For the meek,
Dhimmi chic.
Bad link,
What a stink.
============

While I agree with most of your comments, I think you should check you expression *the Muslims*. You are unnecessarily stereotyping and generalizing a whole lot of people who have nothing to do with the debate. Religion is a personal thing to many in the world and it would be unwise to generalize the radical views as a mass hysteria.

Rezwan's right. Like the old lawyer joke, ninety percent of Muslims are making the other ten percent look bad.

Islam is a comfort and an inspiration to the masses of its believers, just as Christianity is to Jesus's followers. The spiritual leader of Iraq have just promulgated a fatwah against violence with the prodding of an Anglican Canon, who deserves the Nobel Peace Prize for his part in ending this war.

It is over, you know. The globe is cooling, too. You think I'm joking.
====================

Ol Rudy's wonderful, but was he searching for a gas leak in this particular parlor?
==================================

Rezwan Boxed by Skinner.

Wah Wah Wah!

Should be plural, above: 'spiritual leaders of Iraq...'.
==================================

Good link, still a stink.

I wonder at the Swedish diplomat suddenly found himself thrown into the fray as the journalists invoke the whole nation behind them. This could get interesting.

Oh Seixon? Wussup over there?
==============================

The one thing I find ironic over the whole cartoon controversy is where Muslims direct their outrage.

No matter how many times people of the Islamic faith insist they are not of the same mind set as those fighting jihad it is never vocal enough to render news worthiness. I do believe I follow the news enough to notice the lack of outrage by Muslims of Muslims killing other Muslims in the name of Allah. Not to mention killing any non-believer.

If someone is taking words out of the Koran to suit their own agenda of killing others isn't that blasphemous in its self?

Does the Koran specifically state "non-believers must convert or die"?

If not then where are all the protesters demanding that jihadists quit misquoting the Koran due the blasphemous nature of speaking "for" Allah instead of quoting Allah.

In my opinion this is the same as living in a city chock full of daily homicides but only complain about the jaywalking problem.

(Irrelevant, off-topic laundry list of "scandals" deleted. Also, IP noted for future consideration for banning.)

Lincoln, run for your life; Hsunami coming.

jj, Sadr the Lesser, symbolically and fatally, violated the fatwah against violence at an important Shia shrine. He was Persia's best pal, and is now disgraced. The Iraqis are observing how indecorous it is for Muslims to kill Muslims instead of infidels.
==============================

Lincoln, way to stay on topic pal!

So is the cartoon in this case the Republican or is the Swedish government?

The Iraqis are observing how indecorous it is for Muslims to kill Muslims instead of infidels.....Kim

My point is of the scale of the blasphemy and how it is reacted to across the Arab world. No doubt those felling the direct repercussions of Muslim on Muslim violence, particularly in Iraq feel compelled to eradicate it in their own backyard because they are the victims.

My question is where are the masses of Muslims denouncing jihad and protesting vigorously against those speaking 'for" Allah or Mohammad and taking the Koran out of context. (An act of blasphemy IMHO) It has never been on the scale of those protesting these cartoons.

I surmise why, that being it is like when one has a dysfunctional family and knows it but can't stand seeing anyone else outside the family bringing up how dysfunctional your family is, but has no problem attacking those outsiders that do speak up. In the mean time the dysfunctional family stays that way and outsiders fear putting their noses into their problem again.

MunDane, don't expect an answer. I haven't banned his IP, but I strongly suspect Lincoln is one of those drive-by trolls that cuts and pastes his laundry list on every conservative blog he can find, on the most recent posting, regardless of topic. Seen it before, will see it again.

But it's enlightening to see where that type of individual places his priorities...

J.

an awful lot of "Muslims" are doing an awful lot of horrendous things in the name of "Allah"...and have been for decades (ok, CENTURIES!)

And yet, with alQueda, Hamas, Hezzbulah, et al, going about doing DAILY acts of terrorism and barbarism against INNOCENT men, women and children (MOST of whom are Muslims themselves), the "Muslim Community" chooses CARTOONS to get outraged over?

puleeze!

Just imagine if the notorious NATIONAL ENDOWMENT for the ARTS went and payed for having a picture of MUHAMED SUBMURGED IN URINE or done in elepant dung those wretched artists ROBERT MAPLETHORP,ANDRA SORANO or the other would have to look over their shoulders or have their heads chopped off

As much as I love SOUTH PARK or other outrageous shows and tasteless humor, I'm never very happy when Jesus, Mary, or other major religious figures are portrayed in a disrepectful manner.

Maybe those in the media at all levels should consider that religious figures from all faiths need to be only treated respectfully, although the Muslim standard that even bans a respectful representation as an illustration is a very extreme standard.

In regards to National Endowment of the Arts and South Park a couple of points.

A point of contention is government funding in support of a platform for someone to promote their disdain of a religious figure, while that same secular "groupthink" does everything in their power to keep even the perception of government religion endorsement.

Yet no liberal outcry for foot baths for Muslims that are publically funded.

My feeling is you can't have it both ways.

South park on the other hand is a private enterprise whereas someone feeling insulted by the content can turn the channel or go as far as boycotting the sponsors if they choose.

South Park did have an episode in which they depicted the prophet Mohammed but the image was censored by Comedy Central and the scene was replaced by a sign saying "Censored by Comedy Central".

Yet Jesus is portrayed as a mortal idiot constantly on South Park which is pure hypocrisy by executives at the network.

The bottom line is "fear". Fear of violent reprisals. While liberals have over used one of their mantras of "Bush creates a climate of fear to keep the masses inline", it is liberals that have the fear of Muslims.

They try and make up for their transparent cowardice by puffing their chests at Christians, all the while knowing no physical violent reprisal is coming.

Three Dog Nacht.
================

Maybe the Rage Boys need to lighten up a bit. Unless their God is the God of perpetual anger, and not much else.

I sincerely hope you are right about the west prevailing in an all out confrontation with Islam. I'm concerned that leftists and other traitors--McCain and Graham come to mind--would surrender before the fight even began.

I don't get that one, PUPPYMAX. If there is one single issue upon which McCain and his lapdog Graham have been entirely correct, it is the war against Islamic extremism.

The reason the Swedes are quaking right now is because of the quivering the Dutch showed when their own country was subjected to outrage over cartoons.

Tell the Muslims not to buy the offending paper, change the channel, or boycott the sponsors as they choose, but as soon as they resort to violence or threats thereof, treat them as the criminals they then become, and no better.

As with the Dane-geld, once you pay respect to threats of violence, you never get rid of Ahmad.

"Maybe those in the media at all levels should consider that religious figures from all faiths need to be only treated respectfully,"

For the most part, I agree with this idea of being more respectful when it comes to symbols and persons that represent religious belief. Funny, though, how the Muslims' outrage is usually accompanied with words like, "Death to Somebody-or-other!" Not a very stable representation of said belief system.

The muslims who call for respect for all religious figures would be more convincing if it were not for the virulent anti-semitism rampant in their community ... and the violence done by muslim extremists against other religions. Like the Taliban blowing up venerable Buddhist monuments in Afghanistan.

Bamiyan. Oh, Bamiyan.
======================

Could you imagine if they placed a image of MUHAMED on the SOUTH PARK i mean TREY PARKER and MATT STONE would be beheaded and COMEDY CENREAL would be bombed

See, that's the rub Paul.
When Jews and Christians (among other's in the US and west) have their faiths mocked and literally covered in filth, it is expected that they will chuckle or just fume in silence. Any other reaction shows a lack of culture, provincialism or worse. Violence from a Christian in the US over such a thing is such a shock it is major news.
But to Muslims...

I heartily endorse Paul's suggestion that all religious figures ought be treated with respect.

That's in a perfect world, though, and we don't live in anything approaching that. Our choice seems to be between a world where freedom of speech includes the freedom to show disrespect for religions and their icons and one in which governments or mobs control what may be said about religions.

Of course, if they can control what is said about religions, they can control what is said about anything using similar mechanisms.

Paul did also note that even respectful images of Mohamed are prohibited by Islam, so that in itself wouldn't even solve the problem.

Incidentally, Howie at The Jawa Report has the original cartoon if anyone wants to see it. As he observes, most publications would require more evidence of talent before publishing a cartoon.

As he observes, most publications would require more evidence of talent before publishing a cartoon.

And yet Ted Rall gets published!

add a soccer ball wizzing by his crappy little dog-muslim paws....hilarious!!