South Park Fatwa

[topher5150]

South Park is now under threat from Islamic extremists for their "depiction" of Muhamad

Comedy Central Censors 'South Park' Episode After Muslim Site's Threats
By Joshua Rhett Miller
- FOXNews.com

A radical Islamic website warned the creators of "South Park" that they could face violent retribution for depicting the Prophet Muhammad in a bear suite

RevolutionMuslim.com posted a warning following the 200th episode of Trey Parker and Matt Stone's "South Park," which included a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad disguised in a bear suit.
Comedy Central bleeped out all references to the Prophet Muhammad in Wednesday night's episode of the animated show "South Park."

The episode was a continuation of last week's episode which depicted the Prophet Muhammad in a bear suit.

A radical Muslim website threatened the show's creators following that episode.

Comedy Central confirmed to FoxNews.com that it had censored the show, and that the episode was not available on its website.

In addition to bleeping the words "Prophet Muhammad," the show also covered the character with a large block labeled "Censored."

A radical Islamic website had warned the creators of "South Park" that they could face violent retribution for their depiction of Prophet Muhammad.

RevolutionMuslim.com posted the warning following the 200th episode of Trey Parker and Matt Stone's "South Park," which included a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad disguised in a bear suit. The web posting also included a graphic photo of Theo van Gogh, a Dutch filmmaker who was murdered in 2004 after making a documentary on violence against Muslim women.

"We have to warn Matt and Trey that what they are doing is stupid and they will probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show," the posting reads. "This is not a threat, but a warning of the reality of what will likely happen to them."

Abu Talhah al Amrikee, the author of the post, told Foxnews.com he wrote the entry to "raise awareness." He said the grisly photograph of van Gogh was meant to "explain the severity" of what Parker and Stone did by mocking Muhammad.

"It's not a threat, but it really is a likely outcome," al Amrikee said, referring to the possibility that Parker and Stone could be murdered for mocking Muhammad. "They're going to be basically on a list in the back of the minds of a large number of Muslims. It's just the reality."

Al Amrikee said the website is considering a protest against the "disgusting" show, which also depicted the Prophet Muhammad in an episode on July 4, 2001.

"This is not a small thing," he said. "We should do whatever we can to make sure it does not happen again."

The posting on RevolutionMuslim.com also includes audio of a sermon by Anwar al-Awlaki -- a radical U.S.-born preacher now believed to be hiding in Yemen -- who discusses assassinating individuals who defame the Prophet Muhammad. It also included a link to a 2009 story in the Huffington Post that gave details of Stone and Parker's mansion in Colorado.

 

[cammerfe]

Typical of Huffington to aid anti-American extremists.

Bring it on!!!
You're safe as long as you can run faster than 1100 feet per second. My 185 grain .45 loads go about that fast!
KS

 

[fossten]

Isn't it funny how Christians never react this way when they're made fun of.

 

[topher5150]

give me time to load up my mauser, they won't know where im hitting them from

 

[PetesSweets86]

lol I'll go and become a Southpark body guard free of charge...well...if I get all my debts paid I'd glady protect anyone...even this retarded government

 

[hrmwrm]

Isn't it funny how Christians never react this way when they're made fun of.

yeah, histories full of examples. there's no murder in their background.

 

[Calabrio]

yeah, histories full of examples. there's no murder in their background.

...can you tell me the Christian philosophical principle that teaches those that practice the faith to murder unbelievers or to justify their enslavement and treatment as cattle?

I realize I'm not a theologian, but I don't remember Jesus ever talking about that. And I'm not talking about abuses and bastardization of the philosophy by individuals in the name of the religion either.

What you're doing in your response is making a contemptuous, vague attack on Christianity where you're trying to draw some false moral equivalence. There is no comparison within the philosophy of the religions.

The best you can do is use your example to point out the flawed nature of man and humankind's dangerous lust for the power to control other individuals. And that is a dangerous thing- made even more dangerous when it's associated with a poisonous ideology.

 

[hrmwrm]

can you tell me the Christian philosophical principle that teaches those that practice the faith to murder unbelievers or to justify their enslavement and treatment as cattle?

bible's full of passages everywhere.

Deuteronomy 17
If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant; 17:3 And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded; 17:4 And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel; 17:5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.

you're response merely validates fosstens foolish remark.

What you're doing in your response is making a contemptuous, vague attack on Christianity where you're trying to draw some false moral equivalence. There is no comparison within the philosophy of the religions.

history isn't vague.

The best you can do is use your example to point out the flawed nature of man and humankind's dangerous lust for the power to control other individuals. And that is a dangerous thing- made even more dangerous when it's associated with a poisonous ideology.

and that is true of both ideals.

 

[04SCTLS]

Well since some of them are such hotheads about this it may be best not to provoke them over something that to us is trivial.

 

[fossten]

bible's full of passages everywhere.

Wrong. You obviously don't understand the difference between commands to the Israelites hundreds of years prior to Jesus Christ being born, and commands to Christians in the New Testament.

Christians are NOT under Levitican law. That was for the Jews ONLY, and that was prior to Christ's death. After Christ's death, Levitican law became obsolete and most of the Jews rejected Christ as the Messiah. That's been expressly spelled out in the New Testament.

Read Hebrews...not that you'd understand one word of it.

You probably don't even know the difference between a Jew and a Christian.

You probably don't even know what 'Testament' means.

But then again, I wouldn't ordinarily expect an atheist, bigoted moron to understand the Bible.

I can give you dozens of examples A DAY of Christians being persecuted around the world without fighting back, and you can't furnish one example of Muslims being persecuted without fighting back.

Furthermore, the differences in doctrine and treatment of fellow believers, spouses, etc. are so stark that even an idiot like you should be able to see the difference.

It's clear you're not interested in a discussion where you might learn something - you're just here trolling to stir the pot. And, as usual, you demonstrate your gross, willful ignorance of anything relating to God and the Bible. The only other thing you've shown here is that you know how to use google, albeit rather sophomorically.

But you just keep up with your wild stabs in the dark. It's amusing.

 

[hrmwrm]

Blah Blah Blah Blah......

history isn't behind you on that drivel.

 

[fossten]

history isn't behind you on that drivel.

Great comeback. Amazing. Like I said - TROLL.

 

[hrmwrm]

Great comeback. Amazing

should be familiar. you and shag use it frequently.

you seem to be confused in your thinking in that i am in defence of islam. it makes your rebuttal pretty worthless.
i was merely pointing out the falsehood of your first reply.

 

[shagdrum]

Well since some of them are such hotheads about this it may be best not to provoke them over something that to us is trivial.

So, we compromise our way of life to avoid offending someone. No problems there...

 

[shagdrum]

i was merely pointing out the falsehood of your first reply.

Misdirection and distortion are not the same thing as "pointing out the falsehood of [someone's] reply".

 

[04SCTLS]

So, we compromise our way of life to avoid offending someone. No problems there...

Ideals may be pure but
life is a compromise.
This isn't some big deal that affects any of our lives in any way.
It's a matter of choosing our battles wisely instead of frivolously.

To them it's like Larry Flynt and derogatory Jesus cartoons.
Even if you support that on free speech grounds I'm sure you would find them offensive on personal grounds.

Comedy Central is a privately owned business and they make their decisions as they see in their best interests.

 

[shagdrum]

Ideals may be pure but
life is a compromise.
This isn't some big deal that affects any of our lives in any way.
It's a matter of choosing our battles wisely instead of frivolously.

In a war, you shouldn't cede ground unless there is some strategic benefit. If you don't push back against aggressors, they will crush you.

The more this type of intimidation is allowed to work, the more emboldened our enemies become. The more emboldened they become, the more powerful they become. The longer it takes you to draw a line in the sand the weaker your position is and it is harder to push back.

They are waging a war against our culture and our way of life. We should not cede ANY ground to them.

Rationalize cowardly appeasement however you want, but that is all it is...

 

[cammerfe]

Very Well Said, Shag!

Fight them on their ground, not on ours.
KS

 

[fossten]

Ideals may be pure but
life is a compromise.

More "words of wisdom."

Freedom isn't free.

To quote Mark Steyn about the South Park Episode being censored:

Yet in the end, in a craven culture, even big Hollywood A-listers can’t get their message over. So the brave, transgressive comedy network was intimidated into caving in and censoring a speech about not being intimidated into caving in. That’s what I call ‘hip,’ ‘edgy,’ ‘cutting-edge’ comedy: They’re so edgy they’re curled up in the fetal position, whimpering at the guy with the cutting edge, ‘Please. Behead me last. And don’t use the rusty scimitar where you have to saw away for 20 minutes to find the spinal column . . .’

 

[fossten]

i was merely pointing out the falsehood of your first reply.

Actually, you attempted to do so with a seriously flawed and grossly mistaken understanding of the Bible, and failed in the process.

 

[hrmwrm]

Actually, you attempted to do so with a seriously flawed and grossly mistaken understanding of the Bible, and failed in the process.

it has nothing to do with the bible. it has to do with an ideal that says it is peaceful, yet historically has shown itself not to be.

Well since some of them are such hotheads about this it may be best not to provoke them over something that to us is trivial.

true, but i like keeping things honest.

 

[04SCTLS]

it has nothing to do with the bible. it has to do with an ideal that says it is peaceful, yet historically has shown itself not to be.


true, but i like keeping things honest.

If truth is your goal maybe we should attack them over this.
The bomb cartoons are pretty lame.
This would be more controversial to say the least.
Every now and then I hear about some 65 yr old arab sleazeball marrying a 10-12 year old.

A Complete Guide to Pedophilia in Islam

http://www.islam-watch.org/Amarkhan/pedophilia-in-islam/pedophilia-islam.htm

 

[Calabrio]

it has nothing to do with the bible. it has to do with an ideal that says it is peaceful, yet historically has shown itself not to be.

Actually, you're wrong.
The text of the New Testament is tolerant, though people have used it in intolerant ways in the past to expand THEIR power, usually political power. This speaks to the flawed nature of man and the tendency of individuals to abuse and expand power. It's actually an argument for limited-government.

true, but i like keeping things honest.

...though in your effort, you made a statement that was misleading.
That doesn't make you a liar. It doesn't make you dishonest. It just means that you're mistaken. It also means that you should probably defer to issue of Christian theology to someone like Fossten.

 

[fossten]

it has nothing to do with the bible. it has to do with an ideal that says it is peaceful, yet historically has shown itself not to be.

Ambiguity is your strong suit, clarity is not.

true, but i like keeping things honest.

Oh, the ironic self contradiction.

It's impossible to debate someone who repeatedly demonstrates that English is his second language.