March 11, 2015

NEWS: Muslim Action Forum wants pictures of Muhammad banned in the UK for 'hate speech'

Rebel Staff
 

Would these be considered "moderates"?

The UK's Muslim Action Forum (MAF) is seeking to have all depictions of the Islamic prophet Muhammad labeled as 'hate speech'.

A document posted to MAF's site last month attacks Charlie Hebdo's 'insulting cartoons' with no reference to the terrorist attack committed by Muslims that occurred earlier. 

“Muslim Action Forum (MAF) has devised a legal strategy to prevent the continuous insulting and derogatory publications depicting and abusing the personality of our Holy Prophet Muhammad peace be upon Him. This strategy and campaign will have taken its first historical step by presenting a petition supported by over 100,000 signatures of Muslims promoting the concept of Global Civility and condemning the continuous publication of these insulting cartoons in France and other parts of the world."

MAF intends to launch a series of legal challenges in the English Court system to establish that such depictions of our Holy Prophet peace be upon Him is the worst kind of ‘Hate Crime’ that can be perpetrated on the 3 million Muslims in the UK and 1.7 billion Muslims worldwide. We shall support this strategy through amendment of some existing legislation and the presentation of a Private Members Bill that promotes the idea of Global Civility.”

In addition to wanting cartoons of their prophet outright banned, the group is encouraging its members to ask local MPS if 'Islamophobia' should be a culpable offense.

The document says that this is the single most important issue to “every Muslim in this country and worldwide.”

In any case, the fight for freedom of speech wages on.

JOIN TheRebel.media for more news and commentary and investigative reporting like this that you won’t find anywhere else.

GET INVOLVED in our 100% grassroots crowdfunding campaign and help us bring you more stories like this one.

READ Ezra Levant's book about free speech -- Shakedown: How Government is Undermining Democracy in the Name of Human Rights

FIND OUT who are Canada's radical Muslim leaders and fight back at CanadianJihad.ca

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2015-03-18 12:19:03 -0400
When people come to the west as immigrants or refugees…before they signed the paperwork of agreement….they knew or they aught to have known that they were arriving in a secular state.

If that does not suit them then the way to rescind the agreement that they now regret is to leave…..it is not incumbent on the secular state to change in order to suit them.

Using Orwellian Newspeak insults does not change agreements entered into in good faith and they cannot say that the consent was not informed consent.
commented 2015-03-16 22:55:17 -0400
The root cause of all evil is the human heart…"deceitful above ALL things and DESPERATELY WICKED…who can know it? ",. Period.
commented 2015-03-14 19:55:48 -0400
I think it’s a lack of religion that caused this strife. If we could give them back what we took from them there would be no conflict
commented 2015-03-14 19:20:09 -0400
Freethinker. The reason for this strife is botched political policies. What religion does communist Russia or China practice. An atheist is some one who has no knowledge of any God, like someone from a Pygmy tribe in Borneo. Is that what you are because your stupidity is something normally reserved for the institutionalized. Agnostic is someone indifferent to God. To say man created God is pure vanity. Science has not found evidence of any planet like earth in the galaxy, but you would believe aliens travelled thousands of light years but supernatural beings can’t travel through dimensions. God didn’t do this to us, we did. We are all instilled with a sense of good and evil, but knowing right from wrong can only be realized by studying The Truth. Once you do you will begin to see things that are unimaginable
commented 2015-03-13 20:55:07 -0400
If a simple image of Mohammed should be banned as hate-speech, I would think that the, ‘banners’ might want to have a hard-look at many verses in their own age-old hand book. If drawing a generic caricature is hateful, how would one describe the tenants that call for death as a penalty for something as simple as failing to belief another’s theological views, or being gay or being Jewish or for even attempting to leave such a totalitarian system of absolute mind-control. In short, the complete and utter opposite of Freedom and Democracy for which we should not make the slightest accommodation. Lest-we-Forget.
commented 2015-03-12 17:10:47 -0400
Indeed, Ron, thanks for pointing out that we live in the House of War. Looks like even moderates want blashemy laws.
commented 2015-03-12 16:32:17 -0400
Joan, with respect to suspecting that “they have a different definition of ‘peace’ than we do”. Yep. Islam divides the world into two spheres: the House of Peace (Dar al-Salaam) – areas that Muslims control – and the House of War (Dar al-Harb) – areas that Muslims don’t yet control. Peace in Islam means submission to Allah. The ultimate meaning of Islamic peace is all of us living in Dar-al-Islam – the house of submission.
commented 2015-03-12 15:58:58 -0400
Freethinker,
Just as scientists haven’t learned everything, we don’t know everything. It is plainly obvious. The problem is you folks who do take time to study this take hostile offense because someone isn’t as eloquent and versed on articulating their positions. We wish we could! :)

There is evidence: testimonies. Written accounts. Centuries of it. That’s also the kind of evidence that is accepted in a court of law.
The problem is, and this just me assuming, is that atheists, and some not all scientists, dismiss this as evidence.
Can you imagine if our court system did that? Even though someone says they heard and saw say person A kill person B? That would be inadmissible?

That is our evidence me believes. Written historical experiential accounts, or testimonies, about what they heard and saw happen. The same way I believe a scientist would see something, test it to confirm, and record his findings.
But these accounts can’t be tested in a lab or something of the sort. They already happened, and someone wrote it down. The question is: Is that good enough for the scientist. From what I can tell, the answer is a resonding no.
commented 2015-03-12 12:33:19 -0400
And will the MAF be successful in its quest? The answer to that should cause great dread in the hearts and minds of adherents of the other religions of the world.
commented 2015-03-12 11:30:05 -0400
So nice that they feel united and have come together to deal with " the single most important issue to every Muslim in this country and worldwide.” Because the slaying of innocent people comes second, obviously. Maybe they will deal with that later. No wait, there is no money in that…
commented 2015-03-12 10:27:42 -0400
A more fundamental question that I would ask the angry Islamists is, if you aren’t supposed to make images of Allah, how do you know that the caricature that’s making the rounds on this site and other dare-to-be-real media is even really what the big guy looks like? Maybe they’re getting themselves all worked up needlessly when they really should be rolling on the floor laughing their asses off about “stupid kuffars, that’s not what the him at all….hahahaha that’s the dude from the South Park episode about Osama bin Laden….”

But seriously, if your religion doesn’t permit images of your preferred deity, should you not be averting your eyes and shutting your mouths instead of encouraging the non-believers to create more by engaging in provocative behaviour? You could be pissing the deity off without knowing it and what will be the consequences of that in the afterlife? Imagine the Seinfeld soup nazi: No virgins for you Abdullah! If you don’t look at it and you don’t think about it, then it isn’t real, right? This could be resolved very simply.
commented 2015-03-12 09:57:16 -0400
Joan, your argument against Peter’s claim that there is no evidence to support the existence of god is flawed, you are using a common fallacy called the straw man argument. Claiming that worshiping or idolizing something in the real world like money or a woman is the same as providing evidence for a supernatural entity is ridiculous. That is not evidence.
Chris, if you understood the commonly accepted definition of atheism, that those making the claims of a god’s existence haven’t met their burden of proof to provide sufficient evidence to support their claims, then you would realize that “scientists” do not attempt to disprove any god’s existence but welcome any evidence brought forward to support these claims and would gladly analyze it (None has ever been presented to a scientific panel of experts), however, as you stated, you are making a claim that a god is a non-physical being of which you have provided no explanation for : this is a logical fallacy called Unfalsifiable Hypothesis/ Special Pleading.
Doris, your argument is also flawed, you are using a common logical fallacy called Ad Ignorantiam :the argument from ignorance. Many fields of science do study the neurology of the brain and how our thought processes work, great advances are made every year in understanding the brain. Atheists would reject your statement that they make any decisions based on “faith”,which is appropriately defined as believing things without evidence (that’s the definition of gullibility). Claiming god is the designer of the universe and the ultimate cause of the universe is yet another fallacy, its the argument from incredulity (most commonly called the God of the gaps argument)… scientists haven’t learned everything about the universe yet, but saying “god did it” when we really just don’t know is also just plain poor thinking.
commented 2015-03-11 23:06:32 -0400
In response to Peter Clanahan: The complexity of the physical laws that operate in the vastness and complexity of the universe (including living beings) surely suggest that there is an ultimate cause. There are metaphysical aspects to life that are imponderable and defy scientific analysis. What about thought processes, emotions and a sense of morality – that inner soul which defines one as a human being? Which of the animal kingdom from which evolutionists think we evolved has demonstrated this same attribute? This may seem simplistic, but for me it would take more faith to be an atheist than to believe in a God as the designer and ultimate cause of the universe.
commented 2015-03-11 20:34:14 -0400
Global Civility! That’s rich!
commented 2015-03-11 20:33:30 -0400
Einstein was an atheist but converted when he realized some things can’t be explained by science. The supernatural uses the natural to achieve its goals
commented 2015-03-11 19:55:13 -0400
I try to remain open minded. Billions restore their faith daily by praying to a higher power. There is nothing wrong with that. It makes sense. Perhaps Allah is a God. Yahweh and Shamash is the Jewish God. Jesus is the Son of God. Now muhammud as a vicious, warmongering, pedophile is hard pressed to be labeled anything other than a fake prophet. His murder was welcomed. So yes. Draw pictures or cartoons of Mo. Throw darts at the pic, defecate on them, spit on them. No one in Western Society is hanged, burned, decapitated, whipped, or jailed for making remarks about the Christians and Jewish God or about Siddhartha the founder of Buddhism. Welcome to Canada.
commented 2015-03-11 19:48:14 -0400
Some excellent ideas here. The best one so far would be to ban any public mention of the prophet Moe – mention of his name is getting tiresome I admit.
commented 2015-03-11 19:14:35 -0400
Hey Pete,
I try to look at both sides of the arguement, and have noticed some philosophical failures from the atheist perspective. May I?

The problem with the scientific arguement is that it attempts to quantify the presence of processes as always existing, but not how it came into existance.
It attempts to find physical evidence from, what would be by definition, a non-physical being. Attempting to explain metaphysics, from a physics only perspective. Attempting to control the uncontrollable in a fully controllable environment.

I’m a Christian; I would find it rather difficult to worship an all powerful, eternal, immortal “God” if He could be confined to a test tube.
If I could touch Him, that means I could hurt Him. If I could hurt him, that means I could kill him.
Hope that helps :)
commented 2015-03-11 18:59:11 -0400
paving the way for all religions to come under attack, then the world will eventually be free
commented 2015-03-11 18:46:36 -0400
He is "THEIR prophet , not mine.
commented 2015-03-11 17:52:07 -0400
Rick Hemmingson – Good one!!
commented 2015-03-11 17:32:56 -0400
On second thought, I may join with the MAF. Let’s ban ALL reference to Muhammed – everywhere and at all times.
commented 2015-03-11 17:30:42 -0400
I am really – really – getting tired of listening to demands from Islamo-Facsists requiring that all the rest of the world pay homage to their “Holy Prophet Muhammad peace be upon Him”.
commented 2015-03-11 17:08:55 -0400
Bill, I suspect they have a different definition of “peace” than we do.

You know, like “Dang, it sure is peaceful ‘round here now there’s no more of them pesky infidels always demanding we let women talk”.
commented 2015-03-11 17:05:42 -0400
Peter MacIsaac – Off with your head!! (-:
commented 2015-03-11 16:44:30 -0400
If MAF is serious about their prophet promoting peace, maybe it’s time to walk the talk by condemning the acts committed in his name, not only in public but also in their places of worship.
commented 2015-03-11 16:43:06 -0400
Actually the Quran should be investigated for hate speech and investigated as such by the RCMP. I am not a scholar but based on everything I have read in passages from the Quran the book meets all the criteria under Canadian law identifying hate speech. Any document preaching one society is second class to any other is also racist. This web site is a must see www.thereligionofpeace.com But what do I know- I am just another nonbelieving Kafur who refuses to convert or pay the Jizya for my subjugation.
commented 2015-03-11 16:39:48 -0400
This is another attempt by this sickening muslim organization to usher in the Islamic blaspheme law where in some countries this is an offense punishable by death. This is in no way moderate and is 100% islamic extremism. WTF are is going on right now in the middle east to Christians and others by their hero freedom fighting isis buddies? Only slaughtering, raping, beheading and burning people alive to name just a few of their atrocities. I wish this Islamic bs would just curl up and go away. It does not belong in the civilized world. The more of them that come to Canada, the more trouble they will cause in every aspect of our lives.
commented 2015-03-11 16:35:44 -0400
Peter, I will take issue with your statement “there is absolutely no evidence any gods exist”.

The term “god” can be defined as something that is worshipped, exalted or idolized. Therefore, money can be a god. Or a lover. Or power. Lots of evidence of that.

I take your point, though. I prefer to suspend my disbelief and focus instead on the question of knowledge regarding gods. In that forum, I qualify as agnostic.

However, in the realm of ethics and morality, I fall somewhere on the Christian-Buddhist continuum. I believe it serves society well to love my neighbours, pray for my enemies and to love and strive for goodness, recognizing my reach in this will always exceed my grasp.

I also enjoy what can be learned from a long history of Christian/Buddhist/Sufi and similar traditions of mysticism, given our almost entirely unknown reality. And I enjoy exploring religious ideologies as there is often a very consistent internal logic in them.

I wonder a lot what common assumptions about belief we might share with Muslims on which to build a sturdy set of shared beliefs about world government. Including and especially what common assumptions we might share with Muslims similar to you, schooled in and convinced science is a superior platform on which to base beliefs about the world. Because the OIC and the Muslim Brotherhood and even IS are full of extremely well-educated scientists. Yet they reject equity, human rights, and democracy in favour of ethnic (Islamic) supremacy and what we consider a very inequitable set of shariah laws.

Our history shares in common with Muslims the life of Abraham so maybe that is where to start. But I’m not sure that gets us anywhere as the accounts of that shared history differ dramatically. Sigh.
commented 2015-03-11 15:13:54 -0400
The root cause of all this strife is religious belief. As an atheist, i would encourage everyone to do the research into all forms of religious beliefs, and then compare those ideologies with modern day scientific discoveries. If you do this, you too will become an atheist. There is absolutely no evidence that any gods exist, no evidence that anything supernatural has ever occured and literally mountains of evidence, backed by scientific investigations that religions in general where created by man to explain the mysteries of the universe with “god did it”… Most people are religious, only because they were indoctrinated into it by family at an early age. The religion of Islam is particularly dangerous, as it promotes death to non-believers.