t stop there.

    The Qu’ran actually prohibits that any persons or animals be portrayed in a picture or a statue.

    In March 2001, the Taliban of Aghanistan destroyed two ancient giant statues of Buddha in Bamiyan. The reason: Supreme Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar issued a statement declaring “The real God is only Allah, and all other false gods should be removed.”

    Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi is quoted as saying “Islam prohibits statues and three-dimensional figures of the living creatures. The prohibition is even more stressed in case the statue is for a being already dignified i.e. Angels, prophets, the Virgin, or idols like cows for Hindus.”

    But the prohibition doesn’t stop there. A strict interpretation of Islamic law also bans dolls if they have human-like faces. Many interpretations also forbid any drawings, photographs, or films where people are shown.

    This is why when you walk into a mosque you never see any statues or illustrations of people or animals. Instead you will see intricate patterns in the carpets, woodwork, and inlays. You will see beautiful calligraphy and elaborate designs. But you won’t see statues of photographs.

    Obviously this prohibition is enforced rather selectively. After all, there are statues all over many Islamic countries. (Do you remember the statue of Saddam Hussein being toppled in Baghdad?) Even in Iran and Saudi Arabia, two countries where Islamic law is enforced extensively, you’ll find videos and films, as well as cartoons and photo studios.

    In fact, if you follow only a narrow interpretation of this prohibition to impact only images of Prophets or “Holy Ones”, you’ll find that it is enforced only sporadically. Under strict Islamic law, images and pictures of Jesus Christ are also prohibited; this means virtually every church in the world, including those in Islamic nations, is violating Islamic laws prohibiting the depiction of a Prophet, since Jesus is considered a Prophet of Islam.

    The 1976 film The Message, directed by Mustapha Akkad who was killed in the hotel bombings in Amman, Jordan a few months ago, caused a similar outcry some thirty years ago. The movie was supposed to open in London with the title Mohammed, Messenger of God, but the name had to be changed at the last minute. The reason: the theater received bomb threats because Mohammed’s name was in the title.

    The Supreme Council of the World Mosque Conference in Mecca and the National Assembly of Pakistan both banned the film; the scholars in Cairo who had previously approved the script now called the movie “an insult to Islam.” Turkey and Tunisia were the only Islamic countries to allow the film to be shown.

    The problems weren’t restricted to the rest of the world. A group of black Muslim terrorists from the small Hanafi sect, under the leadership of Khalifa Hamaas Abdul Khaalis, invaded the B’nai B’rith building and two others with plenty of weaponry, taking more than 100 hostages. Their demands were simple: cancel the American premiere of Mohammad: Messenger of God. After talking to the ambassadors of several Muslim countries, and meeting with a handful of diplomats who promised to try and stop the film, the group surrendered. Their leader, Khaalis was sentenced to 21 to 120 years in prison for his role.

    As this illustrates, bullying and violence in reaction to something that the Islamic world doesn’t like isn’t something new.

    To put it simply, this is just a rerun of a technique that we have allowed to work in the past.

    It’s time for us to say “No”.

    They have their beliefs; we have ours.

    If the Muslim world wants us to continue to respect their beliefs and teachings, then it is high time for a little quid pro quo.