Comedy Central Censors South Park After Death Threats From Muslims In US

[Gotch]

I don't believe you are seeing my point about Mohammed being BOTH the founder of the religion and a warlord. It is of paramount importance that he was BOTH. None of these other leaders were BOTH.

Point being that you have a man who lived by violence, who inflicted violence upon countless others who ALSO wrote a religious text and who laid down principles upon paper (or had others do so) that many millions of people live their daily lives in accordance with.

I don't think that it's a secret that my personal belief system is that of a non-conventional Christian. I believe strongly that the teachings of Jesus are the perfect road-map to attempt to live ones life by. But IF Jesus had be a pedophile, IF Jesus had been a killer, If Jesus had been a Warlord, there is no way I would be interested in trying to live my life in accordance to his teachings. In fact I would be repulsed by anything Christian, and would be concerned about anyone who would live their lives in accordance with his teachings. Starting to get the point?

Now real quickly, because you seem to be touching upon the subject again. The difference in the violence of the OT and that of the Koran (I don't like Q's) is that the violence of the OT is told by various writers in the form of a historical narrative. The violence in the Koran is the direct teaching on one man claiming to speak for God, one man who committed numerous acts of violence, one man who is not giving a historical narrative but who is laying down a series of directives to his followers.

The OT violence is sort of like a father telling his sons about the time years ago when he killed many enemies in battle. The violence in the Koran is like a father telling his sons to go kill as many of their enemies as possible. Big difference.

The sharia has pretty much the same goals as the Nazi's. Take power and impose their will, I never said there were not differences in method or desired result. Just that a reasonable comparison could be made. It can, right down to many of the same perceived enemies. Also, you can't compare the end result of the Nazi movement to the start of the sharia movement. You could only compare the beginning phases of each movement, and they are strikingly similar.

[R13]

Why is the Christian God exempt, he's the founder, Jesus was the son of a war-lord...acorrdingly. Islam is no worse than Christianity, go ahead and post terrorist numbers from this month, they're modern day terrorists that happen to be muslim...Christianity showed the world was terrorism looked like long before Islam was even around, deny it all you want, but it's absolutely true. For a religion that's borrowed so much from other stories and fables, it became so violent and twisted it's unreal.


Israel just banned the iPad of all things, a small taste of how controlling, but little known that country is. But no, they and the Chrisitians are the victims. lmao.

[Biggin]

I wont go that far, Islam has some texts in their set of holy documents that do seem to encourage Muslims to murder anyone in their way, cut the hands off the enemy, etc..

But, what is failed to mentioned is that just like in the Old Testament, many verses are open ended, meaning that put into the historical context of the time, seem right.
During the times that the Qu'ran covers, many wars were fought and many Muslims were slaughtered for being Muslims, just like any other religion, so a call to arms in 800 AD may sound violent now, but in context it is perfectly acceptable.

Not all verses are that simple, but as with any religious texts, you must look at the context of the words and the events of the times the words were written.


All religions have terrorists, crazed fundamentalists hell bent on stopping anyone in their way. Right now, its inaccurate to say that Christian fundamentalists are killing near the amount of Muslim terrorists.

I do agree that many of men have been slaughtered in the name of the Christian God, thats fact and inarguable. The first Christians did a lot of the same thing that modern Muslims are doing, if you don't convert you get killed, but that has not happened in many ages on the scale like it happened in the Middle Ages.


I am trying to save this thread, this isnt about Christian terrorists or violence in teh Qu'ran, its about Muslim terrorists intimidating American culture.

[Biggin]

I don't believe you are seeing my point about Mohammed being BOTH the founder of the religion and a warlord. It is of paramount importance that he was BOTH. None of these other leaders were BOTH.

Point being that you have a man who lived by violence, who inflicted violence upon countless others who ALSO wrote a religious text and who laid down principles upon paper (or had others do so) that many millions of people live their daily lives in accordance with.

I don't think that it's a secret that my personal belief system is that of a non-conventional Christian. I believe strongly that the teachings of Jesus are the perfect road-map to attempt to live ones life by. But IF Jesus had be a pedophile, IF Jesus had been a killer, If Jesus had been a Warlord, there is no way I would be interested in trying to live my life in accordance to his teachings. In fact I would be repulsed by anything Christian, and would be concerned about anyone who would live their lives in accordance with his teachings. Starting to get the point?

Now real quickly, because you seem to be touching upon the subject again. The difference in the violence of the OT and that of the Koran (I don't like Q's) is that the violence of the OT is told by various writers in the form of a historical narrative. The violence in the Koran is the direct teaching on one man claiming to speak for God, one man who committed numerous acts of violence, one man who is not giving a historical narrative but who is laying down a series of directives to his followers.

The OT violence is sort of like a father telling his sons about the time years ago when he killed many enemies in battle. The violence in the Koran is like a father telling his sons to go kill as many of their enemies as possible. Big difference.

The sharia has pretty much the same goals as the Nazi's. Take power and impose their will, I never said there were not differences in method or desired result. Just that a reasonable comparison could be made. It can, right down to many of the same perceived enemies. Also, you can't compare the end result of the Nazi movement to the start of the sharia movement. You could only compare the beginning phases of each movement, and they are strikingly similar.

You keep saying that about Mohammed, I do not doubt for one second that he was a violent man. But, when you talk about a religious leader, a God, who slaughters many millions of people sometimes without reason; one who commands their followers to do violent acts or commit terrible atrocities, there is at least one other God who shares the same vindictiveness. Violence was an integral part of the foundation of the world.

I understand that some texts in the Qu'ran sound an awful lot like a call to violence, but when put in historical context, some of them fit perfectly for the time period. Not all, some do seem like a call for Muslims to slaughter any non-believer, but wasn't that the preferred method of the time? In that age, if people did not convert, they deserved to be murdered, correct?

And you believe what you believe, how is it fair to hold everyone to the same standard? Does everyone have to share the same beliefs that you hold? That isn't fair nor does it mean someone else is wrong for choosing to believe in something different.

What about this, that violent people are violent people, and some of these fanatics might have been another kind of fanatic if they were from somewhere else? Granted, that is probably a small portion of the number of terrorists. Also, I know its a radical comparison, but I compare some of the these fundamentalists to bigots in America in the mid 20th century. When something is instilled in you from an early age, at a very high intensity level, even if its wrong, its very hard to change a person.

Fundamentalist Islam is like a cult, a terrible violent cult that incites murder.
But to paint Islam with the brush isn't fair to the Muslims who are not violent.


Heres what I am saying, in a nutshell.
For one, its not fair to blame all Muslims for what the terrorists do. Just like its not fair to blame all white people if a white person kills someone, its not fair to blame all Buddhists if one assassinates a president, etc..

If Islam taught violence and made its followers violent, wouldn't every Muslim be a terrorist? If that was the case, wouldn't a person have to be a violent fanatic to be Muslim?

That's because its not specifically Islam that causes violence. It can be a combination of fundamentalist Muslims and hatred of the West, any number of things, but its not Islam that is the enemy. Fundamentalist Muslims are the enemy, crazed fanatical terrorists.

I was saying the comparison isn't valid because its two different attack systems. Sure there are some similarities, but what I was saying that is the two approached obtaining their goal in different ways.
I agree that both have horrible intentions, and that the main goal of both is to take over the world and impose their will.

[Gotch]

Israel banned the ipad due to what appear to be legitimate concerns about it's interfering with other wireless devices. Which might be fatal in their situation. If you really think that banning the ipad for legit reasons is worse than sanctioned regular beatings of female family members then you are an idiot.

Allah, the God of the OT and and the Jewish God are all one in the same (technically) the difference is Mo the molester.

[Gotch]

And in a nutshell I'm saying that you are going to have a larger % of terrorists coming from an Islamic base due to the teachings of the religion and the influence of the founder. At no time have I blamed all Muslims. That is something you've mistakenly decided on your own that I believe.

[R13]

Israel banned the ipad due to what appear to be legitimate concerns about it's interfering with other wireless devices. Which might be fatal in their situation. If you really think that banning the ipad for legit reasons is worse than sanctioned regular beatings of female family members then you are an idiot.

Allah, the God of the OT and and the Jewish God are all one in the same (technically) the difference is Mo the molester.

Bull, it conforms to the European standards approved in Israel and uses the same wifi that other Apple computers already use in Israel...most wireless networks in Israel are private anyway, assuming by some tiny chance if the standard is different. Because the ministry said that, doesn't mean it's true. They're how many centuries behind Christianity? Subtract that number and in that time, how were females treated in Christianity?

[Gotch]

Here is the difference. Mohammad condoned the beating of women, the rape of children, the torture of any perceived enemy. Not only is it in black and white within the pages he wrote or dictated, but he did all of these things himself.

Compare that to the teachings of Jesus and to the example that he gave us through the way he lived his life.

Any comparison between modern Muslims and 15th century (or any century) Christians cannot be made without putting it into the context of the time period. In fact the cruel and brutal actions improperly done in the name of the Christian God pale in comparison to the actions of others in that same time period. this does not excuse their actions, but it is worth noting that they weren't the only or even the worst offenders of any time period.

You want to compare the religions according to their respective ages. In fact the only real way to compare them is in relation to the world norms within the time frame they are doing whatever act they are doing.

[R13]

Federal authorities in Virginia have arrested the man who allegedly wrote online posts threatening the creators of South Park after the show ran an episode that included the Prophet Muhammad. The Justice Department announced the arrest of 20-year-old Zachary Chesser Wednesday, saying authorities had stopped him at a New York airport on July 10 before he made a planned trip to Somalia to allegedly try to join an Islamic militant group.

The Justice Department said in a press release that Chesser admitted to using ?several online profiles dedicated to extremist jihad propaganda.? One of those profiles was Abu Talha al-Amrikee, the poster who threatened South Park creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone in April after an episode that made fun of religious figures, including Muhammad, says a law-enforcement official who spoke on condition of anonymity. The posts, made on RevolutionMuslim.com, encouraged readers to ?pay Comedy Central a visit,? listed addresses of the television network?s New York offices, and said Parker and Stone ?will probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show.? Van Gogh was a Dutch filmmaker killed by an Islamic militant in 2004 after he produced a controversial film that criticized Islam for demeaning women.

When authorities arrested Chesser at the airport, he had his infant son in tow, allegedly in an effort to stay under the radar. He was reportedly planning to travel from New York to Uganda and then to Somalia, where he would join Al-Shabab, the militant group with ties to Al Qaeda that has claimed responsibility for a pair of coordinated bombings in the Ugandan capital during the World Cup final that killed scores of people. Those bombings occurred on July 11, one day after Chesser was prevented from boarding the plane.

?This case exposes the disturbing reality that extreme radicalization can happen anywhere, including Northern Virginia,? said U.S. Attorney Neil H. MacBride in a press release. ?This young man is accused of seeking to join Al-Shabab, a brutal terrorist organization with ties to Al Qaeda. These allegations underscore the need for continued vigilance against homegrown terror threats.?

Declassified first reported Chesser?s ties to the South Park threats in April, when New York police were stepping up security at Comedy Central?s headquarters, fearing that the online posts might incite violence. Chesser?s alleged posts also include ?an article detailing the prerequisites involved in leaving for jihad, which closely follows the steps Chesser took? before trying to join Al-Shabab and fight in Somalia, according to the Justice Department.


Feds Arrest Man Behind 'South Park' Threats - Newsweek

[Gotch]

Why Won’t the FBI Stand Up to Islamic Extremism? - Abigail R. Esman - Pen & Sword - Forbes


Why Won’t the FBI Stand Up to Islamic Extremism?
This time, I’ve had it.

While “outrage” has been pretty much the key word this summer, my own reached its upper limits with the news that cartoonist Molly Norris had been forced into hiding by a fatwa threatening her life for an idea: to establish “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day,” on which the world would sketch images of the Prophet Mohammed in defiance of efforts by Muslims to censor such images, and, in some cases, to murder those who created them. Norris’s suggestion came in response to a decision by executives at Comedy Central to censor the satirical show, “South Park,” which aired an episode that joked about showing Mohammed dressed in a bear suit.

Funny, right?

Well, not to religious Muslims, who, unable to distinguish fact from fiction or truth from allegory, view parodies of their holiest figure as an assault on Islam itself. We’ve encountered that kind of ignorant hate before, of course – most famously in the case of the so-called “Danish cartoons,” created by cartoonist Kurt Westergaard for Denmark’s news daily, the Jyllands Posten. In that case, not only was Westergaard targeted for assassination, but Danish and other Scandinavian embassies across the Middle East were torched, and violent demonstrations left numerous people dead.

But Norris didn’t even draw a cartoon of the Prophet. Rather, she sketched a number of commonplace objects – -a teacup, a spool of thread, a domino – with the caption, “Will the real likeness of the prophet Mohammed please stand up?”

Funny, right?

Apparently not – at least, not to some people, whose idea of “funny” is what happens when American civilians die. (Cut to images of Palestinians and of Moroccan immigrants in the Netherlands dancing in the streets on 9/11.)

The Yemen-based cleric Anwar al-Awlaki is one Muslim unamused by Norris’s idea. Writing in the English language magazine Inspire, an online publication produced by al Qaeda, he declared: “A soul that is so debased, as to enjoy the ridicule of the messenger of Allah, the mercy to mankind; a soul that is so ungrateful toward its lord that it defames the Prophet of the religion Allah has chosen for his creation does not deserve life, does not deserve to breathe the air.”

Not funny.

Apparently, the FBI doesn’t think so, either; and here is where my outrage boiled over. Cautioning Norris to take al-Awlaki’s threat seriously, they have now advised her to change her identity, move far from her home in Seattle (where she, until now, worked for the Seattle Weekly), and start over – essentially entering into a witness protection program – only without the accompanying protection.

Let me repeat: The U.S. government is suggesting that Ms. Norris change her name, strip away her past, possibly even change her appearance, because she has been targeted by Muslim extremists who are not amused by her work or her ideas. Rather than protect her, rather than defend her, rather than stand up for her Constitutional and democratic rights, declaring their intention to route al-Awlaki out and bring him (and others who are threatening her life) to justice, the American government, as it were, is itself in essence allying with him by taking away her freedom and her life .

And here’s the kicker: it’s likely not that hard to find Al-Awlaki – who has been linked to the Fort Hood massacre, the so-called “Christmas bomber,” and the attempted bombing of Times Square. Anwar Al-Awlaki, born in Las Cruces, New-Mexico, is a citizen of the United States.

And yet, unlike the British, who for years protected and defended Salman Rushdie from the edicts of Ayatollah Khomeini and others, the USA has thrown up its hands, leaving her to her own devices, the victim of the same sick Islamic ideology that permits women to be stoned to death for the crime of having loved.

And so it becomes clear: If we are not involved in a physical war against Islam, we certainly are engaged in an ideological one. And as a woman with a secular, democratic ideal runs, now, for her life, the knights in armor assigned to save her stand aside.

This is how we protect our values? This is what has become, now, of America? That even the suggestion “Draw Mohammed” can cost a woman’s life and the Federal Bureau of Investigation will do nothing? That even the voicing of a threat has America putting down its arms?

We have spent untold billions of dollars in Afghanistan and Iraq at the cost of more than 5,000 US lives.

And all the Islamic militants had to do to conquer us was speak.

Such is the power of the word: and America now sits silenced, silent, dumb.