Prejudiced Danes provoke fanaticism - Low even in guardian

[BJWoods]

Prejudiced Danes provoke fanaticism

Publishing Kurt Westergaard's cartoons was an aggressive act born of Denmark's reluctance to respect religious belief

Ie, some nutter tries to kill him with an axe, because he said that islam is violent?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/201...

The author is being hammered in the comments section though: hope for us all i suppose

[Dupont666]

this cartoon was done in 2005, it was a mocking cartoon like many of the ones you will find in most newspapers... the muslims were offended at the thought their religon might be associated with violence and terrorism, so they try to kill him and have done for 4 years, does that not prove his point?

The amount of people that have taken the piss out of PM and president in several countries is quite big, from burning of coutries flags to slander and racial violence against embassies, does that give them the right to declare war on those countries and act upon it as war against terror?

Isnt it strange that which people are the ones commiting the violence and terror are the ones that categorically state that is not what its about, its not the whole of the religon, but by god they give their kinsman a really bad name and wonder why people are wary of them.

Not saying he was right or wrong, but it was freedom of speech that allowed him to do it and that is his porogative (sp) if he wants to, to be presecuted by it is denying him the freedom of speech in his own country.

How many people get annoyed and declare that act and the human rights act when preaching racial violence and other stuff against the state that have taken them in (UK if you are wondering) take the hook for example, he did just that and then tried everything in the book to allow him to stay when we kicked him out... did we attempt to murder him... Err NO... says a lot about peoples views.

And before you say what about BNP, everyone has got bad eggs, but even those guys wont blow themselves up in mosques and try and murder people in the name of religon, this type of stuff just fuels their cause and what they are trying to do instead.

Enough from me...

[Parrot of Doom]

Dupont666 said:

And before you say what about BNP, everyone has got bad eggs, but even those guys wont blow themselves up in mosques and try and murder people in the name of religon, this type of stuff just fuels their cause and what they are trying to do instead.

Enough from me...

What about David Copeland?

Edited by Parrot of Doom on Tuesday 5th January 13:59

[Dupont666]

Parrot of Doom said:

Dupont666 said:

And before you say what about BNP, everyone has got bad eggs, but even those guys wont blow themselves up in mosques and try and murder people in the name of religon, this type of stuff just fuels their cause and what they are trying to do instead.

Enough from me...

What about David Copeland?

Edited by Parrot of Doom on Tuesday 5th January 13:59

He wasnt in the BNP when he did that, he was acting alone.

1998 when he left, 1999 when he did it.

[Parrot of Doom]

The implication being therefore that the person who attempted to attack the Danish cartoonist was not working alone. Who was he working for, or was he just a nutter like Copeland?

[Dupont666]

Parrot of Doom said:

The implication being therefore that the person who attempted to attack the Danish cartoonist was not working alone. Who was he working for, or was he just a nutter like Copeland?

Yes... but if you read this:

In May 1997, at the age of 21, he joined the British National Party, a far right, white supremacist party. Copeland acted as a steward at a BNP meeting, in the course of which he came into contact with the BNP leadership and was photographed standing next to John Tyndall, the then leader of the BNP. It was during this period that Copeland read The Turner Diaries, and first learned how to make bombs using fireworks with alarm clocks as timers after downloading a so-called terrorists' handbook from the internet.

In 1998, Copeland left the BNP, outraged by their democratic involvement strategy. He then joined the smaller, violent and openly Neo Nazi, National Socialist Movement, becoming its regional leader for Hampshire just weeks before the start of his bombing campaign. It was around this time that he visited his family doctor and was prescribed anti-depressants after telling the doctor he felt he was "losing his mind".

so nothing to do with BNP, just a neo nazi gang of thugs, or are you suggesting that cause there are these type of people out there in the UK it is justified for the muslims to have people like this and they should be allowed to do what they want?

Dont remember Dave copeland being made a martyr and being thought of as doing good for Christianity, do you?

Religon and politics is not the same thing

[Parrot of Doom]

I know all that, in fact Tyndall was booted out only a year later. The point is that you mentioned that the BNP would have nothing to do with such people, when they clearly once did. They still have such people in their ranks - I wonder, what would it take for Mark Collett to start bombing people?

[Dupont666]

Parrot of Doom said:

I know all that, in fact Tyndall was booted out only a year later. The point is that you mentioned that the BNP would have nothing to do with such people, when they clearly once did. They still have such people in their ranks - I wonder, what would it take for Mark Collett to start bombing people?

DOnt know, could we ask and find out?

[Chris_w666]

Dupont666 said:

this cartoon was done in 2005, it was a mocking cartoon like many of the ones you will find in most newspapers... the muslims were offended at the thought their religon might be associated with violence and terrorism, so they try to kill him and have done for 4 years, does that not prove his point?

The amount of people that have taken the piss out of PM and president in several countries is quite big, from burning of coutries flags to slander and racial violence against embassies, does that give them the right to declare war on those countries and act upon it as war against terror?

Isnt it strange that which people are the ones commiting the violence and terror are the ones that categorically state that is not what its about, its not the whole of the religon, but by god they give their kinsman a really bad name and wonder why people are wary of them.

Not saying he was right or wrong, but it was freedom of speech that allowed him to do it and that is his porogative (sp) if he wants to, to be presecuted by it is denying him the freedom of speech in his own country.

How many people get annoyed and declare that act and the human rights act when preaching racial violence and other stuff against the state that have taken them in (UK if you are wondering) take the hook for example, he did just that and then tried everything in the book to allow him to stay when we kicked him out... did we attempt to murder him... Err NO... says a lot about peoples views.

And before you say what about BNP, everyone has got bad eggs, but even those guys wont blow themselves up in mosques and try and murder people in the name of religon, this type of stuff just fuels their cause and what they are trying to do instead.

Enough from me...

IMO if the islamic community is so outraged at suicide bombings etc then why do they not work with the appropriate agencies to flush out the radicals?

It seems that radical groups use phrases like 'The war in afghanistan/iraq is an attack on Islam' now this cannot be true because I still seem muslims allowed to move freely through the western world, if the war was against Islam then surely mosques would be burned, copies of the Koran would be outlawed and nobody who followed their religion would be allowed to enter the coutries that are supposedly attacking their religion.