freedom of speech?!
It was when I read Adam's comment on freedom of speech that I suddenly remember about the recent publication of cartoons satirising our prophet Muhammad which have offended the Muslims all around the world, and that is including me.
I am not going to give a detail account of it, as I guess everyone by now already knew of what really happened. But I just could not agree with the reasons behind the publication of the cartoons.
Jyllands-Posten, the newspaper which was the responsible for the publication of the 12 Muhammad cartoons defended their actions in the name of freedom of speech. I say, go to hell with it! It was not really the matter of them exercising their freedom of speech, but it was more of them taking the opportunity to condemn the Muslims and the religion itself. If they really wanted to exercise their freedom of speech, they should have publicised the cartoon satirising Jesus when they were "invited" to do so. But when Christoffer Zieler, the Danish cartoonist offered some cartoon depicting Jesus back in April 2003 to Jyllands-Posten, the editor rejected it, fearing that it might trigger and uproar in the country, and even in the Europe itself, and here, I quote, words by words of what he said to Mr. 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.
Surprise. Surprise. Since when the editor concerned about public reactions? Why not the newspaper just publised the cartoon in the name of freedom of speech, as what they did in the case of Muhammad cartoons?Why did when it comes to condemning Islam and the Muslims, the Danish newspaper can easily do that, without any hesitation, in the name of expressing the freedom of speech, but when they clearly did not have the gut to do so towards Jesus, and towards Christianity itself? Why must they pick on the Muslims? And Islam?
So it was not about the freedom of speech after all isn't it?
How could they be so unfair towards the Muslims? Could it be because the Muslims are the minority in Europe, so they do not really give it a damn of how the Muslims would react to that?
It was not anymore the issue of freedom of speech, but it was indeed to the fact that the Muslims in Europe are way being overpowered by the whites. Just because that the Muslims are the minority, it does not mean that we should just be neglected like that.
I am not saying all people are the same though.
I have few acquaintances who happen to be the British people. They still treat me very nicely though the know that I am a Muslim *daaa.. isn't that soo obvious, my first name is Mohd, and my surname is Abdullah*. But they seems to be confused a bit about our religion. They think that the Muslims are over reacting to the publication of Muhammad cartoons and they think that it is the Muslims "culture" not to depict or satire the prophet in any way. It is not a culture for goodness sake, it is about the religion who does not allow us to do that. And when the religions says that is wrong, no question about it.*Aha, tell that to myself!*
I tried to explain this, but because I know that I do not know much about Islam, I did not have the gut and just kept my mouth shut. The last thing that I would want to do is to entangle myself with their questions on Islam, and to look stupid for not knowing much about my own religion.
My easiest escape route is by saying " I believe in moderation.. blablabla"
HaHa.Crap.I know.
But in my own personal belief, I do believe in freedom of speech, but not a total freedom, otherwise it will only bring us into the state of anarchy. In line with freedom of speech, we should also take into account other people's sensitivity. And once again, moderation is the best policy.
Ok, enough talking crap. I wanna have lunch now.
I am not going to give a detail account of it, as I guess everyone by now already knew of what really happened. But I just could not agree with the reasons behind the publication of the cartoons.
Jyllands-Posten, the newspaper which was the responsible for the publication of the 12 Muhammad cartoons defended their actions in the name of freedom of speech. I say, go to hell with it! It was not really the matter of them exercising their freedom of speech, but it was more of them taking the opportunity to condemn the Muslims and the religion itself. If they really wanted to exercise their freedom of speech, they should have publicised the cartoon satirising Jesus when they were "invited" to do so. But when Christoffer Zieler, the Danish cartoonist offered some cartoon depicting Jesus back in April 2003 to Jyllands-Posten, the editor rejected it, fearing that it might trigger and uproar in the country, and even in the Europe itself, and here, I quote, words by words of what he said to Mr. 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.
Surprise. Surprise. Since when the editor concerned about public reactions? Why not the newspaper just publised the cartoon in the name of freedom of speech, as what they did in the case of Muhammad cartoons?Why did when it comes to condemning Islam and the Muslims, the Danish newspaper can easily do that, without any hesitation, in the name of expressing the freedom of speech, but when they clearly did not have the gut to do so towards Jesus, and towards Christianity itself? Why must they pick on the Muslims? And Islam?
So it was not about the freedom of speech after all isn't it?
How could they be so unfair towards the Muslims? Could it be because the Muslims are the minority in Europe, so they do not really give it a damn of how the Muslims would react to that?
It was not anymore the issue of freedom of speech, but it was indeed to the fact that the Muslims in Europe are way being overpowered by the whites. Just because that the Muslims are the minority, it does not mean that we should just be neglected like that.
I am not saying all people are the same though.
I have few acquaintances who happen to be the British people. They still treat me very nicely though the know that I am a Muslim *daaa.. isn't that soo obvious, my first name is Mohd, and my surname is Abdullah*. But they seems to be confused a bit about our religion. They think that the Muslims are over reacting to the publication of Muhammad cartoons and they think that it is the Muslims "culture" not to depict or satire the prophet in any way. It is not a culture for goodness sake, it is about the religion who does not allow us to do that. And when the religions says that is wrong, no question about it.*Aha, tell that to myself!*
I tried to explain this, but because I know that I do not know much about Islam, I did not have the gut and just kept my mouth shut. The last thing that I would want to do is to entangle myself with their questions on Islam, and to look stupid for not knowing much about my own religion.
My easiest escape route is by saying " I believe in moderation.. blablabla"
HaHa.Crap.I know.
But in my own personal belief, I do believe in freedom of speech, but not a total freedom, otherwise it will only bring us into the state of anarchy. In line with freedom of speech, we should also take into account other people's sensitivity. And once again, moderation is the best policy.
Ok, enough talking crap. I wanna have lunch now.
posted by faisal at 11:00 AM
12 Comments:
It is interesting to see that you refer to anarchy as bad. Actually, state of anarchy isn't bad. When you start to learn philosophy, you will love anarchy. I know because after my fellow classmates learn what anarchy is all about, we realized that anarchy isn't such a bad thing after all. If you want to know why, email me and I will tell you :)
omg
now we are being so philosophical huh?
*yawning*
i do believe i social order, and solidarity.
instead of me mailing you, why dont u just come up with a topic on that in ur blog, okay?
:P
off to lunch now, my stomach is growling now
" but it was indeed to the fact that the Muslims in Europe are way being overpowered by the whites."
Notice that there are many so-called "whites" who are also muslims, so it isn't the battle between the whites VS muslims anymore, it's the Non-muslims VS muslims.
Anywhere, anyhow, it's difficult when you're living amongst people of whom you are not part of. It's difficult when you're chinese living amongst indians, and vice versa. To talk about religious diversity, I guess it's even more complicated, intertwined between past histories of holy wars and neverending personal innuendoes between religions across the world.
But I really love your answer: "My easiest escape route is by saying " I believe in moderation.. blablabla"
Haha OH YEAH BABY CRAP! I was laughing out loud when I read that, because I guess that is the exact thing that I would answer on my behalf if I were to be asked that kind of questions. ;)
So don't worry. We are all "moderated muslims". The question is, how "moderate" is our moderation?
HaHa
I do realize the fact.
thanks for reminding me
it's just that i do not have the gut to say that it is a "war" between muslim and the non muslims, it sounds too provocating.
just wanna be on the safe side.remember? moderation is the best way of life.
hehe
how moderate i am?
wow
that's one very difficult question.
Only God knows how faithful I am towards my religion
:P
hey.u should come out with a new topic on ur blog la mirul. can't wait to read one.
i mean, provocative
sorry for wrong spelling/grammar that i used.
my bad!
I dont like that phrase. "moderate muslim"
It is either u r a muslim or u r not. there is no such things as moderate muslims.
True, agree with adam. That was my thought, hence the comment "how moderate WE are as muslims" ...
And notice that I'm using "WE" instead of "you", because in this case, I'm not an obediant one at all.
Faisal I updated already la get your arse down there and comment!
You know what, I'm sick and tired of talking about "serious issues" in my blog, it's either that i'll get a call from my dad saying that my entry is being read by Terengganu's MB and will get his arse in trouble later, or my mum will scold me for being "too different".
I'm sick and tired of being labelled provocative and whatshits, I just want to get myself in the position where I can say anything I want and do anything I want.
Until then, I'll just keep my mouth shut and comment about it in other people's blog.
Oh, do delete any of my comments if you find it offensive.
Wise discussion should always be oriented towards facts. Nice to read on the short flash of this glimpse to see how far rational we're.
You can read more about the cartoons at this link:
http://www.ezine-act-politics-business-and-love.com
to anonymous,
thanks for the link.
i do agree that nobody would actually gain anything from the cartoons.
it will only create more hatred, mistrust and hostility towards journalism, which I have to agree that it is indeed a noble profession.
As what I said before this, I do believe in freedom of speech, but not with a total freedom of it.
You two. That just leaves your daughter.
free stories virgin rape
free erotic wife sharing stories
free masturbation stories
free adult erotic stories online
free first time stories
You two. That just leaves your daughter.
She willingly sucked his cock ata slow, even rent less pace as if he was her personallollipop, her tongue worked its magic by coating hisdick with warm wet pulls, teeth gently glided over hisforeskin and as the pearly liquid was about to comeshe caressed his balls and made him come hard andfast. The answer was a firm YES.
nifty incest stories
gang rape sex stories
mother grandmother beastiality stories
gay blowjob stories
fuck me mommy stories
She willingly sucked his cock ata slow, even rent less pace as if he was her personallollipop, her tongue worked its magic by coating hisdick with warm wet pulls, teeth gently glided over hisforeskin and as the pearly liquid was about to comeshe caressed his balls and made him come hard andfast. The answer was a firm YES.
Post a Comment
<< Home