Intellectual Terrorism?
intellect |ˈintlˌekt| |ˌɪn(t)lˈɛkt| |ˌɪntəlɛkt|
noun
the faculty of reasoning and understanding objectively, esp. with regard to abstract or academic matters
terrorize |ˈterəˌrīz| |ˌtɛrəˈraɪz| |ˌtɛrərʌɪz|
verb [ trans. ]
create and maintain a state of extreme fear and distress in (someone);
The Cartoon Controversy rages on in Pakistan:
The petition is addressing:
What right do judges in Pakistan have to declare what non-Muslims in other countries and cultures may say, do, publish, or otherwise express themselves?
Blasphemy is a relative term, depending on many sentiments. Although all sects of Islam consider the cartoons, blasphemy, what does that have to do with non-Muslims. In fact, viewpoints of Muslims toward Christian dogma is considered blasphemy to most Christians. No one is up in arms or taking Muslims to court or physically attack Muslims because of their beliefs that are variance with those of Christianity or Judaism which are routinely disregarded by Muslims.
How is the publication of the cartoons causing "a state of extreme fear and distress?" As Muslims have murdered and created mayhem because of the publication of cartoons is terrorism. To expect non-Muslims to "be sensitive to the feelings of Muslims" and to call them "intellectual terrorists" is hypocritical.
noun
the faculty of reasoning and understanding objectively, esp. with regard to abstract or academic matters
terrorize |ˈterəˌrīz| |ˌtɛrəˈraɪz| |ˌtɛrərʌɪz|
verb [ trans. ]
create and maintain a state of extreme fear and distress in (someone);
The Cartoon Controversy rages on in Pakistan:
ISLAMABAD: The government has blocked all websites that carry caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) on the Internet, and the attorney general has been asked to explore legal avenues for implementing a global ban on these sites.
The petition is addressing:
The federal government (of Pakistan), the Telecommunications ministry, PEMRA, PTA, Yahoo Incorporated USA and 1&1 Co, the host of websites carrying the cartoons, are respondents in Imran Uppal’s petition...
Advocate Qamar Afzal stated in his arguments that the availability of the caricatures on the Internet, which have hurt the religious sentiments of Muslims worldwide, should be declared “intellectual terrorism”. Maulvi Iqbal Haider stated that though the site had been blocked, the sacrilegious cartoons could still be accessed through various search engines. Advocate Ibrahim Satti, counsel for Iqbal Haider, also stated that an FIR on the availability of the sacrilegious material under blasphemy laws...
What right do judges in Pakistan have to declare what non-Muslims in other countries and cultures may say, do, publish, or otherwise express themselves?
Blasphemy is a relative term, depending on many sentiments. Although all sects of Islam consider the cartoons, blasphemy, what does that have to do with non-Muslims. In fact, viewpoints of Muslims toward Christian dogma is considered blasphemy to most Christians. No one is up in arms or taking Muslims to court or physically attack Muslims because of their beliefs that are variance with those of Christianity or Judaism which are routinely disregarded by Muslims.
How is the publication of the cartoons causing "a state of extreme fear and distress?" As Muslims have murdered and created mayhem because of the publication of cartoons is terrorism. To expect non-Muslims to "be sensitive to the feelings of Muslims" and to call them "intellectual terrorists" is hypocritical.
posted by Eleanor © @ 3/17/2006 07:21:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home