NationStates Jolt Archive

http://hiphoprepublican.blogspot.com/2006/02/pictures-from-nyc-danish-protest.html

http://labaf.blogspot.com/2006/02/la-baf-crash-la-manif-des-islamistes.html#baf-islamistes-english

Can someone explain to me again why this is considered the religion of peace when all I see is hatred and violence from the Muslims?

Do we really need another thread on this?

Canada City']
Can someone explain to me again why this is considered the religion of peace when all I see is hatred and violence from the Muslims?

Because you have a prejudiced view of Muslims and only open your eyes to the violent actions of a minority whilst ignoring the 99% who are peaceful?

Because you have a prejudiced view of Muslims and only open your eyes to the violent actions of a minority whilst ignoring the 99% who are peaceful?

Let's see...

UK, asking for 9/11

NYC, 'fuck freedom of speech'

Canada, small protest but same message as NYC

Why aren't I seeing these so called "peaceful muslims" going AGAINST these 'extremists'. Where is the Protest Warrior's version for the Muslims? Why are they pissed off over a cartoon, but yawn at the suicide bombings that BLOW up the Quran's in the middle east?

Explain.

Canada City']Let's see...

UK, asking for 9/11

NYC, 'fuck freedom of speech'

Canada, small protest but same message as NYC

Why aren't I seeing these so called "peaceful muslims" going AGAINST these 'extremists'. Where is the Protest Warrior's version for the Muslims? Why are they pissed off over a cartoon, but yawn at the suicide bombings that BLOW up the Quran's in the middle east?

Explain.

Ok you have accounted for 50000. Oh heck I will give you 250000.

Now how many Muslims are there?

Canada City']Explain.

You deserve no explanation, troll.

You deserve no explanation, troll.

Why not? All I'm getting is insults when I show you facts, images, and even videos. Have you watched the video? TWO guys holding a small sign on their chest saying "freedom of speech", and all of a sudden a bunch of muslims start doing shit.

If the Muslims truly care about their image of "being peaceful", they better start doing something about it. I saw a thread here saying "Do you want a war with Islam?" No, I never did. They started the war with us.

Do you think the endless tide of Islam-bashing threads could be classed as copy-cat threads? If they could then we could put a stop to this endless trolling.

Canada City']Let's see...

UK, asking for 9/11

NYC, 'fuck freedom of speech'

Canada, small protest but same message as NYC

Why aren't I seeing these so called "peaceful muslims" going AGAINST these 'extremists'. Where is the Protest Warrior's version for the Muslims? Why are they pissed off over a cartoon, but yawn at the suicide bombings that BLOW up the Quran's in the middle east?

Explain.

For a start, they are condemned by moderates if you'd bother to pay attention to what they say, it just doesn't recieve much media attention. See the "40% UK muslims want Shia law" thread - 99% of muslims who were polled said the london bombers were wrong.

Secondly, why should they go to some massive effort to prove to others that they hate the extremists? Just because they are of the same religion doesn't give them an obligation to apologise for those who take it to the extreme.

I don't see many protestant parades against the abortion clinic bombings, or catholic parades against the IRA's actions, do you?

Canada City']Why not? All I'm getting is insults when I show you facts, images, and even videos. Have you watched the video? TWO guys holding a small sign on their chest saying "freedom of speech", and all of a sudden a bunch of muslims start doing shit.


You do know the paper that started this mess wasn't defending Freedom of the Speech/Press; right?

They did censor cartoons about Christ.....

You do know the paper that started this mess wasn't defending Freedom of the Speech/Press; right?

They did censor cartoons about Christ.....

Do you have a link?

Canada City']Let's see...

UK, asking for 9/11

NYC, 'fuck freedom of speech'

Canada, small protest but same message as NYC
They're still a minority of Muslims. You only notice them because they are the loudest.

Canada City']Why aren't I seeing these so called "peaceful muslims" going AGAINST these 'extremists'. Where is the Protest Warrior's version for the Muslims? Why are they pissed off over a cartoon, but yawn at the suicide bombings that BLOW up the Quran's in the middle east?

There are Muslim groups openly opposing the extremists. The Muslim Council of Britain is especially active in this area. They just get less media coverage because they aren't as dramatic as the extremists.

Here in Ireland recently there was a peaceful protestby Muslims against the cartoons. There was not even a single threatening sign. The most dramatic event was the one minutes' silence, which was supposed to send a message of disapproval of the cartoon.

yes yes I like it-I think some one should give them alot of media coverage...anyone have an idea?

yes yes I like it-I think some one should give them alot of media coverage...anyone have an idea?

Yeah, I got an idea.

ROAD TRIP!!!!!

Do we really need another thread on this?


Oh come on it's only the 100th thread about this, we normally start getting tired of it after 107

You don't hear about Muslims protesting against the extremists because it's not in anyone's interest to show it. Politically, the extremists are very good for some Western countries, especially the US. The media can have a field day with it. It's win-win, as long as the moderate Muslims protesting against it aren't given air time.

Okay so here is a question. Why don't more moderate Muslims pool their cash together (because many of them are extremely affluent) and create newspapers and networks to propagate their cause? Why constantly complain that they get no media coverage when it is within their reach? As for that poll on Sharia law, it is concerning, but it means little at this point in time.

Or better yet, start using BLOGs.

You know how that stuff spreads like wildfire mixed with oil when you post something that isn't shown at the media coverage.

So I challenge anyone who supports muslims and say they are peaceful by doing this. You see a peaceful protest, video tape it and post it on several sites. You aren't winning the battle by doing nothing.

Canada City']Or better yet, start using BLOGs.

You know how that stuff spreads like wildfire mixed with oil when you post something that isn't shown at the media coverage.

So I challenge anyone who supports muslims and say they are peaceful by doing this. You see a peaceful protest, video tape it and post it on several sites. You aren't winning the battle by doing nothing.
Exactly. They have the means to ensure themselves increased coverage. Simply sitting back and complaining about a lack of press coverage is going to get you nowhere.

ban all religion is really that simple. it starts to many wars and to many lives have been lost
if there was a god it would have dome something by now

like tought me how to spell

Canada City']Or better yet, start using BLOGs.

You know how that stuff spreads like wildfire mixed with oil when you post something that isn't shown at the media coverage.

So I challenge anyone who supports muslims and say they are peaceful by doing this. You see a peaceful protest, video tape it and post it on several sites. You aren't winning the battle by doing nothing.

Here you go: link (http://www.sorrynorwaydenmark.com/)

Now stop complaining.

ban all religion is really that simple. it starts to many wars and to many lives have been lost
if there was a god it would have dome something by now

And how do you intend to do that? Bear in mind that Atheists are a minority and we are outnumbered by both Christians and Muslims...

Here you go: link (http://www.sorrynorwaydenmark.com/)

Now stop complaining.
What they need to do is create a network the equivalent of Al-Jazeera and start broadcasting it in the West. It should be neutral and be there to debate Islam's aspects and also to urge against extremism. That would be a positive action.

What they need to do is create a network the equivalent of Al-Jazeera and start broadcasting it in the West. It should be neutral and be there to debate Islam's aspects and also to urge against extremism. That would be a positive action.
Al-Jazeera is more neutral and professional than you think. I'm searching still, and if I find a better link, I post.

http://www.allied-media.com/aljazeera/Wall%20street%20journal%20article%20about%20al%20jazeera.htm

What they need to do is create a network the equivalent of Al-Jazeera and start broadcasting it in the West. It should be neutral and be there to debate Islam's aspects and also to urge against extremism. That would be a positive action.

Friend, I've just shown you an example of Muslims using the internet to publically condemn violence. I was challenged to find an example of Muslims spreading a message of non-violence, what more do you want?

Al-Jazeera is more neutral and professional than you think. I'm searching still, and if I find a better link, I post.

http://www.allied-media.com/aljazeera/Wall%20street%20journal%20article%20about%20al%20jazeera.htm
Yet who in the West honestly watches it? What I would envision is a network particularly targetted towards the West and clarifying issues of Islam, rather than being just a news network.

Canada City']Can someone explain to me again why this is considered the religion of peace when all I see is hatred and violence from the Muslims?
You're looking in the wrong places.

Friend, I've just shown you an example of Muslims using the internet to publically condemn violence. I was challenged to find an example of Muslims spreading a message of non-violence, what more do you want?
Something a bit more substantive? A bit more widespread?

Here's a bunch of Muslims at a picnic.

http://www.utulsa.edu/iss/2004_muslim_picnic.htm

zOMG! TeH EvIL!!!11!!!

Yes, yes. We can all show images of something Muslims do. Now go home and ask for your testicles back, mmay? Mmkay!

Yet who in the West honestly watches it? What I would envision is a network particularly targetted towards the West and clarifying issues of Islam, rather than being just a news network.
Apparently, more people in the West watch in than in the Middle East. However, I don't know anyone who has. A network of that sort would be great, and is needed. Better than those evangelical programs I get back home. Makes me sick.

Here's a bunch of Muslims at a picnic.

http://www.utulsa.edu/iss/2004_muslim_picnic.htm

zOMG! TeH EvIL!!!11!!!

Yes, yes. We can all show images of something Muslims do. Now go home and ask for your testicles back, mmay? Mmkay!
Okay I in no way mean to equiparate the Muslims to the Nazis, but you can also find pictures of Nazis having picnics and acting all human.

Apparently, more people in the West watch in than in the Middle East. However, I don't know anyone who has. A network of that sort would be great, and is needed. Better than those evangelical programs I get back home. Makes me sick.
Precisely. Preferrably this network would be open to all religions, yet I say Islamic because it is the religion under the most heat now, and also the one with the most outspoken radicals. The fact that less people watch Al-Jazeera in the ME than in the West is troublesome, yet there is only so much you can do. You can't force them to watch TV I guess.

Canada City']Why aren't I seeing these so called "peaceful muslims" going AGAINST these 'extremists'. Where is the Protest Warrior's version for the Muslims? Why are they pissed off over a cartoon, but yawn at the suicide bombings that BLOW up the Quran's in the middle east?

Explain.

Do you protest when some nutso Christian fundamentalists blow up an abortion clinic or murder some gays? Or do you go on with your life because it's really not your responsibility?

Something a bit more substantive? A bit more widespread?

Why should I try and find evidence for you? You are clearly never going to change your bigotted opinions and every time I post a link you'll just ask for more.

Why not search the BBC for the 'Muslim Council of Britain'? You'll find they condemned the violence and threats of violence and called for violent protesters to be prosecuted. Is that enough for you?

Canada City'] I saw a thread here saying "Do you want a war
with Islam?" No, I never did. They started the war with us.

oh you gotta be shittin' me.

America started that war with imperialism and neo-colonial policies regarding the rest of the world.

Osama bin Laden oppossed the first Gulf War because he believed that once the United States got into Saudi Arabia, they would never leave. And guess what, he was right.

They want to be left alone, they want us to not project the American way of life across the world as the best way to live.

Their theocratic dictatorships are wrong as well, but what these countries need is a revolutionary movement for justice from below, not American troops and not suicide bombings.

Why should I try and find evidence for you? You are clearly never going to change your bigotted opinions and every time I post a link [you'll just ask for more.
My bigotted opinions? Umm, all I said is that a lot more could be done to voice the concerns of moderates. A simple internet blog is not enough.

Why not search the BBC for the 'Muslim Council of Britain'? You'll find they condemned the violence and threats of violence and called for violent protesters to be prosecuted. Is that enough for you?
The BBC is far too expansive. It includes a multitude of issues, so little airtime is truly given to each. It's a huge news network.

Something a bit more substantive? A bit more widespread?

http://www.freemuslims.org/
http://www.islamfortoday.com/terrorism.htm
http://www.m-a-t.org/
http://www.rayhawk.com/classics/matusa/home.html
http://www.awesomelibrary.org/Muslims.html
http://www.muhajabah.com/otherscondemn.php
http://islam.about.com/cs/currentevents/a/suicide_bomb.htm

2005 rally against terrorism (http://voanews.com/english/archive/2005-05/2005-05-13-voa38.cfm?CFID=31261609&CFTOKEN=77158537)

Happy?

Precisely. Preferrably this network would be open to all religions, yet I say Islamic because it is the religion under the most heat now, and also the one with the most outspoken radicals. The fact that less people watch Al-Jazeera in the ME than in the West is troublesome, yet there is only so much you can do. You can't force them to watch TV I guess.
My guess its more of an economic problem than one of choice.

Anyhow, for more, NEWSWEEK has a good article in their latest issure. Check it out in a library, doctors office, or a friends coffee table. Until then, this link elludes to it, but its not that great:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43069-2005Jan27.html

I'd like to see more programs on Hinduism. After seeing some thoughts on Christianity on this forum, its not as well understood as people think either. You wanna be co-CEO? ;)

Okay I in no way mean to equiparate the Muslims to the Nazis, but you can also find pictures of Nazis having picnics and acting all human.Together with non-Nazis?

Together with non-Nazis?
Yes. Of course not Communists or anyone who outright opposed their party, but other Germans.

Unfortunately, there are two types of Islam in the world. There is the "true Islam" of the Muslim world, and there is the secular Islam of the West. Musc like western christianity is largely secularized to fit the society we live in, so is western Islam, and so many western Muslims are peaceful, good members of society. But the MidEast version of Islam is growing more radical and violent every day. Entire cities in the Arab world stopped everything on 9/11 to celebrate the death of 3000+ Americans. An overwhelming majority of Muslims in the MidEast would like to see Israel driven into the sea. They burn down their own cities over cvartoons and call for the death of the artist of the cartoon by putting a bounty on his head. This is not a religion of peace, no matter what anybody says. Until they prove that they can coexist with the rest of the sane world, they will be radical, religious fundamentalists who want nothing more than to impose their horrid ideology on us all. Call me racist, bigoted, whatever you want, but those are the facts. DEAL WITH THEM!

http://www.freemuslims.org/
http://www.islamfortoday.com/terrorism.htm
http://www.m-a-t.org/
http://www.rayhawk.com/classics/matusa/home.html
http://www.awesomelibrary.org/Muslims.html
http://www.muhajabah.com/otherscondemn.php
http://islam.about.com/cs/currentevents/a/suicide_bomb.htm

2005 rally against terrorism (http://voanews.com/english/archive/2005-05/2005-05-13-voa38.cfm?CFID=31261609&CFTOKEN=77158537)

Happy?
Now. Answer this question. How many people do these articles reach? When I mean substantive I mean in the form of television networks. Articles are so abundant on the internet they can easily elude your attention. News networks tend to be more captivating. The problem with most efforts so far is that they are not widespread enough.

My guess its more of an economic problem than one of choice.

Anyhow, for more, NEWSWEEK has a good article in their latest issure. Check it out in a library, doctors office, or a friends coffee table. Until then, this link elludes to it, but its not that great:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43069-2005Jan27.html

I'd like to see more programs on Hinduism. After seeing some thoughts on Christianity on this forum, its not as well understood as people think either. You wanna be co-CEO? ;)
So long as I get the Rolls-Royce :p

Canada City']Why aren't I seeing these so called "peaceful muslims" going AGAINST these 'extremists'. Where is the Protest Warrior's version for the Muslims? Why are they pissed off over a cartoon, but yawn at the suicide bombings that BLOW up the Quran's in the middle east?

Explain.Very well:
You are looking in the wrong places.
I have seen footage muslim clerics try to stop the people throwing rocks at the Danish embassy in Lebanon.
I saw the protests against the bombings in London and Madrid.
If you didn't see it, you didn't look. Don't blame anybody else for your inability to turn on the right channels, read the right papers, or click on the right link.

Now. Answer this question. How many people do these articles reach? When I mean substantive I mean in the form of television networks. Articles are so abundant on the internet they can easily elude your attention. News networks tend to be more captivating.Because they report about violence. A bunch of peaceful muslims protesting against suicide bombers isn't going to get the ratings the charred remains of a car bomb will.
It's all about the money.

Now. Answer this question. How many people do these articles reach? When I mean substantive I mean in the form of television networks. Articles are so abundant on the internet they can easily elude your attention. News networks tend to be more captivating. The problem with most efforts so far is that they are not widespread enough.
Well, for the Middle East, I know that a majority families are too busy making ends meet to purchase newspaper subscriptions or a TV. As far as the West, on the whole, there is no excuse.

Now. Answer this question. How many people do these articles reach? When I mean substantive I mean in the form of television networks. Articles are so abundant on the internet they can easily elude your attention. News networks tend to be more captivating.

Fine ... clearly it isn't enough. You want more.

http://www.islamfortoday.com/60minutes.htm
(60 Minutes reaches a lot of people)
http://www.islamdenouncesterrorism.com/p_the_pacifism_of_islam.html
http://www.uua.org/news/91101/mottomohagan.html
(So does the Washington Post)
http://bmcs.gotadsl.co.uk/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3
(There's even a book or two)
http://bedouina.typepad.com/doves_eye/2005/12/a_few_muslim_de.html
(Some good links in this Blog)
http://www.mindanews.com/others/voices/0405palestine.html
(They even denounce in Pakistan!)
http://www.islam-democracy.org/terrorism_statement.asp
(This reached millions. Just not you, apparently)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A57167-2001Sep19
(Washington Post again)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1453655/posts
(Even here in Bush country)

Now when is it going to be enough?

I have 500 more links to sites and will gladly post every single one of them.

When will you get it through your head that the great vast majority of Muslims *DO* condemn the acts of the terrorists and terrorism in general it's just that the peaceful ones aren't newsworthy.

What more do you want from us?

Because they report about violence. A bunch of peaceful muslims protesting against suicide bombers isn't going to get the ratings the charred remains of a car bomb will.
It's all about the money.
I won't disagree there, yet they do have an advantage; they are audiovisual. Internet articles tend to be restricted to being written. So if a news network were to present less "flashy" events in an interesting way, it may actually capture attention. Or, it could display the "flashy" events and then offer some insight into them and condemnation of them.

As for money, some Muslims are extravagantly wealthy (like the owner of Harrod's). They could fund such a network.

Entire cities in the Arab world stopped everything on 9/11 to celebrate the death of 3000+ Americans.

That is an absolute bald-faced lie.

What more do you want from us?

Now condemn terrorism while standing on your head, balancing a beachball on your nose and whistling Bohemian Rhapsody in B-flat.:p

*watches with interest*

When will you get it through your head that the great vast majority of Muslims *DO* condemn the acts of the terrorists and terrorism in general it's just that the peaceful ones aren't newsworthy.

What more do you want from us?
No, I get that. What I meant was that nothing so far has managed to reach the vast majority of the West.

Well, for the Middle East, I know that a majority families are too busy making ends meet to purchase newspaper subscriptions or a TV. As far as the West, on the whole, there is no excuse.
They could circulate newspapers in the Middle East too. Of course, that would depend on whether or not a theocratic government would allow this.

I won't disagree there, yet they do have an advantage; they are audiovisual. Internet articles tend to be restricted to being written. So if a news network were to present less "flashy" events in an interesting way, it may actually capture attention. Or, it could display the "flashy" events and then offer some insight into them and condemnation of them.

As for money, some Muslims are extravagantly wealthy (like the owner of Harrod's). They could fund such a network.

Would you really trust any station funded by Fayed to give you the facts? He still thinks that the Royal Family and MI6 were in a conspiracy to kill Diana in a car crash.:rolleyes:

Would you really trust any station funded by Fayed to give you the facts? He still thinks that the Royal Family and MI6 were in a conspiracy to kill Diana in a car crash.:rolleyes:
He was an example.

What I meant was that nothing so far has managed to reach the vast majority of the West.

It has. People only see what they want to see.

I won't disagree there, yet they do have an advantage; they are audiovisual. Internet articles tend to be restricted to being written. So if a news network were to present less "flashy" events in an interesting way, it may actually capture attention. Or, it could display the "flashy" events and then offer some insight into them and condemnation of them. People watch audio-visual networks because of the captivating violence. It's interesting, that's why they watch it. They don't watch the networks that don't show it because they aren't interesting and then complain about not seeing the things they wouldn't find interesting if they knew how often they happened.
As for money, some Muslims are extravagantly wealthy (like the owner of Harrod's). They could fund such a network.But who would watch it?

No, I get that. What I meant was that nothing so far has managed to reach the vast majority of the West.

Why does it need to reach the West?

People watch audio-visual networks because of the captivating violence. It's interesting, that's why they watch it. They don't watch the networks that don't show it because they aren't interesting and then complain about not seeing the things they wouldn't find interesting if they knew how often they happened.
Meaning they have even less incentive to read an internet article. Usually those who read such articles or watch TV programmes of an informative nature tend to be intellectuals. Which is why I said the said network could manipulate violent images so as to attract viewers, then discuss them. In the end it's all about presentation.

But who would watch it?
Good question. That would depend on how good its presentation and publicity was.

Why does it need to reach the West?
Because there is so much fear of Islam here. It has to reach both East and West.

They could circulate newspapers in the Middle East too.
Free of charge? This is a concept I've never heard of! :eek:

About the government, my bet is that they are more concered in whats in the paper, than if it exists or not.

Free of charge? This is a concept I've never heard of! :eek:

If they make enough profits in the West, they could do this. Yes. I would think they would opt for a low price though.

About the government, my bet is that they are more concered in whats in the paper, than if it exists or not.
Exactly. For that very reason they may ban it.

Meaning they have even less incentive to read an internet article. Usually those who read such articles or watch TV programmes of an informative nature tend to be intellectuals. Which is why I said the said network could manipulate violent images so as to attract viewers, then discuss them. In the end it's all about presentation.


Good question. That would depend on how good its presentation and publicity was.Exactly. Why would a network spend money on such a project when they can easily just put up images of what is interesting and add braindead comments from a figurehead anchor?

Setting up such a project to get ahead of the competition would probably not attract the audience necessary to make it worthwhile. A company would be investing many more resources in order to get a product up to the level of competition instead of spending less for something that easily competes.

In Germany, the most popular daily newspaper remains BILD, which pitches its contents so low I'd need a shovel. It best compares to children's books: Large pictures, big letters, little text. It's incredibly easy to produce something that people want to see.

It's going to be really hard and expensive to find something that can compete with large pictures, little text, and pre-chewed opinions dressed up as articles.

Exactly. Why would a network spend money on such a project when they can easily just put up images of what is interesting and add braindead comments from a figurehead anchor?

Setting up such a project to get ahead of the competition would probably not attract the audience necessary to make it worthwhile. A company would be investing many more resources in order to get a product up to the level of competition instead of spending less for something that easily competes.

In Germany, the most popular daily newspaper remains BILD, which pitches its contents so low I'd need a shovel. It best compares to children's books: Large pictures, big letters, little text. It's incredibly easy to produce something that people want to see.

It's going to be really hard and expensive to find something that can compete with large pictures, little text, and pre-chewed opinions dressed up as articles.
mmmmmmmmmmmm..... pre-chewed opinions........

I still don't see why they have an obligation to reassure the west that not all of them support terrorists. Besides, most people know that already, and those that don't aren't going to listen to an Islamic based news channel are they?

In fact, it might even worsen the position. "OMG! Islamic propaganda - trying to convince us they're overall peaceful because deep down they are all violent! It's like what the Nazis did!" etc etc.

Exactly. Why would a network spend money on such a project when they can easily just put up images of what is interesting and add braindead comments from a figurehead anchor?

Setting up such a project to get ahead of the competition would probably not attract the audience necessary to make it worthwhile. A company would be investing many more resources in order to get a product up to the level of competition instead of spending less for something that easily competes.
Indeed. It would take extremely good marketting techniques.

In Germany, the most popular daily newspaper remains BILD, which pitches its contents so low I'd need a shovel. It best compares to children's books: Large pictures, big letters, little text. It's incredibly easy to produce something that people want to see.

It's going to be really hard and expensive to find something that can compete with large pictures, little text, and pre-chewed opinions dressed up as articles.
That is due to the level of intelligence that most people possess. Sometimes, dumbing it down is a must. Not many people read The Economist sadly. Many read The Sun, on the other hand. The Sun is about on the same level as Bild.

I still don't see why they have an obligation to reassure the west that not all of them support terrorists. Besides, most people know that already, and those that don't aren't going to listen to an Islamic based news channel are they?

In fact, it might even worsen the position. "OMG! Islamic propaganda - trying to convince us they're overall peaceful because deep down they are all violent! It's like what the Nazis did!" etc etc.
It would be both for West and Middle East. Perhaps it would be best targetted solely at the Middle East, in the form of newspapers, provided they aren't banned from circulating. Someone has to instigate a renaissance in the Middle East.

mmmmmmmmmmmm..... pre-chewed opinions........
"People talking without speaking...."

Do you have a link?

Originally, I heard the claim from the radio.

I did find this on the Net:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/cartoonprotests/story/0,,1703552,00.html

One thing I don't get is when interviewers ask Muslims "Well Kanye West posed as Jesus Christ for the Rolling Stones and that rubbed many christians the wrong way but you don't see them in such a voilent manner to get the photo off the shelves", I always laugh to that bullshit they always throw at the Muslims. First of all, Kanye West is not Muslim okay, it's not like he's making fun of another religion, cause Kanye West is Christian, maybe they were pissed off because he is black (so maybe that should be a race issue instead of a religous one). The drawer of the controversial photos was not a Muslim, that's one problem, second, the drawer has hijacked and manupilated freedom of speech to suit his own sick and twisted interest (maybe to get attention, maybe to stirr such hatred, maybe to destroy the bridge between Islam and the West, or maybe due arrogance and lack of knowledge of Islam).

Originally, I heard the claim from the radio.

I did find this on the Net:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/cartoonprotests/story/0,,1703552,00.html

Interesting, thanks.

I wish I could persuade my parents to buy the Guardian instead of the Times...:(