Muhammad cartoons n+1
February 8, 2008 4:19 AM Subscribe
This post was deleted for the following reason: a bunch of wikipedia articles about a wikipedia issue are really still not bringing this outside the range of LOLMUSLIMS -- jessamyn
I'm not sure buttressing a (very brief) NYTimes link with Wikipedia links is a good idea.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 4:27 AM on February 8, 2008
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 4:27 AM on February 8, 2008
um, what BP said.
also, i had to click through a bunch of stuff i already knew, plus some wikipedia ^ stuff, to get to the story that should have been on the FPP: "Muslim groups are attempting to censor Wikipedia because of images of Muhammad contained in the article about him"
why not just put that upfront?
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:01 AM on February 8, 2008
also, i had to click through a bunch of stuff i already knew, plus some wikipedia ^ stuff, to get to the story that should have been on the FPP: "Muslim groups are attempting to censor Wikipedia because of images of Muhammad contained in the article about him"
why not just put that upfront?
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:01 AM on February 8, 2008
You couldn't come up with any link for the letter I?
posted by Wolfdog at 5:21 AM on February 8, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by Wolfdog at 5:21 AM on February 8, 2008 [1 favorite]
I'm so angry that Muhammed failed to acknowledge Siegal and Schuster's inspiration for Alloy Ackbar, The iman of steel. Clearly comic book plagersism.
[I am tired of the other "controversy" so I made my own.]
posted by srboisvert at 5:30 AM on February 8, 2008
[I am tired of the other "controversy" so I made my own.]
posted by srboisvert at 5:30 AM on February 8, 2008
What's the fuss? Aren't we building a font a world knowledge here?
posted by parmanparman at 6:10 AM on February 8, 2008
posted by parmanparman at 6:10 AM on February 8, 2008
I think the proper response to any instance of "That offends my religion!" is "So fucking what?"
posted by Pope Guilty at 6:20 AM on February 8, 2008
posted by Pope Guilty at 6:20 AM on February 8, 2008
You know, one thing I don't quite get: from what I understand, they don't want to make images of Mohammed because they fear worshiping false idols. There's actually a core of sense to the idea... it's not about the man, it's about the message, and pictures of him may distract from what's important.
But who cares if non-believers make images? If the problem is worshiping false idols, but the images aren't about worship, what's the problem?
posted by Malor at 6:22 AM on February 8, 2008
But who cares if non-believers make images? If the problem is worshiping false idols, but the images aren't about worship, what's the problem?
posted by Malor at 6:22 AM on February 8, 2008
« Older Research into primary education | Glimpses of South Asia before 1947 Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Jimbob at 4:22 AM on February 8, 2008 [1 favorite]