• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Muslim Hate Group Gives Death-threat to South Park

Catz Part Deux said:
I'm not offended. That's the difference. I don't care if an Islamic person calls me a satanic slutty woman on the fast train to the lowest hell. I do care if they threaten to kill me because they disapprove of my sex life.

Do you see the difference?
Click to expand...

I understand. I thought he was making a general statement about all Muslims. This is what I disagreed with, not the fact that a group threatened. I was pissed about that too. Hell, **** Mohammad.

Catz Part Deux said:
These people threatened to kill two people over a cartoon. They should be charged with felony terroristic threats and/or deported back to whatever backward ass place they originally crawled out of. They have no right to threaten people in this country because their prophet was put in a bear costume.
Click to expand...

Already answered this above.

Which by the way was funny as hell.
 
Blackdog said:
I understand. I thought he was making a general statement about all Muslims. This is what I disagreed with, not the fact that a group threatened. I was pissed about that too. Hell, **** Mohammad.
Click to expand...

This whole thing seriously pisses me off. Why do we tolerate this crap in our country? I think they should be deported. Let them issue their ****ing fatwas from Riyahd.
 
The Giant Noodle said:
LOS ANGELES - A U.S. Muslim hate group has issued a dire Internet "warning" to creators of the satirical animated TV show "South Park" over a depiction of the Prophet Muhammad in a bear outfit.
"We have to warn Matt (Stone) and Trey (Parker) that what they are doing is stupid and they will probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show," said a posting on the muslim hate-based website RevolutionMuslim.com.

The website posted a graphic photo of slain Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh, who was killed in 2004 by an Islamic militant over a movie he made that accused Islam of condoning violence against women.

It also posted link to a news article with details of a mansion in Colorado that Parker and Stone apparently own.
The episode in question aired last week on cable channel Comedy Central of the 200th episode of "South Park", in which the Prophet Muhammad was depicted in a bear outfit.

"South Park" has a history of aiming biting satire at politicians, celebrities and the media, and its episodes have often drawn criticism.
The website of Revolution Muslim was down on Wednesday because of what a leader of the group called a traffic overload.

The head of the hated-based group, Revolution Muslim, Younus Abdullah Muhammad, 30, defended the posting. "How is that a threat?," he told Reuters. "Showing a case study right there of what happened to another individual who conducted himself in a very similar manner? It's just evidence."

Muhammad said his group "didn't tell anyone to go to their houses and conduct violence" and he added he is not worried the Web post would lead to violence against Parker or Stone.
He described his group as an alternative media outlet with about 20 active posters to the website. Members also engage in demonstrations and lectures at mosques, he said.
"Why would anybody that is plotting or planning to commit a violent act in retaliation, why would they need a post on RevolutionMuslim.com?" he said.
Comedy Central, a unit of Viacom Inc that airs "South Park," declined to comment.

Muslim group issues warning to ?South Park? - Television- msnbc.com
I also added a few words to the report to make it more accurate.
Click to expand...

One thing I always liked about creators of Southpark is that they mess with everyone equally. I only hope that censored Mohamed in those episodes(I think they censored his name as well in the 2nd part) just to make a point and not because they caved into terrorist scum.
 

Attachments

  • muhammad.jpg
    muhammad.jpg
    52.1 KB · Views: 4
WillRockwell said:
I would say this language conveys much less of a threat than much of the rightwing rhetoric against the Obama administration or Congress
Click to expand...

And what threats does the right advocate with our rhetoric?

My... were you around for the Bush 43 years, or were you in a coma?

Last I knew we weren't writing books about the assassination of Obama... as your side had with Bush.

.
 
I do wonder though, if the threats were directed at Parker and Stone, why did Comedy Central cave? Were they really so spineless, they caved in to outrage against them that had yet to even materialize? Didn't they realize how much bad press this would get them?
 
Catz Part Deux said:
The letter wasn't addressed the majority of Islamics. It was addressed to Muslim Revolution specifically.
Click to expand...

Thought that was apparent! Guess not.

Do I think that Mohammed was a mentally ill child abuser? ABSOLUTELY. Does that mean they don't have a right to follow his teachings if they want to? ABSOLUTELY NOT. Why should they give a crap about my opinion? I certainly don't give a crap about their opinion of my beliefs.
Click to expand...

If they did what I do I would never talk bad about their garbage faith again, i.e. live and let live.

However, do I believe that the majority of Islamics are criminals and terrorists? Of course not. I think they're deluded and sad.
Click to expand...

Yep.
 
Dav said:
I do wonder though, if the threats were directed at Parker and Stone, why did Comedy Central cave? Were they really so spineless, they caved in to outrage against them that had yet to even materialize? Didn't they realize how much bad press this would get them?
Click to expand...

I think Comedy Central did this before. The problem is, Comedy Central is owned by Viacom, and they will always kiss people's asses if they get offended.
 
stekim said:
Thought that was apparent! Guess not.
Click to expand...

Completely my fault. If I had noticed it no problem.

I have no idea how I missed it. :doh

PS: I think it's because your avatar creeps me out.
 
Blackdog said:
Completely my fault. If I had noticed it no problem.

I have no idea how I missed it. :doh

PS: I think it's because your avatar creeps me out.
Click to expand...

That's no avatar, my friend. It's a picture of me.
 
Dav said:
I do wonder though, if the threats were directed at Parker and Stone, why did Comedy Central cave? Were they really so spineless, they caved in to outrage against them that had yet to even materialize? Didn't they realize how much bad press this would get them?
Click to expand...

I don't get it, either. I don't know if they did it to illustrate the problem and are going to come back and zing them next week after the press has built up, or if they actually caved.

If they actually caved, I have to say...i'll lose a lot of respect for them.
 
GManNickG said:
Then I await your proof that Allah does not exist.
Click to expand...

That's easy! Let me help you out. There are an infinite number of things that do not exist. Therefore, all one needs as evidence of their non-existence is the lack of any evidence that they do, in fact, exist. For example, all I need to show that bigfoot does not exist is the simple fact that no evidence has been offered that it does. Things do not exist by default, you see. It's the other way around. Otherwise you are stuck with the position that literally everything exists simply if you believe it does. The tooth fairly exists because I believe it? Pretty weak don't you think? The tooth fairy exists when you are shown sufficient evidence of such. How did they determine the Loch Ness Monster does not exist? Merely by showing there was no evidence it did! Ergo, it must not. Same goes for Allah, dude.
 
stekim said:
That's easy! Let me help you out. There are an infinite number of things that do not exist. Therefore, all one needs as evidence of their non-existence is the lack of any evidence that they do, in fact, exist. For example, all I need to show that bigfoot does not exist is the simple fact that no evidence has been offered that it does. Things do not exist by default, you see. It's the other way around. Otherwise you are stuck with the position that literally everything exists simply if you believe it does. The tooth fairly exists because I believe it? Pretty weak don't you think? The tooth fairy exists when you are shown sufficient evidence of such. How did they determine the Loch Ness Monster does not exist? Merely by showing there was no evidence it did! Ergo, it must not. Same goes for Allah, dude.
Click to expand...

But if I imagine it, it's real.

Right now I am imagining ....

I better go. :2wave:
 
stekim said:
That's easy! Let me help you out. There are an infinite number of things that do not exist. Therefore, all one needs as evidence of their non-existence is the lack of any evidence that they do, in fact, exist. For example, all I need to show that bigfoot does not exist is the simple fact that no evidence has been offered that it does. Things do not exist by default, you see. It's the other way around. Otherwise you are stuck with the position that literally everything exists simply if you believe it does. The tooth fairly exists because I believe it? Pretty weak don't you think? The tooth fairy exists when you are shown sufficient evidence of such. How did they determine the Loch Ness Monster does not exist? Merely by showing there was no evidence it did! Ergo, it must not. Same goes for Allah, dude.
Click to expand...

1) Your logic is entirely based on the well-known fallacy argument from ignorance.

2) The second half is a false dichotomy you've created.

You might want to rethink your position, it's extraordinarily weak.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Not necessarily. In some states, a death threat is a chargeable offense, sometimes called coercion or terroristic threats.

Death threat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Terrorist Threats: When Is a Threat Criminal? | Imhoff and Associates Blog

I wonder if the FBI is investigating this?
Click to expand...
It wouldn't really matter what the state codes say, FWIW. The threat was made on the internet, so that would trigger whatever the Federal statute is.

I hope they do charge this assclown. This 14th century bull**** shouldn't be tolerated here at all.

***CAUTION!**** Inflammatory image follows:

jyllandsposten_bombhead.jpg
 
I'm not sure if child molestation is an applicable when people were getting married when they were twelve, there was little to no public education or decent living standards, and when you were lucky to live to forty. 'Child molestation' as an ethical and legal concept is an invention of modern times, pertaining to a certain dysfunctional psychological profile who are unable to act according to established cultural mores.
 
Last edited:
Update!

A Statement from Matt and Trey - News - South Park Studios
In the 14 years we've been doing South Park we have never done a show that we couldn't stand behind. We delivered our version of the show to Comedy Central and they made a determination to alter the episode. It wasn't some meta-joke on our part. Comedy Central added the bleeps. In fact, Kyle's customary final speech was about intimidation and fear. It didn't mention Muhammad at all but it got bleeped too. We'll be back next week with a whole new show about something completely different and we'll see what happens to it.
Click to expand...

I cannot BELIEVE Comedy Central had the gall to do the underlined. What a bunch of d-bags.

I cannot wait to see what the "whole new show about something completely different" is. I give it good odds that it will only be unrelated on the surface.
 
Jucon said:
Did anyone watch the newest episode, the conclusion to their 200th episode? The actually bleeped "Mohammad" the entire episode. And at the end when they had their "you know, I learned something today" moment, they bleeped a straight minute of dialogue.

I really hate Comedy Central right now.
Click to expand...

Jerry said:
Sarcasm noted :2wave:
Click to expand...

Oh, that wasn't sarcasm. But unlike some people I'm not going to threaten Comedy Central just because I'm angry with them.

Coronado said:
I sorta wondered if it was a "meta-joke" for a minute.
Click to expand...

I knew immediately it wasn't a joke. The "censored" block over Mohammad was a joke... it essentially was part of the plot (for when Tom Cruise got "censored")... but I knew Comedy Central had a hand in bleeping "Mohammad" the entire episode and the final speech by Kyle.
 
Dav said:
Update!

A Statement from Matt and Trey - News - South Park Studios


I cannot BELIEVE Comedy Central had the gall to do the underlined. What a bunch of d-bags.

I cannot wait to see what the "whole new show about something completely different" is. I give it good odds that it will only be unrelated on the surface.
Click to expand...

Now comes the next battle... posting the episode online without the bleeps and "censored" block.

The comes the battle of putting it on the DVD.

I look forward to hearing what Kyle had to say.
 
I saw that episode on Adult Swim...no censoring...no bleeps of any kind......idk wtf you folks are talkin about.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
I saw that episode on Adult swim...no censoring...no bleeps of any kind......idk wtf you folks are talkin about.
Click to expand...

You must be thinking of the "Cartoon Wars" episodes which aired a few years ago. This is new, and has only been aired on Comedy Central, and they have not been given permission to use the uncensored version even on their own website.

EDIT: Maybe you're thinking of the first one, which aired a week ago; the censored one is the sequel.
 
Morality Games said:
I'm not sure if child molestation is an applicable when people were getting married when they were twelve, there was little to no public education or decent living standards, and when you were lucky to live to forty. 'Child molestation' as an ethical and legal concept is an invention of modern times, pertaining to a certain dysfunctional psychological profile who are unable to act according to established cultural mores.
Click to expand...

Yet the teachings of Mohammed were meant to transcend time and context and be the path for mankind for all times sake. Allah sent Mohammed all kinds of messages as to what is the devine path for all men forever more, but he forgot to correct Mohammed on certain cultural practices.

So God is a cultural relativists as well? Kind misses the point about religion doesn't it.....
 
GManNickG said:
1) Your logic is entirely based on the well-known fallacy argument from ignorance.

2) The second half is a false dichotomy you've created.

You might want to rethink your position, it's extraordinarily weak.
Click to expand...

He doesn't have to prove anything. How do you prove or disprove a negative concept.

I tell you what, since you obvious believe that Allah does exist or is likely to exist, why don't you do all of your fellow posters a favour by pointing to evidence that supports your position?

That way we can get around the fallacy of ignorance, by adducing some positive evidence.

Kindly appreciated. :)
 
Last edited:
Dav said:
You must be thinking of the "Cartoon Wars" episodes which aired a few years ago.
Click to expand...

Supper Best Friends, right?


[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7Py7rkHadA"]YouTube- Commentary Super Best Friends[/nomedia]
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom