French court bans Christ advert [double standards]

​

​

​

​

I am wondering was this French newspaper or those who are talking about the freedom of speech dumb regarding the advertisement which was based on Leonardo da Vinci's Christ's Last Supper.

​

No Comment, it is clear. Don't take off the topic and be realistic.
For MORE DS Read the additions in posts 22 , 23 , 26 , 34 , 35, 36

And Jyllands Posten refused to publish lampooning Christ

YoursSincerely,​

​

CatStevens​

 

Asalamu Aleykum!
You do make a point there, although I think the editor of that newspaper got fired (the owner was from egypt I think).

What is more interesting is that Jyllands posten, the rasicist magazine that starterted all this mess acually refused publishing pictures depicting Christ (peace be upon him) two years ago. Munafiqeens...

 

The French are hypocrites. Don't worry about us supporting them.

If they're gonna ban the hijab they can ban crosses in school as well.

 

cabdirazzaq
​

​

Wa Alikum As Salam Wa Rahmatu Allahi Wa Barakatu =)
​

​

Are you talking about the newspaper which posted the cartoons about our beloved Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)?
​

​

It is so nice to see Arabic words and Islamic greetings here; I really do feel at home.
​

IronGoth
​

​

Of course not all of them, hypocrites are everywhere probably.
​

​

Thanks =)
​

Yours Sincerely,
​

Cat Stevens
​

 

..now this is what i call, interestin !


Iran protests Jesus and Mary cartoons

The Iranian Embassy in Azerbaijan yesterday protested the publication of cartoons of Jesus Christ and the Virgin Mary by an Azerbaijani newspaper. The Yeni Khabar newspaper published the cartoons in retaliation for the publication of the Prophet caricatures. While condemning caricatures of the Prophet, the Iranian Embassy also denounced the Azerbaijani publication as "rude and immoral insults" motivated by either ignorance or a desire to provoke discord between Muslims and Christians.

 

The only thing the french ever did right. since 1939.

 

may Allah bless the Iranian embassy, we (Muslims) respect all the prophets, thanks to Allah for such rational religion.

Yours Sincerely,
​

Cat Stevens
​

 

You people are forgetting something. The Catholic CHURCH in France has banned the Jesus advertisement, and the French NEWSPAPER has decided to print the Muhammad cartoons. They are two VERY different organizations. I think we all know that the press are the slimiest organization ever, in most countries, so why are you surprised that they disrespected the prophet. I'm appalled by the cartoons but that's the press for you. You can't accuse anyone of "double standards" here, because the church and the newspapers are NOT the same!

And even if the newspapers didn't print blaphemous cartoons of Jesus, and were guilty of "double standards", what do you expect from the press, it's like that in most countries, they are the lowest of the low.

 

...and yet, get the attention of most folks who quote them (believin their shit)

 

Yeah, you're right. But they still show visual shots, are you telling me that the pictures and footage are "shit"? I'm really talking about their decency, not whether they twist things or not.

 

May I add, Allah bless the embassy. May Allah bless the rational and the respectful.

I hope this does not offend.

Thank you again catstevens. My faith in humanity is somewhat restored.

Personally, insult towards a prophet, well that is between the person involved and God. God is not mocked as we say, because it cannot be mocked, though you may try.

But you cannot say that you cannot inflict religious morality on a secular world, and then listen to the Catholic Church. That is hypocrisy of the worst sort.

Either France should have banned the Moslem Cartoon and the Last Supper ad (itself a mockery of a painting, not Jesus) or NEITHER.

 

mmm I think you lost me,

i.e. there are non-Dansish newspapers and those who are calling themselves Liberals or whatsoever, who are supporting the Danish newspapers on the plea of freedom, So where were they concerning the advertisement! isn't a freedom, freedom of expressing or whatever? why they were dumbs, why they didn't support the man who made that advertisementn as they are supporting the Danish newspaper today?

Yours Sincerely,
​

Cat Stevens
​

 

Ops! Hello Anaconda =)

Yours Sincerely,
​

Cat Stevens
​

 

Amen

!! you're more than welcome

Thumps up , very rational, very clear ugly [double standards]

Yours Sincerely,
​

Cat Stevens
​

 

The difference cat is that in one instance, the paper voluntarily made an editorial decision. In the other, there's people burning buildings etc.

There's a world of difference in Western eyes in saying you shouldn't do something, and you can't. "Do this and I kill you" is something that will make the West rouse from its slumber and get REAL mean with ya.

I understand your viewpoint, appreciate and sympathise with your love of the Prophet. For what it's worth, there's tons of stuff I find distasteful and disapprove of. But I am for one glad that in the West one has the right to publish a cartoon, because the same right gives Muslims in the US freedom of worship and the same rights to express their views.

I also think that a major problem here is that the cartoons are meant as metaphors, not literally. I understand they were meant to be illustrations for a book and not meant to be looked at in isolation.

 

IronGoth
​

​

Dear the double standards in the west are so ugly and obvious just like the sun.
​

Read what were the Muslims' reactions in the beginning, why just focusing on those Muslims who say "do this or we're gonna kill you'' The US motto for example is: be with us, otherwise you are our enemy, otherwise you are against us, this is so clear and I won't discuss it I have my bunch of documents from newspapers etc
​

​

Under their ugly humiliating supervision! Which kind of freedom is that! I am not talking randomly; I know very well what I am saying.
​

Click
​

​

Thank you very much.
​

​

I see no difference; it give the same idea, meaning and conceptions, otherwise, they would surely explain it!!!!!
​

​

Which kind of stupid childish illustrations is this?, if somebody Mocked or accused the Prophet then he did that to me, the cartoon points that he was a terrorist, so, you accused him of terrorism è you accused meè you accused all the Muslims! My dear beloved Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) isn't here anymore, how can he defend himself? We Muslims will handle this with our deepest pleasure, If somebody accused someone with such thing he will defend himself or bring legal action against them, whatsoever, I won't believe them if they say, we didn't know that it is not acceptable to the Muslims such things or that hurt them or will make all this RAGE because they are Journalists, which means they know!!!
​

The main idea of this topic is the ugly double standards, and I proved it.
​

Yours Sincerely,
​

Cat Stevens
​

 

You will have no argument with me on this one.

Yeah, I follow you on that. However, once again, it is context that is crucial. The USA has taken a position on people who have tried to kill people here. Those comments were made right after the Twin Towers burned and were a warning to anyone who tried to stand between the USA and its target. I actually found its handling of that particular issue acceptable. They wanted Bin Laden to stand trial and offered the Taleban government no retaliation if they delivered him to a third party.

Dear friend, the issue is not that of worship or expression of religion - the issue there is funds from fundraising to build a building being redirected to kill. It is utterly against the law in this country to collect for charity and use the money for another purpose, be it Moslems, Christians or Atheists collecting the money. In fact in the 1980s some prominent Christian television pastors went to jail for doing so.

What you didn't see where you were from were stories like just after 9/11, when near to here a man angered by the events took a gun to the local mosque here with mayhem as his intent. He was tackled and stopped by CHRISTIANS who did not allow him to get near to the mosque before the police even arrived.

Metaphor exists all the time, here. I've seen, for example, a tattoo of a working man (lower class) attached to a crucifix. This is not to mock Christ - it is a visual poem of sorts comparing the plight of the poor to repeated and thorough persecution. Crucifixion is a slow, hideous death. Nobody would have interpreted it as attempting to elevate the common man to the status of Jesus, or to mock his sacrifice.

However, there are artworks deliberately designed to do that. The heavy metal band "Deicide" have a painting on one of their records of Jesus Christ being autopsied (implying a final and complete death)

In fact, most Danes who saw the cartoon in the context of the book (referring to Islamic atrocities) would see it not as necessarily the prophet Mohammed but an interpretation of Mohammed.

I believe the intent behind the cartoon is to illustrate a particular concept.

The bigger concern in the Western World is not a diagram of Mohammed with a bomb in his turban. Depending on what happens that will be seen as ironic, political speech or juvenile and pathetic. However, when buildings burn and a Pakistani imam says "here's $1 million to whoever kills the author" it affixes that bomb squarely in the turban more decidedly than a cartoon ever will.

That was not the intent of the cartoon.

I understand your point, and I have agreed with you all along. Either all can be mocked or none can be mocked.

I suggest (though it will be difficult for a non English speaker) to read a book called "A Clockwork Orange". It deals with Western ideas about freedom of action and freedom of will with respect to law, morality and religion in a decisive way.

 

IronGoth
​

​

Read more about the 9/11, it seems it was a deliberate they are looking for an excuse to enter the Arabic and Islamic countries, some are saying the Osama is an agent, working with the US, who knows the truth, Allah knows best
​

Click
​

Click here
​

​

​

Dear friend, I don't accept random accusations and doubts which don't depend on facts or sure information.
​

​

Of course Jesus (pbuh) isn't the only one who was crucified! {Note: I don't believe that he was crucified} the metaphor of the cartoons regarding the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is clear and ugly.
​

​

Ignorance, rather deliberate ignorance is dangerous.
​

​

​

​

Yours Sincerely,
​

Cat Stevens
​

 

Speaking of Leonardo i wanted to fuck him whe he was still young and cute.

 

I ve something to show you:

this was published in a french journal named "le canard enchaîné" which is a famous journal. here in France everybody know this journal.
The picture was published the 18 december of 2005. The drawer is named Cabu, and he is also famous.

It says
" Maybe I'm the new Judas"
" But I dont sell myself for 40 bucks"


In the history of every democracy, all religions has been the aim of caricaturists , may you agree or disagree with it, it is.
It is pretty common here in France to see such "chef d'oeuvre" relating Jesus Christ doing pretty silly things, some of them could be called "not good for its image" and not very politicaly correct
In France freedom of speech and publish exists. i would bet that more than 1000 of such publication are done every year, and well, it is recognizable it is Jesus. Sometimes the name is written on them.


I dont take any position in your debate in which I m a bit lost
Just wanted to clarify some things

Now, here is the picture that was forbidden by french authorities:


I am sure most of French dont even take this as caricatural or aggressive.

At the beginning the picture was used often as a small advertisement thing (9m²) in the streets.
But the company decided to do a advertisement of this picture of 400m² and to put it in an avenue in Neuilly (which is one of the richest and right minded town in France (it is right next to paris), in which Nicolas Sarkozy who is very famous now was elected (he is damn right minded asshole in my humble opinion), in which former dictator in Africa live and are tolerated... anyway) where more than 20.000 drivers drive each day.
I guess a believer responsible of a community must have filed something to the police,
He filed that the ritual of sharing bread and wine is repeated every sunday in Churches and that he felt offended by seing this advertisment attacking his community.
The large advertisement was banned, (certainly because of sectionalism). This is it.

Now yes, I think it shows double something, but is it where we thought it would be?

Did anybody believed a minute in freedom of speech in his life anyway? We all know we are cheated

Peace