Who wants to join my little business venture then?

[Neil]

We sell teddies from the website www.muhammedteddies.com?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7117430.stm

[Mike70]

just goes to show that the first victim of any type of "fundamentalism" is a sense of humor.

[Neil]

just goes to show that the first victim of any type of "fundamentalism" is a sense of humor.

Do you realise Muhammed is the second most common baby boys name now in the UK! (Not including teddy bears!) Likely to become no1 next year!


I fully expect to see in the news tomorrow - keeping in mind how crazy this whole matter is - that the teddy has been question in court, and as he wasn't able to offer any evidence in his defense he is to be stoned to death infront of an angry mob burning Winnie The Poo pictures!

:rolleyes:

[_liam_]

"oh no i went to strict muslim country and named a child's plaything after their most venerated prophet, and now i'm in trouble! has the world gone mad"

yes indeed, but you can take solace in the knowledge that you have the moral highground as you get lashed you BLOODY IDIOT :lol:

zero sympathy from liamland! if youre going to live and work within close proximity of nutters, tread lightly

[Tricky]

thing is it wasnt her who named the teddy,is was one of the kids in her class,whos name....wait for it....is mohammed!the poor woman probably thought she was helping to make the world a better place by teaching over there,and look whats happened!this is why britain must NEVER allow sharia law,despite how much certain islamofascists bleat on about it.bunch of pricks.

[Neil]

thing is it wasnt her who named the teddy,is was one of the kids in her class,whos name....wait for it....is mohammed!the poor woman probably thought she was helping to make the world a better place by teaching over there,and look whats happened!this is why britain must NEVER allow sharia law,despite how much certain islamofascists bleat on about it.bunch of pricks.

If she had turned down the suggestion and instead used a nice Anglo-Saxon name instead, we'd be hearing people crying 'foul' and the racism card would be played...

So in good spirit she let the children name the teddy after one of their class mates, and bingo bango... In walk the nutters...

[Danny]

its bollocks, the dude my aunt married is a muslim called mohammed and he doesnt give too ****s either, its like the asian equivalent of james or daniel, sure the phropet mohammed was called, well, mohammed but theres plenty of mexican guys named jesus too.

[Khardis]

I always wanted to start a website where its just pictures of the Prophet Mohammed "Feces be upon him" getting gang raped by jackals or pictures of the koran in a toilet with poop on it.

[MinionZombie]

I too think the whole thing is utterly pathetic.

Indeed, the kids named it and it was named after one of the children - not the prophet.

Also, how weak does your faith have to be that you get into such a fuss over a f*ckin' teddy bear, I mean really - it literally is super lame. Lame incarnate even.

So it's okay to call a bunch of kids Mohammed, but not an inanimate object - even one as inoffensive as a teddy bear, an object of comfort to children. Naming a bunch of kids Mohammed is fine, but you can't have a cartoon and you can't have a teddy with that name, geeeez...

Oh yeah, the David Blaine South Park episode was on today on MTV - guess what - featuring a SP version of Mohammed as one of the Super Best Friends. *gasps in fright*

And lashes - come the f*ck on...that's so 16-something-er-uther. :rolleyes:

[Tricky]

@ khardis do it....doooooo iiiiiitttt :lol:

[Legion2213]

We sell teddies from the website www.muhammedteddies.com?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7117430.stm

I'm in!

We could produce little mohammed teddies holding bombs as well.

[Mike70]

I'm in!

We could produce little mohammed teddies holding bombs as well.

if they are holding danish flags i'm right there with ya.
:D

[_liam_]

oh come on

just think about it, youre in F*CKING SUDAN for christ's sake

DO NOT GIVE A CHILD'S PLAYTHING THE NAME OF THEIR MOST REVERED PROPHET

yes it was named after a kid in the class - but the kid just happens to have the same name as their prophet? hello??? COMMON SENSE?

the sudanese government pays janjaweed militias to slaughter christians in the sudan region

you would have thought someone with COMMON SENSE would have read up on this before they moved there, and subsequently MADE VERY SURE NOT TO STEP ON SUCH DANGEROUS PEOPLE'S TOES

i mean come on, you can sit there and be like "oh but it was named after a kid" "oh how backward" "oh the poor woman" - but are you honestly defending such idiocy? did it not occur to her to circumnavigate such a potentially sticky situation? is she actually retarded?

sorry but she FAILS, and there is no rational way around it.

the sudanese government are going way over the top, and muslim councils around the world agree, but the woman was still being stupid!

it's equivalent to say, one day you are VERY hungry and have a banana in your jacket, suddenly a policeman mistakes you for a criminal, points his gun at you.

now, do you reach in your jacket for the banana?

DO YOU F*CK!

if someone is waiting to catch you out, chiggidy check yo self before they bring the tazir down on you

i know many of you guys like to point out how outrageously everyone overreacts to everything and how Political correctness has gone mad, but even with that in mind i fail to see how you find that stupid woman so blameless.

and yes, they have a problem with naming even a kid's toy muhammed - they have a blanket policy of just not f*cking with the name of their prophet - otherwise you have to compile a neverending list of what's ok and what's not - and that is how political correctness begins, when people need to be TOLD what is right and wrong instead of exercising COMMON SENSE


...right?


oh yeah and


I always wanted to start a website where its just pictures of the Prophet Mohammed "Feces be upon him" getting gang raped by jackals or pictures of the koran in a toilet with poop on it.

why would you want to do that?

oh wait yeah, because youre prejudiced. big lols

[Kaos]

And her stupidity does not excuse the barbarity of that culture. You choose to focus on a the stupidity of a well meaning and, by any rational standard, innocuous act while others choose to focus on the utterly barbaric culture surrounding islam. I, for one, think the latter is of greater concern irrespective of the stupidity of the woman. Just a matter of preference, of course. There is nothing prejudiced about recognizing the pattern of barbarity in a culture...(even our own - abortion clinic christian terrorists anyone?). Sorry if that culture is offended...too bad. Don't beat women with lashes and you won't get criticized for it... especially when that woman was raped such as what is going on in Saudi Arabia right now.

[MinionZombie]

I do agree with the 'one woman VS a comparitive many' argument, while the sort of people whose faith is so weak they're threatened by a teddy bear named after a child by the child's school chums are in the minority, they shout the loudest - which represents a negative view of the entire apple cart.

I think the normal Muslims, the majority, should come out loud & proud and say that they think this is utter nonsense and they're not offended at all - as a few have been. In issues like this, the common sense merchants need to speak up, and beat down on the sort of idiots who call slamming a woman up in jail without charge (until now, but before she wasn't apparently) over a teddy bear and yet still call it a "minute" incident.

A minute incident this is not, a minute incident is dropping your phone on the floor and thinking for a moment you broke it.

I read something today about a couple who were KILLED for wearing WESTERN trousers ... killed over clothing from the West ... yeah, that's sensible. :rolleyes:

Shockingly enough, not everybody goes around on eggshells, and heavens-to-betsy, some people actually insult others by sheer accident and by no intentional means ... but you know what happens when rational people are insulted, they figure out why it happened and the perpetrator (non-intentional perp) apologises and everyone's happy as Larry.

So heavens forbid a well meaning person should accidentally cause offense over something as innocent as a teddy bear, something which has left millions of people across the globe scratching their heads with confusion and expressions of "WHAT?!", except for the few who are proceeding with persecution over such a retarded matter.

Even if a society somewhere else isn't up to our speed, say in a position we were in a few hundred years ago, it's still retarded.

And come on - if you were seeking to deliberately cause offense, you'd do something worse than call a teddy bear Mohammed.

And yet it's fine to call a person - a mortal being capable of heinous acts - Mohammed. So some person called Mohammed could run off and rape and kill and steal, and that's not an insult to "the prophet" because they share the same name? And yet ... getting bent out of shape over a teddy bear ... now that is the opportunity to say "oh come on", in my opinion.

Okay, that's my side and some of my thoughts plucked fresh from the cuff, so there's no need to get into a great long diatribe about it, brick-wall-discussions are boring...just sayin', geez. :rolleyes:

[_liam_]

And her stupidity does not excuse the barbarity of that culture. You choose to focus on a the stupidity of a well meaning and, by any rational standard, innocuous act while others choose to focus on the utterly barbaric culture surrounding islam. I, for one, think the latter is of greater concern irrespective of the stupidity of the woman. Just a matter of preference, of course. There is nothing prejudiced about recognizing the pattern of barbarity in a culture...(even our own - abortion clinic christian terrorists anyone?). Sorry if that culture is offended...too bad. Don't beat women with lashes and you won't get criticized for it... especially when that woman was raped such as what is going on in Saudi Arabia right now.

i didn't choose to ignore the barbarity of the culture, if you have another peek i said they are both at fault. I placed emphasis on how stupid the women is because I felt TOO MUCH emphasis was being placed on how the sudanese were at fault - that was the point of the post

and i dont seem to remember saying that pointing out barbarity within a culture is prejudice as you seem to imply, i was saying that Khardis' suggestion of creating a website with the sole itent of offending any & all muslims who visit it was prejudiced - because it was.



I do agree with the 'one woman VS a comparitive many' argument, while the sort of people whose faith is so weak they're threatened by a teddy bear named after a child by the child's school chums are in the minority, they shout the loudest - which represents a negative view of the entire apple cart.

aye. personally i wouldnt say it was a weak faith because of their sensitivities. i can see where you are coming from in that if the faith were strong it should be impervious to such trivial blows, but on the other side of the coin, the faith is so strong that they will make utter tits of themselves defending it.



I think the normal Muslims, the majority, should come out loud & proud and say that they think this is utter nonsense and they're not offended at all - as a few have been. In issues like this, the common sense merchants need to speak up, and beat down on the sort of idiots who call slamming a woman up in jail without charge (until now, but before she wasn't apparently) over a teddy bear and yet still call it a "minute" incident.

A minute incident this is not, a minute incident is dropping your phone on the floor and thinking for a moment you broke it.

I read something today about a couple who were KILLED for wearing WESTERN trousers ... killed over clothing from the West ... yeah, that's sensible. :rolleyes:


really sorry, but you seem to be waffling on now :lol: - who is saying that the Khartoum government, or islamic theocracies in general, are wholly reasonable? I certainly wasnt, neither are the media or the muslim council.

And what's with the trouser story? you were talking about the gravity of the bear situation and then you furnished us with a seemingly unrelated spook story



Shockingly enough, not everybody goes around on eggshells, and heavens-to-betsy, some people actually insult others by sheer accident and by no intentional means ... but you know what happens when rational people are insulted, they figure out why it happened and the perpetrator (non-intentional perp) apologises and everyone's happy as Larry.


absolute poppycock. if someone came from a country where it's legal to have sex with 12 year old girls and got your 12 year old sister/daughter pregnant, would you take such an attitude?

of course not!

Yes it is an extreme example and may seem a slightly tenuous comparison to draw, but believe it or not it is a good indicator of just how seriously they take religion.

They prize their value systems and the prophet that acts as a figurehead just as highly as we value & defend moral conventions such as protecting underage children. the difference is they believe in an afterlife, and as such this trivialises any extremes one might go to to defend the faith in this life - after all, this life to them is not real, just a stepping stone.

hence fuss over bear, hence suicide bombs.

you dismiss how harshly they reacted because you personally cannot even begin to put yourself in the shoes of a person capable of such a level of devotion to what seems to you to be a strange pursuit.




So heavens forbid a well meaning person should accidentally cause offense over something as innocent as a teddy bear, something which has left millions of people across the globe scratching their heads with confusion and expressions of "WHAT?!", except for the few who are proceeding with persecution over such a retarded matter.


again, nobody is saying they arent over-reacting, i'm just saying it is an idiotic dereliction of tact, diplomacy and common sense for it not to have occurred to her that this may just possibly have been an unwise decision!



Even if a society somewhere else isn't up to our speed, say in a position we were in a few hundred years ago, it's still retarded.


well you can look down your nose all you like, but the reality is that where the paycheck is smaller the preacher cries louder, and that's a fact - it could happen here tommorow. Dumbass islamic extremists are ultimately only guilty of being as human as we are.



And come on - if you were seeking to deliberately cause offense, you'd do something worse than call a teddy bear Mohammed.


aye marilyn manson says a similar thing about his act, but he still pisses people off



And yet it's fine to call a person - a mortal being capable of heinous acts - Mohammed. So some person called Mohammed could run off and rape and kill and steal, and that's not an insult to "the prophet" because they share the same name? And yet ... getting bent out of shape over a teddy bear ... now that is the opportunity to say "oh come on", in my opinion.


yes, religion is an invention of man and as such, is flawed just as man is.

i mean...well done, youve realised that people who are fully taken with religion can often take leave of reason - again, nobody is really denying that, the issue is that the woman is also to blame in her own way, but people seem to be ignoring this because we love to hate on the crazy muslims.



Okay, that's my side and some of my thoughts plucked fresh from the cuff, so there's no need to get into a great long diatribe about it, brick-wall-discussions are boring...just sayin', geez. :rolleyes:

there's always a need & a duty to challenge that which one finds morally reprehensible on any level, and also to outline one's stances on political/religious/social issues in the face of a challenge - nobody would grow as a political thinker if they just surrounded themselves with people who mirror their own opinions.

[Danny]

i think it just said on the news that she has to choose either 40 lashes with a whip or a few YEARS in jail.

id take the lashings.

[_liam_]

it wouldnt be an easy choice, 40 lashes would pretty much cripple you, if you didnt die. theyre no pissing about tazir lashes that split the skin open.

insanity

[Danny]

true, but compared to the alternative.... *insert im too pretty for jail joke here*.

[Kaos]

i didn't choose to ignore the barbarity of the culture, if you have another peek i said they are both at fault. I placed emphasis on how stupid the women is because I felt TOO MUCH emphasis was being placed on how the sudanese were at fault - that was the point of the post

and i dont seem to remember saying that pointing out barbarity within a culture is prejudice as you seem to imply, i was saying that Khardis' suggestion of creating a website with the sole itent of offending any & all muslims who visit it was prejudiced - because it was.


I said you chose to focus on the one aspect as opposed to the others, I didn't say ignore. I think based on your explanation we were in entire agreement as to whose focus was whose.

As far as Khardis' statement about his website is only prejudiced subjectively, not objectively; as far as I can construe he is trying simply to offend muslims who seem to have maniacally fragile sensibilities (and is technically no different in principle to Neil's teddybear venture). This form of expression is quite often defended by civil libertarians when the derision is placed toward xtians:

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

I would have to say that if Piss Christ is acceptable free expression so is a website that shows the koran covered in crap. Khardis may very well be prejudiced against muslims, but this particular statement about an offensive website is not really actionable as far as I can tell in context to any forum rules. If it is acceptable to conceptualize contempt for christianity then islam is fair game. And I do think it is acceptable in both cases.

[_liam_]

I said you chose to focus on the one aspect as opposed to the others, I didn't say ignore. I think based on your explanation we were in entire agreement as to whose focus was whose.


ok, you said i chose to focus on one aspect - but seeing as the other aspect was the one i felt too much focus was being devoted to, it's hardly suprising that i chose not to discuss that issue any more than i did.



As far as Khardis' statement about his website is only prejudiced subjectively, not objectively; as far as I can construe he is trying simply to offend muslims who seem to have maniacally fragile sensibilities


are you SERIOUSLY saying that only muslims with "maniacally fraglie sensibilities" would be offended by what khardis suggested?

pictures of their prophet being gang raped by jackals?

?

it seems you are either seriously out of touch or taking an apologist stance




(and is technically no different in principle to Neil's teddybear venture). This form of expression is quite often defended by civil libertarians when the derision is placed toward xtians:

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

I would have to say that if Piss Christ is acceptable free expression so is a website that shows the koran covered in crap. Khardis may very well be prejudiced against muslims, but this particular statement about an offensive website is not really actionable as far as I can tell in context to any forum rules. If it is acceptable to conceptualize contempt for christianity then islam is fair game. And I do think it is acceptable in both cases.

again with these mysterious tangents, when was i questioning his right to free speech?

i'm not denying that it is free expression, or that khardis has a right to voice it, i'm just saying it's prejudiced.

when i see something i find objectionable, i'll let it be known that i find it unacceptable. and so will he. he has his rights, so do i.

you can still question a mans beliefs without questioning his right to the hold them.

[MinionZombie]

You don't have enjoy picking everybody's opinions apart do you? :lol::sneaky:

The trouser story was to point again at the retarded nature of the extraordinary nitwits who spoil/tar everybody else in their area with their own moronity...oh yes, I made up a word and went there. :D

Also, I wasn't saying the faith itself was weak, I was saying those who are specifically complaining about a teddy bear have weak faith - in my opinion - because they got so arsed-up about a teddy bear...and yes I can see the other side, but this side is my side of preference if I had to choose.

But teddy bear VS kiddy fiddler is a bit of a difference. One is an inanimate object named by children after their friend, the other is a twisted criminal who abuses children and robs their innocence and ruins their lives...so yeah, tenuous alright. :D

Regardless of race, religion, or region...getting bent out of shape over a teddy bear is just retarded, put simply.

I wonder what would happen if Brown & Co threatened to remove all aid and aid workers from Sudan? Not that they'd do that, they don't have the balls to. I mean geez, you go out there to help some kids, and this is what happens...:rolleyes:...ultimately who will suffer in situations like this? The innocent, for one - but in this particularly case - the children, who admittedly & ultimately caused the situation (if you wanted to look at it like that, but you know) - ultimately the kids will suffer.

In general, I think not being able to criticise religion is bad (not that teddy naming is even criticism, or anything beyond teddy naming in fact). You have to have criticism, and as you say, challenges - which is what's going on here on both sides...but it's just, again, such a stupid thing to be having to get involved over.

You wonder if there might be - to some of the whingers at the centre of this - a hatred of the bear itself, as some symbol of the Western world? Although ironically the teddy was probably made in China, like almost everything else us Westerners own. :lol::rolleyes:

As long as I'm anywhere near you, I won't be surrounded by people of my political disposition - although it's nice to also be around people who share your values and thoughts on things, a common view if you will (like this forum about them thar zombie films) - I just didn't wanna get into a whole thing about it with bullet-point deconstructions of other's opinions (ultimately what's the point...and yes I see the hint of irony in that statement in this post). Just wanted to say my piece and go.

Oh and I've just read she's getting banged up for 15 days or something. :rolleyes:

Bah! We should just all have numbers & barcodes instead of names ... and stuffed toys should only be named by what they are - "Bear", "Rabbit", "Dog" etc.

*puts on a face mask and lights a petrol bomb, charges into the streets like a French student* :sneaky::p:D

Damn you Liam and your dragging me into long-post territory, stop making me think about things you bastard! Now if you all don't mind, nature is calling...ta-ta! :D

[Mike70]

so i guess the stuffed animal pig that my son has, which i named muhammed when he first got it (back when all the crying over the danish newspaper was going on), wouldn't be too popular among these fun loving, crazy kids?

i can't wait for some idiotic imam to come out in favor of banning teddy bears entirely because they aren't mentioned in the koran.

[Neil]

And she's been found guilty!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7119399.stm

15 days in prison... Oh and deportation, but I suspect she can't get out of the country fast enough from her point of view!

[_liam_]

You don't have enjoy picking everybody's opinions apart do you? :lol::sneaky:


well, i enjoy the thrust and parry of debate, but ultimately i only say what i feel has to said



The trouser story was to point again at the retarded nature of the extraordinary nitwits who spoil/tar everybody else in their area with their own moronity...oh yes, I made up a word and went there. :D

Also, I wasn't saying the faith itself was weak, I was saying those who are specifically complaining about a teddy bear have weak faith - in my opinion - because they got so arsed-up about a teddy bear...and yes I can see the other side, but this side is my side of preference if I had to choose.


well, that's your shout after all




But teddy bear VS kiddy fiddler is a bit of a difference. One is an inanimate object named by children after their friend, the other is a twisted criminal who abuses children and robs their innocence and ruins their lives...so yeah, tenuous alright. :D

Regardless of race, religion, or region...getting bent out of shape over a teddy bear is just retarded, put simply.


but you only think its not that bad a thing because it doesnt matter to you. to these people mohammed is perhaps the sole saviour of the human race and father of a future supercivilisation - they really really like the bloke.

to your more touchy muslim, a dis on mohammed isnt quite as bad as child molestation, but it is no joke, as evidenced by the riots over the cartoons




In general, I think not being able to criticise religion is bad (not that teddy naming is even criticism, or anything beyond teddy naming in fact).

You have to have criticism, and as you say, challenges - which is what's going on here on both sides...but it's just, again, such a stupid thing to be having to get involved over.

You wonder if there might be - to some of the whingers at the centre of this - a hatred of the bear itself, as some symbol of the Western world? Although ironically the teddy was probably made in China, like almost everything else us Westerners own. :lol::rolleyes:

As long as I'm anywhere near you, I won't be surrounded by people of my political disposition - although it's nice to also be around people who share your values and thoughts on things, a common view if you will (like this forum about them thar zombie films) - I just didn't wanna get into a whole thing about it with bullet-point deconstructions of other's opinions (ultimately what's the point...and yes I see the hint of irony in that statement in this post). Just wanted to say my piece and go.


well if i'm about i'll blag on, it's a guarantee

[Kaos]

are you SERIOUSLY saying that only muslims with "maniacally fraglie sensibilities" would be offended by what khardis suggested?

pictures of their prophet being gang raped by jackals?

?

it seems you are either seriously out of touch or taking an apologist stance


The link I provided ample information regarding the controversy. There is parity in the sh!t koran conceptualization and the piss christ conceptualization. Both religions appear to have maniacally fragile ego's as was evidenced in my explanation and the link I provided. A wide swath of christians were offended by piss christ.

Your label of apologist is inaccurate and is intellectually untenable not to say a tad insulting ... but I still love ya liam. It is always good to have healthy debate... let's keep it healthy by avoiding characterizing positions with inflammatory adjectives such as apologist without having any solid basis for the description...it is tantamount to flaming . The same care should be used in characterizing opposing views as nazi, revisionist, and/or racist especially when the point of view only differs from yours and nothing really supports the characterization.

The real point is... No one is entitled not to be offended. No where is there a guarantee or right to not be offended. Christians will be offended, Muslims will be offended, Jews will be offended. Atheists will be offended.
Khardis saying he wants to put up a website that has images that will offend muslims is entirely his right, and no one is going take action against him or even warn him for it even if the bestiality stuff is over the top. I suppose a Khardis can also have a website with a picture of Charles Darwin with poop on his head swimming in a toilet with a family of scorpions living in his anus if he wants to. Mighty offensive to anyone who respects Darwin's work, but he is still allowed to say he is going to put a website up with the offending image. Replace Darwin with Jesus or Moses or Buddha and it is still allowed.

If someone said that all muslims are sub-human animals...now that would be a violation of the rules. Or someone referring muslims as a <<insert racial pejorative here>>... that is against the rules. Saying you are going to have a website that offends muslims by desecrating their prophet...totally within the rules.

[Mike70]

Both religions appear to have maniacally fragile ego's as was evidenced in my explanation


amen to that brother.:D

i am an atheist so i care very, very little about what might or might not "offend" religous types.

in the words of the syrian poet al-Ma'arri:
"there are only two types of people in this world: those with religion and no brains and those with brains and no religion."

[Kaos]

amen to that brother.:D

i am an atheist so i care very, very little about what might or might not "offend" religous types.

in the words of the syrian poet al-Ma'arri:
"there are only two types of people in this world: those with religion and no brains and those with brains and no religion."
I cannot argue with sentiment of that syrian poet. (See I even agree with a syrian poet, liam! ;))

[Khardis]

oh come on

just think about it, youre in F*CKING SUDAN for christ's sake

DO NOT GIVE A CHILD'S PLAYTHING THE NAME OF THEIR MOST REVERED PROPHET

yes it was named after a kid in the class - but the kid just happens to have the same name as their prophet? hello??? COMMON SENSE?

the sudanese government pays janjaweed militias to slaughter christians in the sudan region

you would have thought someone with COMMON SENSE would have read up on this before they moved there, and subsequently MADE VERY SURE NOT TO STEP ON SUCH DANGEROUS PEOPLE'S TOES

i mean come on, you can sit there and be like "oh but it was named after a kid" "oh how backward" "oh the poor woman" - but are you honestly defending such idiocy? did it not occur to her to circumnavigate such a potentially sticky situation? is she actually retarded?

sorry but she FAILS, and there is no rational way around it.

the sudanese government are going way over the top, and muslim councils around the world agree, but the woman was still being stupid!

it's equivalent to say, one day you are VERY hungry and have a banana in your jacket, suddenly a policeman mistakes you for a criminal, points his gun at you.

now, do you reach in your jacket for the banana?

DO YOU F*CK!

if someone is waiting to catch you out, chiggidy check yo self before they bring the tazir down on you

i know many of you guys like to point out how outrageously everyone overreacts to everything and how Political correctness has gone mad, but even with that in mind i fail to see how you find that stupid woman so blameless.

and yes, they have a problem with naming even a kid's toy muhammed - they have a blanket policy of just not f*cking with the name of their prophet - otherwise you have to compile a neverending list of what's ok and what's not - and that is how political correctness begins, when people need to be TOLD what is right and wrong instead of exercising COMMON SENSE


...right?


oh yeah and



why would you want to do that?

oh wait yeah, because youre prejudiced. big lols

No I am not, my opinion on Islam and Muhammad "Feces be upon him" are well formed opinions derived from news, current events, study in school, study in college and personal relationships with actual Muslims.

It is a terrible religion that needs to be seen for the barbaric brain vomit that it is. OR Step into the modern era, its literally stuck in the middle ages, its pathetic. Murdering a woman who was raped because her rape dishonored the family? I mean.. WTF?! I recall one story years back of a brother who raped his sister, then MURDERED her for his families honor, and he was vindicated. I mean, can you say WTF? These people have bigger problems than a website, Danish cartoons or stuff animals, they need to get the hell into the present and stop living in the stone ages.

Also I would do this because it would be hilarious and anger all the psychotics who think they have the right to destroy long standing cultures to force their sharia-tastic tripe on us.

[Mike70]

oh, sheyat here we go.

sharia-tastic-:lol::D that is one i am going to remember and use.

yes i find the islamic fundamentalist rejection of everything not invented by the time of muhammed to be, well, idiotic in the extreme.

[DeadJonas190]

We sell teddies from the website www.muhammedteddies.com?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7117430.stm

I'm down with that, we can also give them little pilot uniforms and box cutters and charge extra for shoes with little wicks in them.

Then, to top it of,f we can package them with a copy of the patroit act. This is a phenomenal idea, it could be the next Cabbage Patch Kids!

[Neil]

I'm down with that, we can also give them little pilot uniforms and box cutters and charge extra for shoes with little wicks in them.

Then, to top it of,f we can package them with a copy of the patroit act. This is a phenomenal idea, it could be the next Cabbage Patch Kids!

LMAO! "Jihad teddies" :)

[Legion2213]

MUSLIM TEDDY BEAR HAS PAWS CHOPPED OFF

SUDAN was facing international sanctions last night after hacking off the little paws of a three year-old teddy bear.

The cuddly toy was found guilty of blasphemy after taking the name of the prophet Muhammad, in defiance of the country's strict Islamic teddy-bear naming laws.

rest follows in link...:D

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/muslim-teddy-bear-has-paws-chopped-off-20071126559/

[Neil]

MUSLIM TEDDY BEAR HAS PAWS CHOPPED OFF

SUDAN was facing international sanctions last night after hacking off the little paws of a three year-old teddy bear.

The cuddly toy was found guilty of blasphemy after taking the name of the prophet Muhammad, in defiance of the country's strict Islamic teddy-bear naming laws.

rest follows in link...:D

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/muslim-teddy-bear-has-paws-chopped-off-20071126559/


...and only one small step away from reality!

[Tricky]

I see hundreds of sudanese muslims have taken to the streets demanding that she is executed over this!what a bunch of backward,stone age,moronic,raggy bearded,**** stirring,rag wearing tossers :rolleyes:

[Mike70]

here is a link to the story:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7121025.stm

stop pussyfooting around with these barbarians before this lady gets lynched.

sounds like a job for the SAS.

i also think it absurdly funny that it is ok to name a human being after muhammed. a person who might one day grow to be so hateful and nasty that they will blow themselves up on a street corner or fly planes into buildings- all in the name of allah and aforementioned turd but don't you dare name an innocuous toy bear after him. and don't you dare draw cartoons poking fun at at aforementioned turd. disgusting bunch of people.

let me make it clear before a certain person's panties get all in a twist - the digusting people i am referring to are the morons who would:
a. impose/agree with an idiotic sentence like this
and/or
b. march in the street demanding that someone be executed for it.

i am sure that somewhere on this planet there have to be some muslims who are capable of spending at least 10 minutes of everyday in a rational manner.

having religion serve as the basis for public law is most primitive, digusting and barbaric.

[Tricky]

Ah you mean these little beauts?:lol:
http://www.newciv.org/pic/nl/artpic/10/1633/97244039_3e2b1b88c5.jpg

[Mike70]

Ah you mean these little beauts?:lol:
http://www.newciv.org/pic/nl/artpic/10/1633/97244039_3e2b1b88c5.jpg



hahahaha.

the caption "vi er lobet tor for jomfruer" means we are running out of virgins.

again
bwahahahahaha:D:lol:;):p:):cool: great stuff

oh and one for the sudan
:moon:

taking some liberties with nofx:
"So I'm off to the sudan, learn the laws of Islam
Fundamentalism, forget that rock 'n' roll
No teddy bears, no drink, in fact
It's difficult to think about getting laid
When you don't even get to see her face"