<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Possibility of Muslim violence forces a rethink over scholarly cartoons book</title>
	<atom:link href="http://freethinker.co.uk/2009/08/21/possibility-of-muslim-violence-forces-a-rethink-over-scholarly-cartoons-book/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://freethinker.co.uk/2009/08/21/possibility-of-muslim-violence-forces-a-rethink-over-scholarly-cartoons-book/</link>
	<description>The voice of atheism since 1881</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 05:40:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Awani Kumar</title>
		<link>http://freethinker.co.uk/2009/08/21/possibility-of-muslim-violence-forces-a-rethink-over-scholarly-cartoons-book/comment-page-1/#comment-21349</link>
		<dc:creator>Awani Kumar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 14:55:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freethinker.co.uk/?p=8014#comment-21349</guid>
		<description>In Persian, it reads, &quot;Ba Khuda Diwana Baso Ba Muhammad Hoshiyar&quot;.

It means, you can take liberty with Allah, not Prophet.

Remember this, before publishing any thing which muslims may perceive as offensive to their dearest Prophet. Don&#039;t blame others if you lose your life (or limbs) for not following it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In Persian, it reads, &#8220;Ba Khuda Diwana Baso Ba Muhammad Hoshiyar&#8221;.</p>
<p>It means, you can take liberty with Allah, not Prophet.</p>
<p>Remember this, before publishing any thing which muslims may perceive as offensive to their dearest Prophet. Don&#8217;t blame others if you lose your life (or limbs) for not following it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MelM</title>
		<link>http://freethinker.co.uk/2009/08/21/possibility-of-muslim-violence-forces-a-rethink-over-scholarly-cartoons-book/comment-page-1/#comment-21015</link>
		<dc:creator>MelM</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Aug 2009 02:33:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freethinker.co.uk/?p=8014#comment-21015</guid>
		<description>Good for the Duke! I don&#039;t expect a U.S. leader to say such a thing; Bush didn&#039;t say it and I don&#039;t think Obama would either.  After a little whine about freedom of speech, Bush sided with Islam!  </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good for the Duke! I don&#039;t expect a U.S. leader to say such a thing; Bush didn&#039;t say it and I don&#039;t think Obama would either.  After a little whine about freedom of speech, Bush sided with Islam!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MelM</title>
		<link>http://freethinker.co.uk/2009/08/21/possibility-of-muslim-violence-forces-a-rethink-over-scholarly-cartoons-book/comment-page-1/#comment-21013</link>
		<dc:creator>MelM</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Aug 2009 02:20:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freethinker.co.uk/?p=8014#comment-21013</guid>
		<description>&quot;Inspire&quot; and &quot;instigate&quot; are not the same. All kinds of views &quot;inspire&quot;--which is a form of thought; instigation, I believe, must be part of an act of violence. You may recall the murder of the abortion doctor Tiller in the U.S. a few months ago. In news story comments by readers, there were people who wrote that Tiller got what he deserved. One was even more explicit saying that such doctors should be shot. These are thoughts and opinions but are not instigations even though inspiring to some nutters. I think the last would have to be said as part of an act of violence or threat of violence directed at a doctor before it should be considered instigation. I&#039;m coming from the view that thoughts don&#039;t violate rights--only acts can violate rights. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&quot;Inspire&quot; and &quot;instigate&quot; are not the same. All kinds of views &quot;inspire&quot;&#8211;which is a form of thought; instigation, I believe, must be part of an act of violence. You may recall the murder of the abortion doctor Tiller in the U.S. a few months ago. In news story comments by readers, there were people who wrote that Tiller got what he deserved. One was even more explicit saying that such doctors should be shot. These are thoughts and opinions but are not instigations even though inspiring to some nutters. I think the last would have to be said as part of an act of violence or threat of violence directed at a doctor before it should be considered instigation. I&#039;m coming from the view that thoughts don&#039;t violate rights&#8211;only acts can violate rights.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MelM</title>
		<link>http://freethinker.co.uk/2009/08/21/possibility-of-muslim-violence-forces-a-rethink-over-scholarly-cartoons-book/comment-page-1/#comment-21012</link>
		<dc:creator>MelM</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Aug 2009 01:57:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freethinker.co.uk/?p=8014#comment-21012</guid>
		<description>Exactly! The innocent publisher gets the blame for what the Islamists instigate.  A moral inversion thought up by the innocent: incredible. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Exactly! The innocent publisher gets the blame for what the Islamists instigate.  A moral inversion thought up by the innocent: incredible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MelM</title>
		<link>http://freethinker.co.uk/2009/08/21/possibility-of-muslim-violence-forces-a-rethink-over-scholarly-cartoons-book/comment-page-1/#comment-21010</link>
		<dc:creator>MelM</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 23:57:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freethinker.co.uk/?p=8014#comment-21010</guid>
		<description>Re: Hitchens&#039; Slate article. (linked by David Lawson). I quote the worst outrage: 
 
&quot;...His reply took the form of the official statement from the press&#039;s public affairs department. This informed me that Yale had consulted a range of experts before making its decision and that &#039;[a]ll confirmed that the republication of the cartoons by the Yale University Press ran a serious risk of instigating violence.&#039; &quot; 
 
If the view is accepted that such publication is &quot;instigation&quot;, freedom of speech is dead. Someone, somewhere, can take any inportant speech and decide to harm himself or others. If YUP had said that they pulled the material because of fear for their lives, I wouldn&#039;t have objected. But it&#039;s gross to  blame a publisher for the deaths that the Islamists themselves actually instigate. To lose a right, just take the blame for anything someone else does if we exercise a right. (In my view, speech is instigation if it&#039;s part of an intended act of violence or the threat of violence.) 
 
The cartoons should be published, and I think a good approach is the &quot;I am Spartacus&quot; tactic. 
 
I sent an email to YUP at: customer.care@triliteral.org  </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re: Hitchens&#039; Slate article. (linked by David Lawson). I quote the worst outrage: </p>
<p>&quot;&#8230;His reply took the form of the official statement from the press&#039;s public affairs department. This informed me that Yale had consulted a range of experts before making its decision and that &#039;[a]ll confirmed that the republication of the cartoons by the Yale University Press ran a serious risk of instigating violence.&#039; &quot; </p>
<p>If the view is accepted that such publication is &quot;instigation&quot;, freedom of speech is dead. Someone, somewhere, can take any inportant speech and decide to harm himself or others. If YUP had said that they pulled the material because of fear for their lives, I wouldn&#039;t have objected. But it&#039;s gross to  blame a publisher for the deaths that the Islamists themselves actually instigate. To lose a right, just take the blame for anything someone else does if we exercise a right. (In my view, speech is instigation if it&#039;s part of an intended act of violence or the threat of violence.) </p>
<p>The cartoons should be published, and I think a good approach is the &quot;I am Spartacus&quot; tactic. </p>
<p>I sent an email to YUP at: <a href="mailto:customer.care@triliteral.org">customer.care@triliteral.org</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Harwood</title>
		<link>http://freethinker.co.uk/2009/08/21/possibility-of-muslim-violence-forces-a-rethink-over-scholarly-cartoons-book/comment-page-1/#comment-21009</link>
		<dc:creator>William Harwood</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 23:49:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freethinker.co.uk/?p=8014#comment-21009</guid>
		<description>So Muslims can only put a fatwa on other Muslims.  For non-Muslims they have to be content with putting a hit.   Interesting distinction. 
According to Wikipedia (admittedly a less-than-reliable source) a fatwa is  a decree concerning some point of sharia law issued by an accepted authority.  When Khomeini issued a fatwa against Salman Rushdie, it was a decree that he had committed apostasy, one of Mohammad&#039;s myriad of capital crimes., and therefore all Muslims were under the prophet&#039;s own orders to murder him on sight.  In other words, it was not the hit that constituted the fatwa, but the reasoning behind the hit.   Again, an interesting distinction. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So Muslims can only put a fatwa on other Muslims.  For non-Muslims they have to be content with putting a hit.   Interesting distinction.<br />
According to Wikipedia (admittedly a less-than-reliable source) a fatwa is  a decree concerning some point of sharia law issued by an accepted authority.  When Khomeini issued a fatwa against Salman Rushdie, it was a decree that he had committed apostasy, one of Mohammad&#039;s myriad of capital crimes., and therefore all Muslims were under the prophet&#039;s own orders to murder him on sight.  In other words, it was not the hit that constituted the fatwa, but the reasoning behind the hit.   Again, an interesting distinction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: barriejohn</title>
		<link>http://freethinker.co.uk/2009/08/21/possibility-of-muslim-violence-forces-a-rethink-over-scholarly-cartoons-book/comment-page-1/#comment-21002</link>
		<dc:creator>barriejohn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 22:11:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freethinker.co.uk/?p=8014#comment-21002</guid>
		<description>Oh, I don&#039;t mind being accused of being off-topic sometimes, (isn&#039;t that what makes blogging so enjoyable at times?), or even plain wrong-headed, but I would never consciously  parrott the remarks of another poster, and thus give the impression that what I was writing was so much superior to what he had said on the subject, for whatever reason!! </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, I don&#039;t mind being accused of being off-topic sometimes, (isn&#039;t that what makes blogging so enjoyable at times?), or even plain wrong-headed, but I would never consciously  parrott the remarks of another poster, and thus give the impression that what I was writing was so much superior to what he had said on the subject, for whatever reason!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: remigius</title>
		<link>http://freethinker.co.uk/2009/08/21/possibility-of-muslim-violence-forces-a-rethink-over-scholarly-cartoons-book/comment-page-1/#comment-20997</link>
		<dc:creator>remigius</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 21:16:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freethinker.co.uk/?p=8014#comment-20997</guid>
		<description>Chuckle! </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Chuckle!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Broga</title>
		<link>http://freethinker.co.uk/2009/08/21/possibility-of-muslim-violence-forces-a-rethink-over-scholarly-cartoons-book/comment-page-1/#comment-20994</link>
		<dc:creator>Broga</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 20:32:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freethinker.co.uk/?p=8014#comment-20994</guid>
		<description>barriejohn.   If I may say so, you are too hard on yourself.   We all feel &quot;stupid&quot; from time to time: me more than most, I guess.   I enjoy your contributions and if you are a bit off track from time to time then join the club.   
 
Regards, 
 
Broga </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>barriejohn.   If I may say so, you are too hard on yourself.   We all feel &quot;stupid&quot; from time to time: me more than most, I guess.   I enjoy your contributions and if you are a bit off track from time to time then join the club.   </p>
<p>Regards, </p>
<p>Broga</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stoneyground</title>
		<link>http://freethinker.co.uk/2009/08/21/possibility-of-muslim-violence-forces-a-rethink-over-scholarly-cartoons-book/comment-page-1/#comment-20993</link>
		<dc:creator>Stoneyground</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 20:17:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freethinker.co.uk/?p=8014#comment-20993</guid>
		<description>By being so spineless these people give the Muslim world a genuine reason to despise them. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By being so spineless these people give the Muslim world a genuine reason to despise them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
