South Park Creators Threatened by Radical Muslims

[bush_cheney2004]

My favorite ASCII text Mohammad from years ago:

b ....................................OILOILOIL..............

b .............................OILOILOILOILOILO........

b ...........................OILOILOILOILOILOILO........

b .........................OI___ILOILOILOIL___OIL......

b ........................OI/XXX\ILOILOILO/XXX\OI......

b ........................OI\___/OILOILOIL\___/OIL.....

b ........................OILOILOILO___LOILOILOIL.....

b .........................OILOILOIL\oo/OILOILOIL......

b ..........................OILOILOIL\_/OILOILOIL......

b ...........................OILOILOILOILOILOILO.......

b .................................ILOILOILOILO..........

b .................................ILOILOILOILO..........

b ..................................OIL""""""OIL..........

b ..................................OIL""""""OIL..........

b ...................................LOI^^^OIL............

b .......................................OILOIL..............

[Shady]

This situation illustrates (pun intended) the large problem within Islam. The same South Park episode which has been threatened by some Muslim groups also contained Jesus watching porn, and Buddha using cocaine.

Yet, there's only one religious group that Comedy Central has to placate and worry of. It speaks volumes.

[kimmy]

Go to a bar and insult a bunch of big tough drunken guys, and they will attack you for your words. You may not like those guys, you may think their stupid for going to bars and getting drunk. But as long as you mind your own business and they mind theirs, there is no problem.

Yeah, mouthing off to tough drunk-guys in a bar probably isn't smart. Or there's the "wearing a short skirt in a dark alley..." thing, probably not smart either.

The thing is, Parker and Stone aren't in a bar full of tough drunk-guys, or in a dark alley.

It is offensive to me that some people are attempting to turn our society into that dark alley by invoking the threat of violence in this way.

This isn't actually new. We've had this before. Canada's vocal moderate-Muslim activist Tarek Fatah has received death threats. Or how about the York University incident where a pro-Israel group was unable to have an event because they were unable to pay for security measures that the university decided were necessary because of the possibility of violence from anti-Israel activists? "This *might* be a dark alley," the university decided, "so you have to pay for security."

I can't stand it. People can chose to use or not use their freedoms as they see fit, but to limit our freedoms to the standard of what's prudent in a dark alley or a bar full of mean drunks is unacceptable.

-k

[Shady]

It is offensive to me that some people are attempting to turn our society into that dark alley by invoking the threat of violence in this way.

Exactly. Unless of course it's a Christian/Catholic offended. Then they should sit down, shut up, and stop being so damn prudish. Because it's freedom of speech, seperation of church and state, and/or art.

It's funny how this isn't applied to everyone equally. Funny is an abhorrent and disgusting way. And lets not forget that this particular episode of South Park featured Jesus watching porn, and Buddha snorting cocaine. But which group is outraged and threatening? Yep, you guessed it!

[Guest American Woman]

Go to a bar and insult a bunch of big tough drunken guys, and they will attack you for your words.

Are you comparing radical Muslims to a bunch of big tough drunken guys? Seems to me you are. But here's the thing-- if that bunch of big tough drunken guys did attack someone for their words, they would be arrested. There are laws against that sort of thing. Furthermore, no one is forcing anyone to watch South Park, so no one is directing the insults at the people who made the threat, putting insults 'in their face;' so again, you example falls short.

You seem to think that bullying/threats should result in the desired action; that we should simply ignore such threats and keep our mouths shut, tip toeing around the bully, doing their bidding; in effect, letting them take our rights away. Rights that they are enjoying.

Perhaps I find Islam's beliefs insulting to me as a woman, and as such, I issue a threat to their well being. You think they should change their beliefs to accommodate me, or do you think perhaps I'm the one who better learn to live with it?

[Sir Bandelot]

You seem to think that bullying/threats should result in the desired action; that we should simply ignore such threats and keep our mouths shut, tip toeing around the bully, doing their bidding; in effect, letting them take our rights away. Rights that they are enjoying.

Its sad that some people are always telling me what I "seem" to think, without any factual basis other than extrapolating my statements to the point of utter absurdity. I said if people leave each other alone there's no problem, if people seek to antagonize one another, and that includes using hurtful words against someones beliefs, there will be a problem. Legal or not, inciting someone elses anger for pointless reasons will have predictable outcomes.

Ernst Zundel was imprisoned for writing hate literature against the jews. He was so despised for his neo-nazi views that his home was bombed several times. Some people tried to kill him for what he said. I have never heard of him committing violence himself, or funding it, but I admit I don't know his whole story. The charges against him relate only to holocaust denial and hate literature, so that should tell us something.

Likewise I see a lot of similar writings that could be considered hate in the media, against Muslims. All it takes is a misleading headline to get the public worked up. I'm not denying there is a problem with radicals, in any society but we need to know who the real enemies are. I know many people who are Muslims and they are not threatening, but they are being threatened.

I did not say we should tip-toe around bullies. I myself can't do that. What I mean to say is, pick your fights wisely. Don't expect to insult people with words or ideas and not get some retaliation. Zundels words were a threat. He got retaliation.

Edited April 24, 2010 by Sir Bandelot

[BubberMiley]

It's true that being considerate is the first step to fascism.

[Guest American Woman]

Its sad that some people are always telling me what I "seem" to think, without any factual basis other than extrapolating my statements to the point of utter absurdity.

If people are "always telling you what you 'seem' to think," perhaps you aren't stating what you actually do think very clearly. Note that I didn't say "this is what you think," but rather what you "seem" to think, as that's how it appeared to me. In other words, to me you seemed to think that way. If you find that sad, that's really your problem.

I said if people leave each other alone there's no problem, if people seek to antagonize one another, and that includes using hurtful words against someones beliefs, there will be a problem. Legal or not, inciting someone elses anger for pointless reasons will have predictable outcomes.

And I say there is always someone that will be offended by something, so your line of thought seems to be to constantly be curbing our speech. Guess we can forget satire and comedy, as we don't want to offend anyone, and surely there is always someone that it offends.

Ernst Zundel was imprisoned for writing hate literature against the jews. He was so despised for his neo-nazi views that his home was bombed several times. Some people tried to kill him for what he said. I have never heard of him committing violence himself, or funding it, but I admit I don't know his whole story. The charges against him relate only to holocaust denial and hate literature, so that should tell us something.

Again, whatever his charges were, it has nothing to do with the U.S. These radical Muslims are living in the U.S., the organization is out of NYC, South Park is produced in the U.S., so only freedom of speech/expression in the U.S. applies to this incident. We believe in the right to free speech here, and those curbing South Park's free speech, with death threats no less, are enjoying those very rights themselves. We don't believe we have to sugar coat everything lest someone take offense. Furthermore, Islam wasn't even singled out, which has been pointed out time and again.

So unless we want to let threats silence us, unless we want to sit back and do nothing, some do what they feel they have to do in order to ensure freedoms aren't silenced by threats.

Likewise I see a lot of similar writings that could be considered hate in the media, against Muslims. All it takes is a misleading headline to get the public worked up. I'm not denying there is a problem with radicals, in any society but we need to know who the real enemies are. I know many people who are Muslims and they are not threatening, but they are being threatened.

Muslims being threatened is a whole different topic, and while it's obviously not right, it doesn't dismiss this incident and doesn't mean people have to sit back and do nothing regarding this incident. Muslims have the same opportunity to speak out against these radical Muslims as those speaking out against the censorship/threats have. Yet I don't see that happening. Perhaps it would help them if they did.

I did not say we should tip-toe around bullies. I myself can't do that. What I mean to say is, pick your fights wisely. Don't expect to insult people with words or ideas and not get some retaliation. Zundels words were a threat. He got retaliation.

Zundel evidently broke the law. In Germany [edited to add: and in Canada]. "Draw Mohammad Day" does not break any laws, at least not any U.S. laws, so I really don't see the relevance of your reference to him regarding this incident.

As for "picking your fights wisely," I would say standing up for the right of free speech and protesting threats resulting in censorship is a "wise fight." If we don't fight against such threats, we will continue to be subjected to such threats. Not fighting back means their threats accomplished their goal.

Edited April 24, 2010 by American Woman

[bush_cheney2004]

.... What I mean to say is, pick your fights wisely. Don't expect to insult people with words or ideas and not get some retaliation. Zundels words were a threat. He got retaliation.

Zundel was Canada's problem, created by the very same do-gooder meekness when it comes to free speech rights. As for picking fights, yea, that's exactly what Americans will do when threatened with such an absurd approach to tip-toeing around such backward ideas.

"Bring it on..."

[BubberMiley]

"Bring it on..."

He said anonymously, so he could be sure no one would actually bring anything on to him.

[Sir Bandelot]

Zundel was Canada's problem, created by the very same do-gooder meekness when it comes to free speech rights. As for picking fights, yea, that's exactly what Americans will do when threatened with such an absurd approach to tip-toeing around such backward ideas.

"Bring it on..."

Thats fine by me. If people want a fight, they shouldn't complain when there's going to be one.

[bush_cheney2004]

He said anonymously, so he could be sure no one would actually bring anything on to him.

Take your best shot....junior.

[bush_cheney2004]

Thats fine by me. If people want a fight, they shouldn't complain when there's going to be one.

I'm not complaining.....I'm challenging your contention that somebody else (in another country yet) has to be afraid of free speech because that's the Canadian thing to do.

[Guest American Woman]

Thats fine by me. If people want a fight, they shouldn't complain when there's going to be one.

So any time someone stands up for their rights, and a fight results, they shouldn't complain. Everyone should just accept death threats and the resulting loss of rights.

I'd hate to see where we would be as a nation if that's the attitude most people adopted ...... Seems to me we would be a nation controlled by those making death threats over everything that offended them.

[bush_cheney2004]

So any time someone stands up for their rights, and a fight results, they shouldn't complain. Everyone should just accept death threats and the resulting loss of rights.

Yes...so it would seem...anything for "Peace, Order, and Good Government". Liberty is not important.

I'd hate to see where we would be as a nation if that's the attitude most people adopted ...... Seems to me we would be a nation controlled by those making death threats over everything that offended them.

Fortunately, that isn't the case.

[maple_leafs182]

This is much of what Bill Clinton once said, that we need to have such countries/people experience the benefits of capitalism/freedom and once they do they will embrace them. But I have to disagree. It's a false logic because these backward superstitious people (Islamic terrorists) think freedom and anything the west supports is from Satan and to be resisted. Therefore we can not bring them into our world. That is why they are still killing innocents the world over.

Just because they tell us we live in the land of the free, doesn't make it true.

The West is killing innocents the world over too.

I saw this episode, in it they joke of Muslims threating America for airing the episode.

[Sir Bandelot]

If people are "always telling you what you 'seem' to think," perhaps you aren't stating what you actually do think very clearly. Note that I didn't say "this is what you think," but rather what you "seem" to think, as that's how it appeared to me. In other words, to me you seemed to think that way. If you find that sad, that's really your problem.

I think I do state it clearly. All I have to do is go back to my messages and highlight a word or phrase that some people want to ignore, or extrapolate on what I said to mean more things. Those are cheap debating tactics, quite immature.

And I say there is always someone that will be offended by something, so your line of thought seems to be to constantly be curbing our speech. Guess we can forget satire and comedy, as we don't want to offend anyone, and surely there is always someone that it offends.

Ahh, "seems to be..." constantly curbing our speech. Again you are making absurd claims about what I say. Go back and read my last post, or any of the others because I'm bored with repeating myself, over the same baseless accusations. I seem to be saying, why is it so important to some people that they feel they have to insult Islam.

Again, whatever his charges were, it has nothing to do with the U.S. These radical Muslims are living in the U.S., the organization is out of NYC, South Park is produced in the U.S., so only freedom of speech/expression in the U.S. applies to this incident. We believe in the right to free speech here, and those curbing South Park's free speech, with death threats no less, are enjoying those very rights themselves. We don't believe we have to sugar coat everything lest someone take offense. Furthermore, Islam wasn't even singled out, which has been pointed out time and again.

So unless we want to let threats silence us, unless we want to sit back and do nothing, some do what they feel they have to do in order to ensure freedoms aren't silenced by threats.

Sure, in the US people people can say anything they want. But there are still a lot of situations where this is not so. Or rather, they can say it but they might face the consequences. You cannot speak plainly in a court of law. You cannot disrespect a police officer, or insult a judge. You can't insult your employer. You can;t disseminate confidential or proprietary information. You can't write whatever you want on a forum web site. There are rules of conduct. Break the rules and you'll be removed from the group.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution defines a citizen's right to freedom of speech, except in cases inciting a riot, issuing violent threats, or endangering the public. The act of disrespecting the police is generally protected by the First Amendment, but is sometimes called "contempt of cop" as a analogy to "contempt of court" (which is instead, a long-established, punishable offence). In many cases, citizens have been arrested for "disorderly conduct" based on remarks or hand gestures they made to various officers. Historically, numerous cases[1] of arrests stemming from "flipping the bird" have resulted in the arrested person being exonerated by the courts. More recently, there has been a trend whereby bird-flippers receive cash settlements from the local government involved.

The state does not sanction killings for improper speech, but it still happens, just as Zundel was attacked in his home by bombs.

Malcolm X

Martin Luther King

Vernon E. Jordan

The State does not allow certain speech when it goes against the nationalist agenda.

Protesters Arrested During Bush Speech

Dixie Chicks vilified by President and media

Gay Rights Activist Arrested

Activist Arrested for threatening Elton John

In the United States, resistance to female toplessness is much greater than in mainland Europe or Australia, even extending to controversy over breastfeeding in public.

Topless men were not arrested.

Twelve Arrested in California for heckling Israeli Ambassador

Feb 10, 2010

At the University of California at Irvine (UCI) campus on Monday night, 12 people were arrested after disrupting a speech by Israel’s Ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren. On Tuesday, Deputy Foreign Minister Daniel Ayalon’s speech at Oxford University in London was disrupted when protesters yelled at Ayalon during his speech.

Elisha Strom

Secret Service Ordered Local Police to Restrict Anti-Bush Protesters at Rallies, ACLU Charges in Unprecedented Nationwide Lawsuit

More than 190 arrested at anti-Iraq war D.C. protest

Muslims being threatened is a whole different topic, and while it's obviously not right, it doesn't dismiss this incident and doesn't mean people have to sit back and do nothing regarding this incident. Muslims have the same opportunity to speak out against these radical Muslims as those speaking out against the censorship/threats have. Yet I don't see that happening.

It is not a whole different topic when someone write a thread that attacks muslims for the actions of a radical group. Moderate Muslims are trying and do speak out against the radicals. As is often the case, it's the loud crazy ones who get the attention. The ones who want to mind their own business merely get threatened by paranoid bullies in the street.

Zundel evidently broke the law. In Germany [edited to add: and in Canada]. "Draw Mohammad Day" does not break any laws, at least not any U.S. laws, so I really don't see the relevance of your reference to him regarding this incident.

Yes he did just as some of those Americans I posted links to broke the law. They said things the state didn't like. Chief Justice Rehnquist also stated in regard to bias motivated crimes that "this conduct is thought to inflict greater individual and societal harm.... bias-motivated crimes are more likely to provoke retaliatory crimes, inflict distinct emotional harms on their victims, and incite community unrest."

I suppose he doesn't know what he's talking about.

As for "picking your fights wisely," I would say standing up for the right of free speech and protesting threats resulting in censorship is a "wise fight." If we don't fight against such threats, we will continue to be subjected to such threats. Not fighting back means their threats accomplished their goal.

That's ok. When you are the one who strikes the first blow, expect that others will fight back too. To be clear, I'm not defending the radicals, only saying don't walk into a Hells Angels clubhouse and tell everyone to F-off, expecting them to be civil in their response. If you think your speech will have some constructive outcome, good for you. Just don't whine about it if other people don't like it, and want to do something.

[Sir Bandelot]

So any time someone stands up for their rights, and a fight results, they shouldn't complain. Everyone should just accept death threats and the resulting loss of rights.

I'd hate to see where we would be as a nation if that's the attitude most people adopted ...... Seems to me we would be a nation controlled by those making death threats over everything that offended them.

Again you are putting words in my mouth. "Any Time" Ridiculous.

Everyone should just accept death threats- ridiculous.

All I'm saying is, is it necessary to respond to Muslims ultra-sensitivity of wanting their prophet to be respected, by having a national draw Muhammad day? No, I object to that. Such jeering idiocy is the right of people in a free speech nation, and it's my right to say I think their just being stupid, and I don't think we should do that. For saying that I'm told I must hate free speech, I must like being bullied, and all the other nonsense you've thrown at me.

Edited April 24, 2010 by Sir Bandelot

[bush_cheney2004]

...All I'm saying is, is it necessary to respond to Muslims ultra-sensitivity of wanting their prophet to be respected, by having a national draw Muhammad day? No, I object to that. Such jeering idiocy is the right of people in a free speech nation, and it's my right to say I think their just being stupid, and I don't think we should do that. For saying that I'm told I must hate free speech, I must like being bullied, and all the other nonsense you've thrown at me.

So just what is it you are so afraid of....offending Muslims? But it's OK to offend proponents of free speech? OK to offend, Catholics, Jews, Buddhists, Pagans, because they are not "ultra-sensitive" ??

[Guest American Woman]

I saw this episode, in it they joke of Muslims threating America for airing the episode.

I'm watching it online now, my curiosity got the better of me, and there are so many bleeps and "censored" signs blocking what I assume is Mohammad that I think it's hard to follow......

[Sir Bandelot]

So just what is it you are so afraid of....offending Muslims? But it's OK to offend proponents of free speech? OK to offend, Catholics, Jews, Buddhists, Pagans, because they are not "ultra-sensitive" ??

More nonsense.

I'm afraid...

I think it's ok to offend everyone else, etc. How about some more logical arguments.

It should be no surprise that people around the world are willing to kill for their beliefs, even subtle differences in religious belief. Like the Orangemen in Ireland. Here in Canada we have a general attitude, as long as you leave me alone, I'll leave you alone. In other words, everyone should just mind their own damn business, and there won't be any problems. That means, you do your thing in private, don't bother me. Whoever is bothering someone, is being an antagonist. Chances are we're gonna tangle. Then fuck your right to free speech.

[Moonlight Graham]

"Radical Islamic Group" would be accurate. Mainstream Muslims will be offended, might even complain but will just quietly move on and try to ignore it.

I see no reason why certain elements of the degenerate western media insist on pouring gasoline on a fire. To what end is it useful to be the antagonist here? Because it is our legal right to do so?

I agree. This is offensive to pretty much all Muslims, but as you say most will be offended and maybe complain, but not be anything close to violent.

I also agree that it is wrong for the media to egg this issue on. I watch South Park, its a great show with smart writing. They are known for poking fun at virtually anyone and offending a lot of people because of it. But this is different. If thought Mohammad is dressed in a bear costume, its still going to get a negative reaction from people and they should just drop it and move it. Fighting this because of "freedom of speech" isn't worth it for them.

The dumb thing is that in Season 5, a South Park episode featured a full depiction of Mohammed and there was absolutely no fuss about it as it was done before the Danish cartoon scandal, and the cartoon is still shown in reruns with no fuss.

[Shady]

Security Stepped Up at Comedy Central Following Threats Against 'South Park'

The New York Police Department has stepped up security at the headquarters of the Comedy Central cable channel after an Islamic extremist Web site posted apparent threats to the creators of South Park

Link

[bush_cheney2004]

More nonsense.

I'm afraid...

I think it's ok to offend everyone else, etc. How about some more logical arguments.

Then state your case more clearly and consistently. The world can't make an exception just for "sensitive" Muslims.

It should be no surprise that people around the world are willing to kill for their beliefs, even subtle differences in religious belief. Like the Orangemen in Ireland. Here in Canada we have a general attitude, as long as you leave me alone, I'll leave you alone. In other words, everyone should just mind their own damn business, and there won't be any problems.

Except when it comes to "human rights", "responsibility to protect", encroachment of American media, "hate speech", drug trafficking, and copyright law.

That means, you do your thing in private, don't bother me. Whoever is bothering someone, is being an antagonist. Chances are we're gonna tangle. Then fuck your right to free speech.

...and that's why you're in Canada and I'm in the United States.

[bush_cheney2004]

I also agree that it is wrong for the media to egg this issue on. I watch South Park, its a great show with smart writing. They are known for poking fun at virtually anyone and offending a lot of people because of it. But this is different....

Why is this different? Is there a waiver for Islam when it comes to free speech or freedom of expression?

Hey everybody....let's go see the "Piss Christ" !!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ

Edited April 25, 2010 by bush_cheney2004