Funny Cartoon sparks Islamic Jihad !
POSTED BY: JaynezTown
UPDATED: Wednesday, August 26, 2026 18:50
VIEWED: 48820
PAGE 11 of 26
"The Government was playing with her brain."
-Dr. T, Serenity pilot (censored by Sir Rupert Murdock, Jewish Australian Knight of the British Empire MI6)
French pig farmer is NOT cartoon of Muhammed
photo by WorldNetDaily.com
Quote:
Blasphemous image posted by http://web.IsraelInsider.com
"WASHINGTON, DC -- The NATO intelligence provocation appearing in the guise of the scurrilous Mohammed cartoons published by the reactionary newspaper Jyllands Posten of Denmark, and then by a series of other European publications, has already done much to mobilize the armies, bases, and treasuries of Europe in support of the lunatic plan to the Bush-neocon clique for a nuclear sneak attack and punitive expedition against Iran over the coming weeks or months. As I warned in a red alert for synthetic terrorism issued on total411.info and other sites in the late afternoon of Feb. 3, this entire affair has been cynically orchestrated by NATO intelligence agencies to set the stage for a new world war. Denmark has been largely a British puppet state over the last two centuries since Lord Nelson burned the Danish fleet in a sneak attack on Copenhagen which put an end to Denmark as an independent power. For the broadest political purposes, provocations coming from Denmark can be thought of as being signed by the warmonger Tony Blair personally. The current Danish neocon regime is in any case a member of Bush's coalition of the willing engaged in the illegal occupation of Iraq.
-Webster Tarpley, Rense.com, "The Mohammed Cartoons - Recruiting Europe For Bush's War On Iran"
http://rense.com/general69/moh.htm
"Government control of Communications and Transportation."
—The Communist Manifesto, 6th Plank (written by Jewish Luciferian Freemason Karl Marx in London England)
"The U.S. government has consistently blamed me for being behind every occasion its enemies attack it. I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent attacks, which seems to have been planned by people for personal reasons. I have been living in the Islamic emirate of Afghanistan and following its leaders' rules. The current leader does not allow me to exercise such operations."
-USAma Bin Laden, CNN, "Bin Laden says he wasn't behind attacks," September 17, 2001
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/inv.binladen.denial/
"I have already said that I am not involved in the September 11 attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other human beings as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people."
-Usama Bin Laden, Ummat magazine, September 28, 2001
VIDEO DOWNLOAD: Operation Northwoods
James Banford from ABC News reported on Pentagon's Operation Northwoods plot to perp domestic terrorism in USA to blame a foreign nation and "justify" invasion, declassified in 2000
http://radio.indymedia.org/news/2005/10/7209.php
"In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba. Code named Operation NORTHWOODS, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities. The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro. America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation." The plans had the written approval of allNOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Fletch2's post is probably the most sagacious and succinct posting I've read yet on this topic. I'd like to add that it's not what the Danes did but what Islamic imams from Denmark did that inflamed this issue and incited the violence. As for what's going on now in the Middle East there's lots of evidence to prove that the people living there barely need an excuse to behave violently and then say they are acting from their religious devotion. The only problem I have with Islam is it's preaching of brotherhood while at the same time being so intolerant of other's beliefs. In the religion I was raised in it is considered a sin to lie or steal and it makes no exceptions as to who you lie to or steal from. In the Koran it is written that it is acceptable to lie or steal from an infidel and in the classic definition of infidel that is any non-muslim. There is no central authority in the Islamic religion and too many imams are spreading hatred of the West in their sermons and fostering violence in the name of their prophet. While I sympathize with their beign offended at the cartoons mocking their prophet and feel that was an innappropriate act I find the violence done in retribution and the calling for the deaths of the cartoonists to be totally over the top and proof that Islam is rife with fanaticism. I keep hearing about "moderate" muslims and a few have spoken out lately but it's sad that it's taken this long for the moderates to speak out. Too many seeds of hate have already been planted in the minds of youth in the Middle East for it to turn the tide easily. I fear we are heading toward the brink where it will become very, very bloody before there is a resolution to this problem. And as for being offended, I'm still waiting for an apology from the muslim world for letting the Taliban blow up ancient buddhist statues at Bamiyan.
Jaytee
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I can think of two words, hypocrisy and irony. There's hypocrisy on both sides but it's really much worse with the Muslims rioters considering how they regularly profane against others with their open celebration of terrorist attacks against the west, demonization of the Jews, some Muslim "newspapers" have the audacity to claim that the Jews were in league with the Nazis, not to mention how there's almost no reaction from those outraged rioters when a Muslim terrorist attacks a Mosque in Iraq. The irony is of course, how they're basically protesting against the very rights that they lack, they're basically supporting their own oppression.
"I swallowed a bug." -River Tam
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Cartoon:
Well, I can't speak for the Qur'an, as I've never read it, and was never a practicing a Muslim, but I can refer you to the statement of a man who was a practicing Muslim, Zachariah Anani (from http://www.shoebat.com/anani.php)...
"A lot of people think that Islam is okay," says Anani, and "that those who are making these terrorist attacks are not from Islam. It's actually the other way around. The people who are nice are not really true Muslims—all you have to do is read the doctrine. Chapter (9) of the Qur'an is nothing but a declaration of war."
Can I tell you something that is apparent to me about this man? He's a psychotic, sounds to me like he enjoyed killing and it also sounds like he now blames Islam for his actions. Letting himself off easy, religion made me do it, you can't blame me! That seems to go counter to your earlier statements regarding 'the Elephant in the room'. I'll say it loud and clear, Zachariah Anani does not know what he is talking about. He knows and thinks about Islam only what he was told to know and think about Islam from the 'religious' leaders who indoctrinated him into hating Jews and Christians in the first place.
Fundamentalist seldom follow their own religion particularly closely, while believing they follow it more exactly than anyone else, Zachariah Anani doesn't dissuade me from this view. Think about it, if you were to ask an Inquisitor from the Spanish Inquisition who follows Christianity better, you or them, what do you think they'd say?
Fundamentalist Christians aren't all that better than Fundamentalist Muslims, though they don't receive the extremely one sided coverage afforded Muslims. I could also argue that they are more dangerous than Islamic Fundamentalists, given their strong links to the American Government and vast resources. What about Michael Evans who's calling for Global war in the name of Christ; or Pat Robertson's calls for the Assassination of the Venezuelan president? How would you feel about people calling Christianity evil because of the actions and words of these (frankly) nut jobs? Don't forget that they also believe that they are true Christians and you (unless you support global war and assassinations, which you don't seem too) are not.
Yes there is some passages in Surah At-Tawba(Repentance, Dispensation) (chapter 9) of the Qur'an that can be twisted in to allowing attacks on non-Muslims, as it is passages dealing largely with Muslims in Jihad.
I'll give you this quote, which is probably the worst, for free:
But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.[[]9:5[]]
But to temper it here's something not all that different from the Bible:
They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.[[]2 Chronicles 15:12-13[]]
The truth is that for every passage of violence in the Qur'an there's at least one in the Bible, possibly more, simply because the Qur'an is much shorter than the Bible.
I'm not trying to attack Christianity, well I am trying to attack Christianity, but not because I think Christianity is evil, but because I think neither Christianity nor Islam is. Seriously if I thought it had any relevance I'm fairly certain I could quote ex-Christians who have turned to Islam. There are plenty of people, who can turn on Christianity and call it evil, and a lot of evil has been done in its name, but I'm guessing that you would refute that that means Christianity was evil.
If you believe that exposing your children to violence is a problem, by all means keep them away from the Bible.
Rev. Charles Hender
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JayTee:
In the Koran it is written that it is acceptable to lie or steal from an infidel and in the classic definition of infidel that is any non-muslim.
This needs to be backed up by a quote, just because some nut job Imam says it doesn't make it so.
I fear the Fundamentalists Christians in the American Government far more than Fundamentalist Muslims.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
You should never give powers to a leader you like that you’d hate to have given to a leader you fear
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
thanks fletch2 for the insightful point.
citizen one thing i think you keep doing is trying to make the case for similarity between the two. it's kind of like the old saw, "life is bad in communist Russia, but it's just as bad in capitalist USA". it's not about trying to say that there are no terrorists or bigots or violent fringe groups that are not Muslim. off courser there are (the problem with the world is that it has people in it, and people are by there nature crazy). but right now in this time and place the danger is from loosely allied groups that share a come ideology (give or take a few points between groups) and it happens that that ideology is based on a radical militant version of Islam. now this dose not nesacarly say any thing definitive about the religion (or cultural for that matter) of Islam, as you have pointed out all religions and political philosophical movements in the world today have some type of skeleton in there closet.
by the same token it doesn’t make much sense (to me at lest) to compare what a movement/group is doing right now....last year, two months ago or today with what some other movement/group did decades or cintrys ago. to in a word excuse the fallings of somebody or something from modern times by use of an example form the pre modern times. the thing about the good old days is that they weren’t good it was a nasty dangers time to live. the idea is to move beyond that.
now i had some other stuff i kind of wanted to say (about the use of "fundamentalist" in regards to believing that only one religion is right for example) but most of it is more a discussion of religion in general. and i think we might have already gone a little far a field from the original topic.
oh ya, sorry about the spelling ya'll
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Excuse me if this response is a little combative, but I'm beginning to get annoyed at having to explain this. I am NOT excusing Muslim fanaticism, terrorism or anything else. I'm saying that Islam is no worse than (specifically) Judaism or Christianity and if you wish to say Islam is evil you have to say all religions are evil. Whether their violent period is today tomorrow one hundred years from now or six hundred years in the past it makes no odds to the question "is Islam more evil than Christianity?"
Frankly they were still people and they still had a choice. The violence comes mainly from Muslims living in an environment similar to medieval Christian Europe, so I don’t see how that can be used as an argument to excuse Christianity and not Islam. I’ll say it again, why is Islam demonised because some psycho says “I speak for Islam and we need to kill non-believers” but it’s considered reasonable to excuse Christianity when a psychotic Christian fundamentalist calls for global Christian war? What’s the difference, save for the Muslims have this strange religion that the majority of White Westerners know nothing about?
The logical rebuttal to your argument is that it is culture that is at fault NOT religion, we can look at history and see that given the right cultural circumstances Christians are just as violent as Muslims and that Muslims who are also apart of Western culture (not just who live in western society, those Muslims that actually participate in western culture) aren’t involved in the Terrorism anymore than Christians are. So it logically follows that if Western culture was more like Middle Eastern culture Western Christians would act more like Middle Eastern Muslims (and indeed Middle Eastern Christians). Given this how can anyone say Islam is evil but Christianity is not?
The fact is that great evil has been (and is still being) done in the name of Christianity and Islam, we excuse Christianity of its failings, and for Islam's we demonise it. Why? The only answer I can give is Hypocrisy.
Every argument for why Islam is evil can be levelled on Christianity and every argument used to excuse Christianity can be employed to excuse Islam. So the question is as I see it simple:
Should we ban all religions because they are inherently evil, or should we let people believe in the religion of their choice and accept that religions are not inherently evil, but that some people will do extremely evil things whether they are Muslim, Christian, Jew, Scientologist, Atheist, Agnostic, Wicca or called Brian?
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
You should never give powers to a leader you like that you’d hate to have given to a leader you fear
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The BBC assembled a timeline
Quote:
Cartoons: Divisions and inconsistencies
By Paul Reynolds
BBC News website World Affairs correspondent
The "cartoon crisis" has demonstrated the gulf between sections of the West and the Muslim world, revealed divisions within Islam itself and showed inconsistencies by advocates of both sides.
A look back at the way the issue developed shows the key moments in what was a slow burn towards a crisis.
For this did not just spring upon the world, and decisions taken in the course of the build-up materially influenced the eventual outcome.
It began, in fact, before 30 September 2005, the day the original 12 cartoons of Muhammad were published in Jyllands-Posten.
Inconsistency
And here came the first inconsistency on one side.
More than two years previously, in April 2003, a Danish cartoonist Christoffer Zieler offered some cartoons of Jesus Christ to Jyllands-Posten, Denmark's largest daily paper and generally seen as right-wing.
One of the paper's editors told Zieler: "I don't think Jyllands-Posten's readers will enjoy the drawings. As a matter of fact, I think that they will provoke an outcry. Therefore, I will not use them."
No such concern prevailed when Jyllands-Posten decided to solicit drawings of Muhammad after a children's author, Kare Bluitgen, had been unable to find illustrators for his book about the Prophet (written with the intention of widening understanding). The illustrators refused either because they knew that portraits of the Prophet were against Islamic tradition, or were afraid of reprisals.
Internationalisation
Publication led to immediate protests by Muslim leaders in Denmark - and an immediate effort by them to internationalise the issue.
Imam Raed Hlayhel gave an interview to the news website of the Arabic channel Al Jazeera and said: "This type of democracy is worthless for Muslims. Muslims will never accept this kind of humiliation."
The paper's editor-in-chief Carsten Juste replied: "We live in a democracy. Satire is accepted in this country, and you can make caricatures. Religion shouldn't set any barriers on that sort of expression."
At this stage the row was largely confined to Denmark. Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen refused to get involved and declined a meeting with eleven Arab ambassadors mobilised by the Danish imams.
On 17 October, a curious thing happened. Six of the cartoons were prominently reprinted in an Egyptian newspaper, al-Fagr. The paper said they were racist and would insult Muslims everywhere and predicted an outcry. However, at this stage, nothing happened on the streets. There was no public outcry.
It took concerted action by the Danish Muslim leaders to effect a change.
Wider audience
They decided to take their complaints both about the cartoons and about the position of Muslims in Denmark to other audiences. In December, encouraged by an imam well known in Denmark, Abu Laban, a delegation went to the Middle East where they saw leading Islamic scholars and political leaders.
They took along the cartoons as evidence but they also included in a 43-page dossier three other drawings which were even more insulting and which had not been published in Jyllands-Posten.
The dossier revealed inconsistencies of it own. It contained some placatory statements to the effect that the delegation simply wanted "stable relations, and a flourishing Denmark for all that live here."
But it also contained some rude remarks about Denmark including the sentence "If you say that they are all infidels, then you are not wrong".
The 'non-cartoons'
The three extra drawings were said to have been sent to Muslims in Denmark as insults. However one of them, apparently showing the prophet with the face of a pig, has been traced to a photo of the winner of a pig-squealing contest in the French Pyrenees last summer.
It remains unclear as to how this last picture, a grey photocopy, came to such prominence but it does seem to have played a role in the raising of the temperature.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
There's no argument that Radical Imams are stirring this up, whether thats in Denmark or the Middle East.
Although this comment is funny:
Quote:
The paper's editor-in-chief Carsten Juste replied: "We live in a democracy. Satire is accepted in this country, and you can make caricatures. Religion shouldn't set any barriers on that sort of expression."
Except of course if it's Christianity that is the religion in question, as it appears.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
You should never give powers to a leader you like that you’d hate to have given to a leader you fear
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
I'm saying that Islam is no worse than (specifically) Judaism or Christianity and if you wish to say Islam is evil you have to say all religions are evil. Whether their violent period is today tomorrow one hundred years from now or six hundred years in the past it makes no odds to the question "is Islam more evil than Christianity?"
you say i'm blaming the religion of Islam for the problems of the coulter of... what? the middle east? first of all Islam is a common theme, many of the country’s i'm talking about are self identified as "Islamic" nations. levying that aside i'm not sure you can so cleanly sepreart the two coulter is informed by religion, religion directs culter. culter is a combination of many factors history, politics, religion all pushing and pulling on each other much like the planets of the solar system.
two shibboleths that you seam to subscribe to.
the radical's are the minority and vast majority of the Muslim population is made up of moderates that are opposed to there actions. first what are you basing that on? don't get me wrong i hope to Heaven, honestly i hope like you can't believe that this is true. almost every politiation devotes a part off every speech about the war on terror to this supposition, but what are they going on. hope, political crectines, common wisdom, or is there some sort of prof. then agine if it is true it is one thing to say i wont personally get involved in that sort of action but with out the follow through to then say but i will get personally involved in combating it. well with out that i don't know how much i care realy.
the grate cultreal/religuous forces of this world are basically the same (at lest in regards to actions). well how, why do you say that. in the hear and now, how many conters or part's of countries run there judicial systems under cannon law? going by majority whether a country is western or Islamic were are you more likely to find: judicial maiming as an ongoing punishment. the outlawing of political opposition. the outlawing of non "correct" religious beliefs and practices. were was the last man sent to jail and given hundreds of lashes for in part "practicing witch craft" and disrespecting the religion of _____. were is your wife most likly to be beaten with a stick on the street while you are berated for letting her go out side dressed like that. no i see no way that the cultures of the west and the cultures of "Islam" are equal.
the Muslims in western culter that do not behave like this (the fact that some do is neither her nor there. agine people are crazy like that). the problem is theas are also people that are hated as much or more so than us other infidels. the muluas and imamns that think i would be appropriate to burn beat and kill at the current time feel (and have stated numers times) that those Muslims that don't join with them (the moderate or westernized followers of Islam) are them selves infidels. matter of fact it just gose to show that there are muslams that don't live there lives as if it is the 1300's.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME