religions are at best to be descriped as sosial phenemmenon and has therefore some part in cultures and cultural heritage, and thus making it justicaple in ethichal consideration but thats is far most closest they get when taking about realism…so comparing things that rose from unwareness and imagination and justificating ruling class power status to deniable reality is bit too off the track…there is no ‘deeper’ explanation to bringing religious feelings par whit real lifes events that took place in reality rather than imagination…thats the point YOU (and rest of the lot who consider themself as religious, no matter to what god/gods they kneel) seem to not understand…so its rather useless to try to peel on my sense of reasoning backing it whit things that rose from unreasoning in first place…

nor its polite to use that sort of ununderstandaple slang to a one that doesent speak english as his native language…

N that is the difference which you will never be able to understand. So u keep on with it peep coz i aint backing either against those who are imagining thingz out of proportion.

are you saying that people are just imaginating Holocaust?? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

i’ll take canadian chinese take away food, please 😀 😀 😀 🙂

drums or bass

elephants

shoes or no shoes?

What was done in that time by Nazi gov, is a fact and is a part of the histry. Now a person today talks about it and denies it (he is as bad as the nazi gov??? Did he physically assulted ny1???? He used is right to express himself???) i leave all that for the wise man to decide? To me if the criteria is to express urself in a non physical way then both r same ( one write a book about it, other used the newspaper to propagate). What does humour has to do with all this?? If the book was placed under the shelf of humor in bookstores would it have changed the fact or the reaction???? I can only wonder.

yeah keep wonder it, cos there the crucial difference lurks…
I already explained the ‘morale’ background difference between these two situation where the legal difference comes from so i’m not gonna waste my time to repeat it. You claim that we should understand you but same time you keep missunderstanding it so its not my proplem…but these two arent same things in western, legal point of view… i feel sorry you dont see it, but its your own loss

As per the freedom of expression is regarded i guess the line is blury, pissed or not pissed i aint here to win your support dude??? aint there is nything like freedom of expression??? bear it mate y the fuss.
Its a forum where u seem to be botherd just by talking?? Mate i have all the respect for the religions out there?? i just want the same for mine.

‘

well you can whine after that respection from someone else…Im determent to resist organized religions in every form they appear…I just expressed that it pisses me off when muslims try to make their so called ‘deep anger’ to anyway near same levels as anger that jews migth feel when some one is denying holocaust which did happen and was reality compared to some claimed sancryacy of some guy who lived hundreds of years ago. Religions are matter of imagination, holocaust wasent.

footy

dog or cat

Man can u just read what your saying? “He cause pain to those who went through it during the world war times”, what about the pain which the muslim world is going as a direct result to the stuff published in newspaper?? OH no this dont give us the right to protest our voice right… Great man just proved what i was saying previously.

Yah right man i understand it now, “Cause us pain, in you go in prison (No right for free speech does not imply here),other way around Oh we didnt wanted to cause pain its humorous you know, nothing serious havnt you heard freedom of expression”

pain that nazis gave to jews, slavs, communists, gvypsyes, gays, disables and other minorityes WERE bit MORE realistict, and serious than some hurt religious feelings that muslims mostly inflict upon to themselves…man you start pissing me off with this logic 😡 😡
Irwing effectively tryed to deny those peoples rigth to compensate and claimed them liers from their horrific fate…

well as you have so perfectly claimed that you dont understand western way of thinking then you should propaply drop the subject….but I try to explain it to you bit simplyer that you would understand it. Freedom of publishing comes with responsipility and western laws allows no hate mongering between ethnichal groups nor supporting political activity that engourages to it. Therefore trying to make a historical reseach on supporting neo-nazi ideologyes IS bit different and BIT more serious than some one drawing a charichatyres over some religions holy sacraments/tabus… Irwing’s writings cross the criminal line where they promote hatred and nazi ideologyes which are nothing more than criminal themself. The differences comes mainly from OUR point of wiev, where these things has a different emphasiss whatsoever. Wheter that legal basis apply to the cartoons I leave it to the wiser man and jurically scholared men to do but in general Humor, even a bad humour, even a propagandist humour is humour, and should not couse nothing more serious than ignorancy…freedom of publish, but responsipility to carry as burden from what you publish…but we do not low us selves to sensor things…

So as i said in my first answer to you, you need to uderstand west as much as we do need to understand you to make judgments over others…

cup

bear or lion

dvd

another musical Eric Clapton or jeff beck