A-2-S

Simple questions, no debate, just give honest straightforward answers.

Will you publicly condemn all acts of terror committed by those of Muslim Faith?

Define Act of Terror? If a palestiniane throwing stones at a armed personnel carrier after they have leveled his home is an act of terrorrism then i dont condemn it and if act of terrorism means burning of religious places like a Church etc then yes i call it an act of terrorism and expect the same to be 1 when done against my faith (burning of a mosque etc).

Will you publicly condemn the marchers in London carrying plaques inciting Religious hatred and violence?

Too general term please give details regarding wht you call as inciting religious hatred?

Will you publicly condemn the burning down of Embassies?

Yes i agree to the very fact that this act does not justify in one form or the other the aspirations of the Muslim faith. But then i never said i am pro for this act. The religious leaders and in some cases the Gov themself have used these acts for their own agenda.

Will you publicly condemn followers of Islam who are using any excuse available to further their own aims?

Such a person doesnt stand for islam if he aint in all this for the same purpose as others, how can i take side with such a person. I dont stand for any person who aint in this for the soul purpose that this act was not good and to stop this act. The path to stop this act can be different which for some meanz asking the Denmark for an Apology or to boycott Danish goodz etc.

Will you publicly condemn all incitement to violence by members of the Muslim Faith?

Too general term for me to be pro or against. If in Iraq and Afghanistan where muslims are being killed just for fc*kN oil and resources and you expect any1 asking to fight back as incitement to violence then i dont condemn it at all as every1 has a right to defend oneself.
if EU can come up with a joint declaration or a stand regarding any of its member country then whts wrong with the muslim world to practice the same?

Would you agree that any Muslim with extremist views is not a true follower of the Prophet who preaches peace and tolerance?

Again wht is your defination of extremist? If a person wants his women to cover herself from head to toe and you call such person as extremist then sorry i dont agree with you.

The problem is that you have been constantly told what is an extremist and wht is not?? you have dictators working inaccordance with the views of USA are fine and a democratically elected gov being axis of evil???/ I wonder isnt this all politics and to build a world view against so called enemies of the humanity?
If you beleive in democracy then also beleive in what the people want? People in middle east want control over their own resources?? but then this meanz no monoply over oil for USA so….. their goes your pro democracy stance?? In Pakistan where you want to get rid of so called terrorist which were Mujahadinz (freedom fighters) when USSR was in Afghanistan … then u are more then happy to support a dictator.
Aint these double standards??? i dont hear protests around EU regarding this open violation and mocary rather you would have Open protest against OPEC over high oil prices.
thing is simple man if gov dont represent ppl then another force will emerge which will represent the people? The so called Religious leaders may be working for their own agendas but they r doing so because in the first place ppl aint gettn their voice heard n a simple reason for all tht is the double standards which west n usa have regarding their own intrests in the Muslim world.

What A-2-S is trying to legitimise is terrorism, oure and simple.

Well why am i not surprised to receive this stamp. Thanks for making it clear in writting regarding your views for some1 you tend to differ.

A Muslim newspaper or TV channel posts cartoons about God and the Christian Faith which are deemed to be insulting.

Why will this happen when Islam clearly stops this in the first place. What you forgot to mention is that muslims are trying for and putting forward is a motion at UNO to ban any such attempt against any Prophet which is ofcourse important to the corresponding religion. Muslims are not voicing not only for their religion but also for Chirstianity and Judism as per our teaching we must respect the Prophets of these religions aswell. So bottom line your so called assumption is totally groundless and nothing but a mere last atempt to show muslims as voilant people.
And which part did i said that voilance was good and i support for it? my whole point is for the anger against the incident not the voilance. So get corrected in that regard.

It is okay for terrorists and insurgents of the Muslim Faith to attack innocent civilians around the world (Bali, London, New York) in fact they are applauded for it and promised the status of martyr. A Faith which espouses such action is, I reiterate, not worthy of being considered a Religion.

Yet again you tried to associate terrorism and Islam in a single context. And as per your mention of these acts well i need not to point the Great wars against terrorism which resulted in killing of women and children ( Muslim people) in Afghanistan and Iraq and is still going on. The inhumane treatment of the prisonerz by the so called liberators??? I did not mention all tht because that was not the discussion point the point was the act which sterred strong anger in the muslim world. Its only your point of these facts that i have to mention all these things.

This part i like to direct towards to moderator as clearly kev crossed the line and have directly targetted Islam as a religion and in a suggestive manner make a point that i am the tool to justify these terrorist acts. I expect that the post by Kev to be deleted on the basis that he has directed his personal thoughts and ideas rather then logic and respect for my religion.

Respecting
Insisting that those of other faiths – or of no faith at all – must obey the rules and teachings of one’s own religion is another thing completely.

So we come to square 1, if i am to understand that a person with different beliefs or no beleif can not understand the religious sensitivity so the same is with the freedom of expression thing. So all this pro freedom of expression and questioning the muslim world reaction over the incident is wrong.
I hope u understand urself.

Intresting observation, i wonder if this thing is open or not, as it sure is a surprise to me.

Clearly there will be no meeting of minds here.

We shall have to agree to differ, and you will simply have to accept that you cannot reasonably expect those who do not share your faith to follow the rules and teachings of your religion.

Yes i agree on the fact that some thingz can never be common as per our understanding of each other which further points to the very fact that i said earlier that your freedom of expression doctrine can not be enforced on religious belief. So please respect the fact regarding the sensitivity of religious beliefs and dont ignore them under a global tag of freedom of expression, coz it aint the case.

So you don’t think it’s a little bit questionable that the Muslims who went on the trek through the Middle East thought it wise to include images in their presentation that had nothing whatsoever to do with those published in the Danish newspaper?

Lets try to analyse your argument on the reality basis. The Danish imam goes to different Govs in the middle east and tells them regarding this event which has taken place??? But can you name one Gov which has gone buzurk after his so called presentations???/ NONE…
All the uproar is caused by the local public with the Gov not taking any noticable stance with a few gov calling back their Ambassador which was also done after the public anger over spilled.
There was no official gov reaction before their people hit the street. So your argument of the imam responsible on causing an uproar in the muslim world is pointless as he only interacted with the Gov heads and their reaction your already aware with..
Lets analyse the response taken in the muslim world as a result of all this.
1. Come out in the street to show there resentment on this incident.
2. Call the gov to take measures to ensure that those responsible should be dealt with.
3. Boycott Danish goodz.

Now which of the following actions are gov supported???? Can gov make me come to street after closing my business all around the muslim world??? sorry not possible?/?? If the Gov has taken measures against this incident on Gov level then yes the Danish imam could b one of the reason for that ??/ but tht didnt happened either… Lastly can the Gov force a consumer to not buy danish goodz??? or tht part any other religious party???? NOOOO,….
If any where the Gov is supporting all this is after the people forced the Gov to take this stance not the other way around so in simple that argument that the Danish Imam is responsible for all the above is baseless and far from reality.
so i hope the answer is clear.

I was making the point that political and religious leaders are every bit as capable of distorting the facts and presenting them in a highly selective manner as are the media.

Though this part is already answered but for the sake of completeness, The religious person / leader wil come very late in order to guide the reaction on this particular event. Its an understood thing for every muslim… I dont need any religious leader to tell me tht what has happened is bad n i should do something about it.
let me say it again??? You call some1 niger ,, now there can be a suspision regarding the manner the thing was conveyed. Was it in a derogative manner or not?? Suspision can be there depending on the interpretation…..
But in case of this particular event of Cariculture of Prophet (PBUH), there is no suspision its just CANT DO THING. there r no two views about it. So the thumb rule of suspision does not apply here.
The religious parties can guide the outcome of peoples anger but not the anger itself. If u claim that may be the religious party used the anger for their own purpose around the muslim world then i may agree with you partially, but if u claim that the religious leaders angered the muslim world then your sadly mistaken. The anger is natural based on our religious values and sensitivity of the incident.
I hope the question is answered well.

The images were reprinted in Muslim newspapers as well, notably one in Cairo. Where were the protests about that newspaper publishing the “offensive” cartoons? Or is it only “offensive” when a non-Muslim nation does it?

Well lets first see what happened. The Newspaper did not choose to show the images, the images were blackend beyond recognition to give any idea of what was to happen, but still the newspaper was penalized the editor along with other members of the newspaper have been jailed and are awaiting trials for this very action. So the “Offensive” part is clear, i have given this answer before.

The difference is the Western media was printing the 12 cartoons from the Danish newspaper. The Muslims who went on their tour of the Middle East took not only those 12 cartoons, but a further three images, at least one of which has been described as causing the majority of the uproar. If the issue was simply the Danish paper publishing 12 cartoons, then why weren’t those 12 cartoons volatile enough for them to make their case?

What seems to be the problem is the understanding between the thinking. One picture or 12 does not matter as this act is criticised not the pictures. So please try to understand this matter. West can paint jesus merciful and its okay with them and the christians according to their understanding but in our case the picture of all the Prophets either shown in a positive manner or a negitive is strickly not allowed. So please dont waste more time on the argument regarding the number of pictures as it doesnt matter the act is to be blamed.
Regarding the time it took to show a sizeable reaction has also been explain before in my past posts so u can check that out aswell.

Most media reporting is biased to a degree, this is true, but at least they don’t find a story, run around and drum up worldwide interest, and then make a huge deal out of it three months after the fact. That right is reserved for the nations whining about the cartoons.

What will you call the Western stance to support Danish action, the reprinting of the stuff in other newspaperz around the world as or the movement of “Buy Danish” as?? “a sign to show solidarity” well i think it comes under the same category of “run around and drum up worldwide interest” but ofcourse i forgot u call tht freedom of expression.

You accept, of course, that exactly the same can be said of pronouncements made by political and religious figures?

Well man i never claimed we have fair and true representation but the scenario is different here, the political parties have given it a political face no doubt but the local person does not consider that, i business man who closes down his shop as a sign of protest will hardly need a political party to motivate him, or the educated class coming to street to show their resentment in a peaceful manner.
Sadly the politicized face of the demonstration hits the Western news and the peaceful grass root level demonstrations are considered “Not News Worthy” material.

At least for those Danish imams who used photos which were not related to the original cartoons in any way

Well do you know in detail regarding this matter with proof. Not all the submitted prints were published? so ur comparing the total number of drawn material to the total number of published material. Just another sneaky trick to change the direction of peoples thinking. No proof has been given regarding this accept for a claim made in the western newspaper.
Lets get some facts straight: the Imam went to Muslim countries and showed them the stuff published or lets say was drawn? How did the western media claim with authensity regarding the number or material shown to the Muslim leaders with authensity?? I doesnt take a genious to cast a shadow of doubt regarding this western claim in the media but then still i you have ur loyalities regarding the truth in the material printed in western media then i wont blame you for beleiving this thing.
We do share common points only the misleading factors on my and on your side need to be identified and cleared n i guess we can make the world a beautiful place.