Fifteen killed in Nigerian cartoon riots — Obviously this has nothing to do with the cartoons and everything to do with deep hatred and anti-Westernism.
Nigerian rioters have killed at least 15 people after a protest against the publication of cartoons of the Prophet Muhammed descended into violence, a police spokesman says.
Witnesses told reporters that protesters turned on the Christian minority in the northern city of Maiduguri on Saturday, burning shops and churches, after police dispersed a rally called to condemn European newspapers that printed the caricatures.
A police spokesman, Deputy Commissioner Haz Iwendi, told reporters that army troops and police reinforcements had been deployed to the city and that a curfew had been imposed to bring about a return to order.
“We’ve arrested 115 people. Some 15 persons were killed by rioters, and 11 churches burnt,” he said.
It goes back a ways…
Since 1999 a dozen northern states, including Borno, have attempted to reintroduce Islamic Sharia law, exacerbating latent tensions between the communities and triggering several bloody riots.
Sometimes external factors such as the cartoon controversy trigger the fighting. In September 2001 news of the attack by al-Qaida hijackers on New York and Washington rekindled unrest in Jos which killed 915 people.
And in 2002 an attempt to stage the Miss World beauty contest in Nigeria offended conservative Muslims and led to a riot which left 220 dead
related link:
Resisting Shari’a in Nigeria
Yup, like I said, just an excuse for violence. It makes me laugh everytime I hear some muslim leader professing how islam is all about peace. Guess what, we’re not buying your bullshit. Islam will not rest until the whole world is a model of their ideal. The sooner the non muslim world pulls its head out its ass and realizes this, the sooner this can be delt with.
this isn’t about the cartoons anymore….
A fine point, perhaps: The big offense has more to do with the inscription of the name of Allah (the ornate scribble on the font of the turbin) on (potentially future toilet paper) newsprint. To *any* follower of Islam, this is particularly offensive. Hence, “blasphemy”. I wonder why this aspect hasn’t been reported in the MSM?
Reactionary hotheads looking for an excuse.
Compliments of the day to you. I am barrister Edozie Robert of Edozie Robert & Associates. I have lost a wealthy Muslim brother in the recent rioting. He was offended by the cartoons and thought violence would be a good way to express his outrage. He had a life insurance policy for TWENTY-FIVE MILLIION DOLLARS, but to receive the funds, I must make contact with you and transfer the funds to an overseas bank account. Just reply with your bank account numbers and I will transfer the money to your account. You may keep 10%, and the other 90% will go to Lagos orphanages. It is important that you keep this communication in strictest confidence.
I couldn’t resist OK’ing #5. I hope it’s not just one of our regulars being inventive.
Actually if anyone actually cared to look deep there were plenty of vocal Muslims and organizations condemning the terrorists…lots of them. We just chose to ignore them and they were not talking to us anyway.
The Prophet Mohamad is a belief they hold dear to thier hearts.
Why screw with them. its just not right.
They should have just apologized for the cartoon so everyone can move on.
Why apologize to them? Do they apologize to us when the Taliban beheads an American because he is in the middle east? Do they apologize when they go into a church in Africa, Asia or the Middle East and kill everyone for worshipping Jesus? They answer to those questions are no. Apologize if you want to buit don’t include me.
I agree with BOTH Richard and Carl. I think an apologies are due but it probably won’t happen.
Why didn’t most Muslims apologize for 911?
That’s because the average Muslims had nothing to do with it. Didn’t plan it. Didn’t pay for it. Didn’t know about it. Nothing. No connection at all.
The same goes for these beheadings. The average Muslims has absolutely no connection to them, whatsovever.
Who apologizes for something that had NOTHING to do with?
Do you? not likely Should Muslims? No.
If they want to, that’s fine. But it would be a wierd apology.
Love Your Enemies
Bless those who curse you,
Do good to those you hate you, and
Pray for those who despitefully use you, and persecute you
Tha you may be the children of your father who is in heaven
(Matthew 5:44-45).
Doesn’t mean I have to like it when people make movies blaspheming Jesus, but my beliefs command me to love them, do good to them, and pray for them. Hard to do, yes. Do I live up to this every day? No. But everytime I even think about exacting any type of retribution on someone who makes a mockery of Jesus, this commandment keeps me from even considering anything of the sort.
I’m not here to throw stones at other religions or other people. Just think about that verse when looking at world religions “objectively”.
Some good music to put things in perspective…….
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6790389593482816434
to unlivedphalanx….it NEVER was about the cartoons. They were published back in Oct. or Sept. of last year, and raised a small fuss in Denmark. It was hijacked by other groups last month.
*to richard Brill*….just who should apologise? The Danish paper that published the cartoons has apologised, more than once. The demand is an apology from the Danish goverment, who refuses to apologise for something it has no control over….it’s called a *free press*.
*to greg allen*….>>>>who apologises for something they had nothing to do with?
Why are Mohammedans so mad?
So retaliate with your own damn cartoon you Islamo-fascists turdy screwfish crybaby bullies.
They burn effigies of Bush, who I do not love much, but they also ban Bibles, persecute everyone who is not under their idiotic religious bullshit Sharia “laws” all imaginary fantasies of a Moon God.
They are so tough they are cowards with covered faces.
I have no respect for KuKluxKlan, Neo Nazis, or Islamo-fascists. I don’t have to respect anybody’s religion or lack thereof. I am against any apology for a cartoon.
They are scared of a CARTOON. Do we not see how weak and timid they are?
To Joshua,
Of course the paper should apologize (but not one of those lame, “I’m sorry if you were offended” apologies that people usually do.)
I was responding to Carl:
>> Do they apologize to us when the Taliban beheads an American because he is in the middle east?
If, by “they”, Carl means beheaders, then, of course, an apology is due.
But the average Muslim need not apologize for beheadings (or 911) any more than YOU need to apologize for the cartoons. What value is there in apologizing for others?
I swear, this group-thinking gets us into more problems than practically anything else.
This culture dosn’t understand FREE PRESS or the ways of a free society. And in many ways the free world dosn’t understand thier way of life nor wants to. both sides only care about thier wants and needs.
It’s simple. 15 Diied over a stupid cartoon.
The cartoonist now has a Million dollar bounty over his head for said cartoon. I’m not sure if its really worth the price to pay.
It only costs a little pride for the government to say geese we are so sorry we hurt you with this stupid cartoon.
Isn’t that taught in church to love neighbor?
If it means saving a life I apologise. The cartoon is stupid and never should have gone to print.
This cartoon has little to do with 9/11 it has to with hate and not accepting people for being differnet.
Similiar to seeing a retarded person and laughing at him to his face.
keep in mind
Muslims didn’t bomb us individuals did.
Bin Laden and his group did.
>>I wonder why this aspect hasn’t been reported in the MSM?
“the MSM”?? Hoo boy. The Michelle Malkin squad is now joining up with jihadists?
“Blasphemy” my western infidel ass. That’s a good reason to go on a muderous worldwide rampage, burning, looting, and killing? Fools.
I was in Barnes and Noble yesterday, and noticed a book by George Carlin on the “new arrivals” table titled “When Will Jesus Bring the Pork Chops”? BLASPHEMY. Yet there wasn’t a single Christian rioting, attempting to burn down the store, or putting out a fatwa calling for the execution of George Carlin.
Even the excitable Zionists were not moved to violence by the mention of a cloven-hoofed beast.
No mention of this pacifism appeared in the “MSM” either.
Joshua
That Danish newspaper has not apologized. They still stand for their concept of Free Speech and ignore the consequences of the results. The Danish Government has not apologized because, as they say, the newspaper did nothing wrong. The majority pf newspapers have not published the cartoons, not because they are “wusses”, but because they see no constructive purpose in doing so.
The rioters are not the mainstream Muslims. They are the radical sheep that will protest, burn, and kill whenever given the chance. Many Muslim leaders have urged restraint from their people and the majority have followed that advise.
On both sides we are hearing the radical elements. As the saying goes, the squeaky wheel gets the oil. The saner, cooler heads are not advocating or participating in violence.
To All
I apologize for all the idiots on this planet that think they have more “right” to exist then others. I apologize for everyone on this planet that believes their beliefs are the only proper belief. I apologize for all the hate that exists. I apologize because I too am a member of the Human Race and we are all in this together.
Richard Brill: Do you seriously believe that any form of apology from the Danes or anybody else would pacify this rioting? I have to wonder what percentage of those comitting the violence have even seen the cartoons. Maybe I’m off base, but it seems quite easy to believe that all it would take is a few people saying, “Hey, we’re protesting western stuff, you in?”
Mr. Fusion says:
“That Danish newspaper has not apologized.”
Yes they have. Below is a link to your choice of news stories covering the apology including Aljazeera.
http://news.google.ca/nwshp?hl=en&tab=wn&q=danish%20newspaper%20apology
And here’s a link to a Muslim webpage that doesn’t agree what the prohibition of depictions of Mohammed.
http://www.muslim-refusenik.com/
I’m not really sure what the correct answer is.
I lived in New York City thru 9/11. I attended funnerals etc. It sucked.
I back the president of the Unted States 100%.as a patriotic Amerrican
I agree that we must find bind laden and bring him to justice however
I believe in live and let live. We need to be above violence.
Why Screw with them. Satire is one thing Messages of hate is another thing. Its obvious they are viewing this cartoon is a message of hate.
Messages of hate crosses all lines of Freedom of speech.
About 10 days ago I was attacked by a man from the middle east.Niff Said
He was no p$ssy thats for sure and neither am I.
I did nothing to provoke the attack except look like a red white and Blue American. He started screaming and cursing at me after a few minutes he followed me and ended up pulling a pocket knife and stared waving it around at me in Rage. I wasn’t sure what he was angry about but it wasn’t any time to find out.
I wasn’t able to disarm him but instead I kept my distance and focused on the fight. He was after my Blood.. After a while I was able to land a nice blow and he eventually ran off.
Milo
Flemming Rose, the culture editor of Denmark’s Jyllands- Posten, wrote in an opinion article for Sunday’s edition of The Washington Post that his newspaper had meant no disrespect for Islam, but it was wrong in a democracy for the taboos of one religion to restrict public debate.
“We certainly didn’t intend to trigger violent demonstrations throughout the Muslim world,” Rose wrote. “Our goal was simply to push back self-imposed limits on expression that seemed to be closing in tighter.
…
However, Rose said in the Washington Post, “We cannot apologize for our right to publish material, even offensive material.”
Reuters News Alert. 19 Feb 2006 17:38:07 GMT
The same article does state that the newspaper HAD apologized. I was unaware that they had. Maybe that news had gotten buried under all the rioting and other crap. I had been left with the impression though, that the paper was unapologetic, as evidenced in the quotes above.
there have been several stories with different answers to the apology thing. But as Milo pointed out, the paper did apologise. And the link that he posted about the prohibtions to depicting Mohammond is a good one. I just finished reading an article that talked about that. It seems it depends on how you read a Muslim set of rules written a couple hundred years after Muhamand died. One says it’s ok, just not in Mosques, the other says it’s not ok. It seems it’s our Saudi friends who are totally against any dipiction of their founder. The Saudi’s believe in Waahabism, a very conservative and fundlementalist form of Islam.