sda2.jpg

February 10, 2008

Silence Wikipedia!

WE KEEL YOU!

Islam is a religion of peace and brotherhood. But this doesnot mean that we will forgive every thing and be peacefull. If anyone try to make joke of our beloved Prophet (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) he will not be forgiven and will get the punishement by Allah (Azzawajal) in the life and after death InshAllah. So dont try to hurt feelings of Muslims . . . . .

Posted by Kate at February 10, 2008 4:44 PM
Comments

The concept that they can't dictate to the rest of the world just seems foreign. What part of "we don't give a crap about your feelings" do they have such a difficult time understanding ?

Posted by: Fred at February 10, 2008 6:15 PM

To paraphrase Jack Nicholson: "They can't handle the truth!" Religion of peace, my a**.

Posted by: Soccermom at February 10, 2008 6:25 PM

You cry a lot about how you don't like your feelings hurt. But you appear to not be at all concerned that you might be the cause of hurting the feelings of someone else.

Christians recognize that the only way for peace is through forgiveness. Intimidation does not bring peace. Intimidation brings resentment

Posted by: Russ at February 10, 2008 6:53 PM

And this one: "Remove pictures now! Islam is religion of peace and doesn’t not deserve this disrespect! You will all be slaughtered by the bloody wrath of allah!"

Nuff said.

Posted by: Sounder at February 10, 2008 6:55 PM

Muslims need to learn that Democratic Countries allow for opinions and pictures that are Un-Islamic. We will not accept "Reasonable Accomadation" of Wahhabi Islam because we are not nor will we ever be an Islamic Nation. Islam isn't part of Canadian Culture, we were founded on Jeudaeo/Christian culture and beliefs. We've evolved, Islam hasn't. Can it, I really don't think so.

Posted by: Rose at February 10, 2008 7:03 PM

I got an idea If you came to Canada and don't like how we do things go back.

I would not go to live in Saudi Arabia.

If you were born here and do not like how we do things, go live where you are of the majority. Hope your wife and daughter likes it there too.

Posted by: jeff k at February 10, 2008 7:26 PM

Didn't the Canada Council fund some whack-job to make an art piece with Jesus on a crucifix in a bottle of urine ??

The Council should share their stupidity by promoting artists to equally "satirize" the Big Mo.

Must share after all, it is the multi-culti thing to do.

Posted by: Fred at February 10, 2008 7:28 PM

Funny I have books that show images of the Prophet drawn by devout Turkish Muslims dating from the 15th century, I guess they would punished also?

Posted by: Colin at February 10, 2008 7:38 PM

And what is it with the media always calling him the "Prophet Muhammad" as if they accept him as a prophet. Can't recall ever hearing them refer to "Jesus Christ, the Messiah".

Posted by: SC at February 10, 2008 7:53 PM

I'm no scholar on Islam but I believe Muslims are forbidden from publishing images of Mohammad.

What we do is none of their business, especially in a tolerant multicultural society.

Posted by: Jon at February 10, 2008 7:54 PM

That's another very helpful contribution to the world, Kate. Thanks so much.

Posted by: John Daly at February 10, 2008 8:27 PM

I don't think playing up the miniscule minority voice of fundamental islamists does any good to anyone except them - even if it is shocking and gets page views.

Positive action is a real alternative from raising the level of vitriol and ridicule.

Instead of making ourselves feel morally superior (though it hardly seems so from the comments here). one might counteracting negative stories like this with positive ones about Islam. No wonder it seems as if islam is being demonized if that's all that makes it past the criteria of news stories and blog and gets ad revenue.

thanks for the link. on a personal note, i admire the islam architecture, and lack of icons/idols in their art.

peace

Posted by: anonymous at February 10, 2008 8:40 PM

"one might counteracting negative stories like this with positive ones about Islam."

Good idea. Start a blog and do that. Or is it easier to run your mouth to parade your own sense of moral superiority?

Posted by: dean spencer - fox at February 10, 2008 8:53 PM

That is a good one anonymous. Got any positive stories? Sorry but it is solely Muslims who are responsible for the reputation Islam has. Only they can change the image.

Posted by: Alain at February 10, 2008 8:57 PM

Looks like that chick has had her share of chocalate cake.

Lets all hate fat people now!

Posted by: morningstar at February 10, 2008 9:22 PM

Alain: that's unbelievable brilliant. And Christians are solely responsible for the reputation Christianity has. More brilliance, eh? And Kate and me and you and George Bush...

The dissenting voices here will (hopefully) continue to do just that (dissent), and let's see if Kate and her merry band of Muslim bashers can deal with it. What Kate and y'all good old white Prairie boys and girls call information we call bigotry. And we're right.

Posted by: john daly at February 10, 2008 9:27 PM

If calling a spade a spade is bigotry then you can sign me up too:}

Posted by: orvict at February 10, 2008 9:31 PM

And what is it with the media always calling him the "Prophet Muhammad" as if they accept him as a prophet. Can't recall ever hearing them refer to "Jesus Christ, the Messiah".
Posted by: SC at February 10, 2008 7:53 PM

Yeah, I find that jarring too! In fact, I believe I've even seen western writers put the PBOH after it, which is infuriating.
The phrasing should be "the Islamic prophet" Mohammed.

Anybody seriously wanting Muslims in the West to adapt to western civilization should advocate more and more and more of this stuff to de-sensitize them.
And, we need a Pythonesque "Life of Mo" for sure. (I'd love to do it, but I'm way too busy at the moment :))

Posted by: Me No Dhimmi at February 10, 2008 9:38 PM

Try this . . .

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/

= TG

Posted by: TG at February 10, 2008 9:39 PM

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/

WOW! Just checked out the ones under DANTE'S.
Don't do drugs then visit this site.
Trippy as hell, no pun intended!
Thanks TG.

Posted by: eastern paul at February 10, 2008 9:46 PM

John Daly writes:

"What Kate and y'all good old white Prairie boys and girls call information we call bigotry.  And we're right."

Wow, John.  That's ever so tolerant and unprejudiced of you.  Yep, not a single gratuitous, unprovable, bigoted, prejudiced, asinine assumption in that entire statement.

Just how the Hell do you know who the "typical" poster here even is?  Is there some special ID function on SDA that I and others missed?

Or, using your same tendentious, self-righteous logic, should most of us assume you're a "typical" 905-area-code semi-funky latte-sipping reality-challenged ideologically-blinkered doofus with an overly-developed moral-superiority complex, a lifetime subscription to the Toronto Star and a library filled with Noam Chomsky books?

Hmmmm?

Posted by: Garth Wood at February 10, 2008 9:55 PM

We can thank the Ayatollah of Canterbury for opening can of worms. Articles like these are suddenly in the British papers today:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/a-question-of-honour-police-say-17000-women-are-victims-every-year-780522.html

and...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3342040.ece

All of a sudden Muslim inbreding and "17,000 women in Britain are being subjected to "honour" related violence, including murder, every year, according to police chiefs" are out in the open for examination. Any dimwit ought to be able to figure out what all of this dysfunction is costing the British taxpayers and the culture. I know, I know, if you are a vacuous guilt riddled liberal then the Brit's need to put up with this as atonement. The hallmark of a liberal is wishing upon others that which they would never subject themselves.

Posted by: penny at February 10, 2008 9:55 PM

Here's a little down home Prairie kinda saying, Garth. The bit pig squeals the loudest. So wear it, Garth, because I think it fits. If folks are bigots they are bigots. It's that simple. They know who they are.

Posted by: John Daly at February 10, 2008 9:59 PM

Wikipedia editor: accept my revision or "I KEEL YOU!

Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at February 10, 2008 10:01 PM

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/

WOW. Mo was Chinese!

Posted by: Sounder at February 10, 2008 10:01 PM

Here's a little down home Prairie kinda saying, Garth. The bit pig squeals the loudest. So wear it, Garth, because I think it fits. If folks are bigots they are bigots. It's that simple. They know who they are.

Typical lefty. No real counter argument. Just call me a bigot. Why not call me a nazi too.

Posted by: orvict at February 10, 2008 10:10 PM

"That's another very helpful contribution to the world, Kate. Thanks so much."

Me. Ghandi. People have trouble telling us apart.

Posted by: Kate at February 10, 2008 10:14 PM

re: Silence Wikipedia!
WE KEEL YOU
what a great decision taken by wikipedia!

easy. render unto caesar... and when in rome... and wikipedia is neutral.

for those who would menace me because i agree with wikipedia's decision - forgive me if i think my values count for something or if i have trouble giving primacy to something foreign and incomprehensible. sound familiar?

here's a simple solution - don't go there if it's offensive or enable the "images off" option in your browser. or start up the correct version of wikipedia. but - whatever you do - stop trying to impose your version of the universe on me. and btw - i don't like being threatened. peace.

Posted by: johnnyonline at February 10, 2008 10:15 PM

My, that's ever so deep, John.

Did you find that ridiculous saying in your redacted version of Tom Sawyer for Canadians?

Did you not see the irony in your own statement?

And did you ever progress beyond grade school insults?

The answers to these questions are left as an exercise for the student.  A reasonably bright student, I mean.  You may be excused, John.

Posted by: Garth Wood at February 10, 2008 10:16 PM

Garth: what exactly are you suggesting I need to argue about? Kate posted another bash at Islam and I posted another comment about the bigotry that prevails on her website. What exactly is the point of contention here? Is Kate fond of Muslims? Or Islam as a world religion? Or does she think Islam, as a world religion, is a dangerous thing? The answer to those last two questions, teach, are no and yes. By definition Kate has a major prejudice about Islam. I think she's a bigot. I also think that folks who support her positions and her point of view, as evidenced by here, are by association also bigots.

So there it is. I think you are making an assumption, teach. That I necessarily need to, or ought to argue with you or Kate or anyone else here. I can comment, and will, without engaging (too much) in the stuff here that usually drifts toward childishness.

Posted by: John Daly at February 10, 2008 10:34 PM

**SIGH**

Apparently, John, you're incapable of reading what you just wrote.  As I said, you may be excused.  There's a finger-painting class down the hall — try not to ingest too much of the blue acrylic, hmmmm?

There's a good lad.

Posted by: Garth Wood at February 10, 2008 10:45 PM

Heh...John Daly.. you think Kate is a bigot and I think you're mentally retarded. Who do you think is right? Probably me - I can smell mentally retarded lefties from quite a distance, and you stink of self-righteous liberal fascism. Do be careful crossing the road. And BTW, no I have no intention of debating you or any other leftist. Your ilk is an illness within western civilization and sensible people do not argue with illness, they cure it.

For what it's worth, the biggest bigots live on the left side of the political spectrum - you know, the people who excuse unacceptable behaviour because of race or colour, i.e. don't worry about the XXXX, they just don't know any better, back where they came from, XXXX behaviour is normal.

Posted by: Caveman at February 10, 2008 10:59 PM

Garth: is what you've just posted what passes for argument where you went to school? I guess I really do need to attend a special SDA class for folks who fail to see the bright right light. But Garth, I'm not going anywhere. So I'll look to smacking you around another day, K?

Posted by: John Daly at February 10, 2008 11:00 PM

Garth (and others here): Kate has basically sealed the deal in terms of establishing who and what she is. She finds it amusing to have punked Warren Kinsella by faking a photo depicting a concentration camp survivor's tattooed forearm and sending that to him.

And you have the gall to question why folks think Kate is a bigot and a racist? Come on Garth, give your damn head a shake. I think we are still waiting for Kate to take ownership of this lousy and miserable slap in the face of Holocaust survivors. What have you got to say Kate? Maybe she is saving that for her next visit to her psychiatrist.

Posted by: John Daly at February 10, 2008 11:23 PM

You given yourself the right name, Caveman. No go back to that dark place where you live.

Posted by: John Daly at February 10, 2008 11:25 PM

For who it may concern;There has been NOTHING on Kate's site authored by anyone but a follower of Islam.To call her or Wikipedia bigots proves that some either can't read or else can't comprehend what they read.The first thng to read is what sharia law stands for.It stands for the killing or maiming of women.It stands for the killing of those that leave the religion.It stands for the killing of infidiles including you.Kate did'nt write those laws,Islam did.

Posted by: spike 1 at February 10, 2008 11:53 PM

This john daly guy must be a real wacko.I see a serial number on a bike and he thinks its a concentration camp number! I did'nt know someone put bikes in a concentration camp,or maybe just one type of bike.If he equates it with anything else then he should be ashamed of himself and apoligize for any harm he may have implied.

Posted by: spike 1 at February 11, 2008 12:02 AM

hmmmmm

Bigot: : a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

Looks like the shoe might fit Mr. Daly as much as he thinks it fits anybody posting here. Assuming, of course, that the posters at SDA constitute a group.

Perhaps he can provide evidence of the religion of peace and tolerance actually tolerating modern ideals such as the rights of women, and the rights of others to their own beliefs.

Posted by: Andrew at February 11, 2008 12:10 AM

John Daly at 10:34

"I also think that folks who support her positions and her point of view, as evidenced by here, are by association also bigots."

Guilt by association.. thats a good one! Certainly saves a lot of wasted time on thinking or reasoning.

Posted by: ward at February 11, 2008 1:00 AM

Ward and Andrew: both of you are off the beam. I have absolutely no responsibility for arguing the relative merits of Islam. As compared with what? Christianity? Burning folks at the stake? The Crusades? Or has Christianity benefited from a statute of limitations?

I said Kate and many of her readers are racist and bigots. They are. I didn't say a god damn thing about my own bigotry. Of course I am a bigot. I thought that much would be obvious. Not the point, though, is it? It's Kate, your queen bee, not mine, who has crapped all over the memory of 6 million dead Jews. She ought to be ashamed and she has yet to make an explanation. So: are you ashamed of what you've done, Kate? Or not?

Posted by: John Daly at February 11, 2008 1:19 AM

John Daly 10:34 "I can comment, and will, without engaging (too much) in the stuff here that usually drifts toward childishness."

For such a mature and restrained person you sure post alot of nonsense. About a dozen times in the last few hours. Not only does your reasoning lack consistency but so does your self proclaimed behavior

Posted by: ward at February 11, 2008 1:45 AM

Gee, what's up with this Muslim hyper-sensitivity towards not showing pictures of Mohammed, anyway? Could he really have been that ugly?

Posted by: Jim at February 11, 2008 2:13 AM

someone might point him out in a lineup of kiddie rapers.

Posted by: FREE at February 11, 2008 3:17 AM

"Gee, what's up with this Muslim hyper-sensitivity towards not showing pictures of Mohammed ..."

It's the false idol thing ... they are worried they may start worshipping a cartoon or a teddy bear.

Posted by: ural at February 11, 2008 3:50 AM

"someone might point him out in a lineup of kiddie rapers."

Yeah the middle eastern guy always stands out in a lineup of Catholic priests.

"Guilt by association.. thats a good one! Certainly saves a lot of wasted time on thinking or reasoning."

I take it you do not believe in profiling? Even at airports.


Posted by: bleh at February 11, 2008 6:19 AM

anomymous and daly and other apologists. get the shit out of your eyes. the followers of the evil that is islam are over one billion and they believe that the koran is immutable, unchangsble. they have to follow what big mo says, all of them. let's hope that you will not suffer the wrath of some islamic moron.

Posted by: old white guy at February 11, 2008 6:51 AM

John Daly wrote: "Kate posted another bash at Islam and I posted another comment about the bigotry that prevails on her website"

How is posting a story that is in the news bashing Islam?
Following your logic, you should be writing angry letters to the Toronto Star, CBC, et al for constantly bashing Harper and all things conservative.

Posted by: Largs at February 11, 2008 7:45 AM

Petition #2

Don't remove the muhammed pics from Wikipedia.
Target:Anyone that thinks their religion trumps my person rights
Sponsored by: uber_kuffar

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/dont-remove-the-muhammed-pics-from-wikipedia

Posted by: JM at February 11, 2008 7:58 AM

This multi-pseudonym jerk posting here is not worth engaging. He's full of arrogance and full of himself.

Since he's taken the liberty to call other posters racists and bigots I take the liberty to opine he is projecting as a very frustrated asshole.

Posted by: Liz J at February 11, 2008 8:29 AM

"Information wants to be freeee!" meets "I keel you!"

Going to be interesting to see who has bigger balls. Richard Stallman never struck me as much of a knife fighter. Just sayin'. ~:D

Posted by: The Phantom at February 11, 2008 9:33 AM

John Daly, re: statute of limitations. I know this will be hard for you, but I'll try to keep it simple.

The people who killed witches back in the day are dead. Deceased. Gone to meet their maker. They are ex-witch burners.

The people who stone women and blow up school buses are alive. You know, breathing, farting, planning their next atrocity.

So we have stone dead bad Christians who are taking a dirt nap vs. alive bad Muslims who are armed and gung-ho to blow stuff up.

Of the two categories, which one should we be paying the most attention to?

Feel free to use a calculator on this one John.

Posted by: The Phantom at February 11, 2008 9:44 AM

LOL! I love Phantom's comment. I hope he doesn't mind if I second it!

Posted by: Gayle at February 11, 2008 10:44 AM

Gayle, I take it you don't see Richard Stalman as the Rambo type either? Or you just think John's an idiot? ~:D

Posted by: The Phantom at February 11, 2008 10:48 AM

Mohommed is dead; and his 6 year old wife is happy.

Posted by: Peter at February 11, 2008 10:49 AM

John calls Kate a bigot for discussing the NEWS because it's about Islam. He calls those of us who loath 7th century Islam bigots, cool I can be a bigot. So I'm a bigot for discussing Islam, what do you call someone who holds Christians in utter contempt?? A Liberal or a member of the NDP of course, holy duck what a hypocrite John is.

Posted by: Rose at February 11, 2008 12:10 PM

Daly,

Re-read your own post. The slagging you are taking is a direct result of your post.

You throw around labels of bigotry while IN THE VERY SAME SENTENCE show equal bigotry yourself.

You don't seem to have recognized it. That's why you are the subject of scorn.

Andrew,

In your definition of bigotry, you don't explain how Islam fits into race or ethnic group. Last I checked, the followers of this religion were members of all races and ethnic groups (including those of white European dissent.)

Clearly you are unaware that Islam is a belief system which combines religion with political ideology. The very real and fundamental difference between Islam and demographic characteristics such as race, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation is that the former is something you chose and the latter is not.

The reason real bigotry is wrong is that you judge people based on the things they have no control over. The reason that Islam is different is that you chose your beliefs, you chose your philosophies and thus are responsible for them.

You are culpable for the choices you make in life. Your politics, religion and ideology is a choice. Your race, gender, sexual orientation isn't a choice. It's fair game to hold people accountable for their choices. To blame someone on their colour or gender isn't fair.

You need to think of these differences and their meanings. This is what the propaganda of the far left has eliminated - that dialogue.

You question any leftist dogma and some leftard with a lack of critical-thinking skills comes out with the "racist" tag without even understanding the word or its meaning. You slag people with "racism" when race isn't even mentioned and use your own slur as "proof" of your point as if circular logical errors and cheap insults was intellegent debate.

Worse yet, the same leftard will defend as reasonable the bashing of Christianity and deny that attacks on Christianity are bigoted in any way while declaring any criticism of Islam as the work of knuckle-dragging, rural, hillbillies (which is chauvinistic on both counts.) The lack of logical consistency is the reason for the derision that we feel towards lefties. That lack of ability to see the glaring hypocrisy and double standards is incredibly galling. That lefties don't seem to see that their dogmatic attacks using labels and jargon rather than ideas is the furthest thing from enlightened discourse you can get.

The vicious response leftards get thrown at them in response is a direct result of the frustration we feel to unthinking drones of the Orwellian school of newspeak. After a few futile attempts at reasoning and questioning the left's assumptions, we find it unproductive to even try. Thus instead of wasting time reasoning with someone incapable of it, we lash out at their infuriating condescension. It's intolerable to suffer attacks from people who don't understand their own opinion and who foolishly try to use their ignorance against you as if it's my fault you can't think.

Posted by: Warwick at February 11, 2008 12:24 PM

Oh, and leftards, here is a brilliant piece of an larger article calling for the end of multiculturalism:

Multiculturalism was formed with good intentions as a counter-reaction. But it has become a mirror-image of this old racism, treating Muslim women – and others – as so different that they do not deserve the same rights as the rest of us. As the European-Iranian feminist Azar Majedi puts it: "By creating different laws and judicial systems for each ethnic group, we are not fighting racism. In fact, we are institutionalising it."

If you are capable of thought, use that ability now.

Posted by: Warwick at February 11, 2008 12:34 PM

So, John Daly,

Is exposing and factually criticising an ideology bigotry?

Here, I am going to state an opinion - the Islamic ideology is foundationally violent, racist and misogynistic as proven in the trilogy (Quran, aHadith and Sira). This is especially proven by Mohammad's life example and sayings - the so-called prophet that all Muslims are commanded to emulate. This foundationally violent ideology is also political, having its holy writ institutionalized into law.

Now, do you have a fact based counter argument to this statement?

If not, whether you're ignorant of the ideology and texts or otherwise, I can safely assume that you support this ideology and its commands and rewards for genocide of non-Muslims, racism, misogyny, pedophilia, rape, bigotry, slavery and piracy.

I can also safely assume that you are in favour of the horrors served on Muslims first and particularly Muslim females based on this ideology.

Therefore, I can assume that you are a racist and bigoted monster.

Posted by: irwin daisy at February 11, 2008 1:10 PM

A few of the Leftards should go spend a few nights in the sands of Afghanistan, Kandahar to be specific. Even if they lose their heads they'll still have their arses which is where their brains are.

Someone here should be served papers unless an apology is forthcoming. The line has been crossed.
It's personal, it's libelous. I'd be happy to donate.

Posted by: Liz J at February 11, 2008 1:20 PM

"Even if they lose their heads they'll still have their arses which is where their brains are."

They re right Daly. Quit calling people bigots and other names here. This is a place for discussion of news. In a manner that is in keeping with this board's lofty standards. See above quote. Thats the kind of straight talk that goes on around here.

Nope, no hypocrisy at all.

Posted by: bleh at February 11, 2008 1:53 PM

"... counteracting negative stories like this with positive ones about Islam. "

Mr al-Anonymous has his work cut out for him (or her). Let's begin with one for our side:

17,000 Victims of Honour"

Correction - not one for our side, but 17,000.

I didn't even have to hunt for that one. It's in today's reading, in the last hour. Next hour, there will be more like it.

These comments are still open - we'd all like to see a few positive stories about how Islam is good for people and countries.


Posted by: ZZMike at February 11, 2008 2:30 PM

I can tell by the way you speak you've got centuries of catching up to do. Let's pick up this conversation in a couple of centuries.

Posted by: Bour3 at February 11, 2008 2:55 PM

They should just start there own site like conservatives did. Or maybe the two groups should join forces and together launch a WAR ON REALITY.

That'd be cool.

Posted by: John at February 11, 2008 4:24 PM

Folks, please do not feed a mindless troll like John Daly (aka Johnny Maudlin, and likley other names as well). He gets no traffic at his own laughable excuse for a blogg so he dumps his childish nonsense here. As long as he gets reactions here, he will continue to dump his childish drivel here.

He is just another troll who does not have a real life so he spends far too much of his time dumping childish rubbish here, just as other trolls do. People with real lives do not waste their time like John Daly and other trolls.

Posted by: terrence at February 11, 2008 5:15 PM

John Daly is Johnny Maudlin? BWAHAHA! That makes him TWICE the fool I took him for. What a riot!

Posted by: The Phantom at February 11, 2008 6:14 PM
Site
Meter