1 I agree completely. In fact, I've known some of the most wonderful Nazi's you'd ever want to meet. Just because they hate everyone who isn't like them doesn't make them bad people. Now pardon me while I go get my eyes unstuck from where they rolled back in my head.

2 I agree Maximus. The problem I have with many Muslims, and why I do at times hate, is not their over blown sensitivities and warped judgments of western motives, but their own lust for hate. They don't wanna reason. They're beyond caring - for anyone but themselves, but that's really not true either. I'm talking about those we see, who are over sensitive and make it public display. By and large they are fascists. They're no better - they deserve no greater understanding - than Hitler's followers. Its hard to love or forgive so many would-be Reinhard Heydrichs.

3 That said, does anyone know where I can pick up some Koran brand toilet paper?

4 A letter to Ms. Zerbisias. Rusty, if I'm missing something (ala - the point), let me know (I've been studying Islamic history like a gnat on crack to try to understand things, recently, I'm just trying it on - feel fre to tell me to go jump in a lake) Afternoon, I see that you're getting an interest response in the blogs regarding your "Hate behind Right Wing Blogburst" article. First off, I'm a centrist, so let's not make any quick judgements - nor, am I wanting to come across as cheeky, or rude. I'd like to simply state fact, ask some questions and move along. Secondly, I've been reading the right wing blogs and have not found hatred of muslims. What I have found is hatred of Radical Muslims. There's a difference. And, the bloggers I've read have gone out of their way to denote that difference. Some, ala Jawa Report, have gone so far as to incite their dismay over Islam, or the teachings of the Qu'ran; but have also circled back to make a clear definition of their feelings. One fo those feelings being that they do not hate muslims. This point, you leave out. I disagree that there was no need to republish the cartoons. I think in doing so, the Radical Muslims have exposed themselves to everyone. Which is a good thing. I also think that not to reprint is, as one muslim I've spoken with has said, "forces us to to submit to the will of the Radicals." Another viewpoint you left out. Also, considering how the deafening silence of the moderate muslims has the West wondering what is going on, it's good to have something hypocritcal in the Radicals' mindset be exposed. In a way, the end justifies the means. Which is exactly the same creedo that the Radical muslims use to defend their seperations from the Qu'ran, which they say they want to defend. The Qu'ran strictly forbids murder and suicide. So, a suicide bomber is violating the tenents of the Qu'ran, but do so, as they say, to save Islam. To non-violently respond to a non-believer is also a tenent of the Qu'ran. Two wrongs, my friends, do not a right make. Especially when what the Radical muslim sees as being right is a total bastardization of the religion they claim to protect. Please note: the Qu'ran does allow for images of Mohommed; but not images that can be used for devotional or idolitarian purposes. There is a major diffence. I think your article making a blanket statement about the hatred of the "cons" is simply short-sighted. Actually, I believe some of the points you use to display your stronger issues are short-sighted: "I hope that's the real reason for their reticence. I would hate to think that newspapers are backing away to avoid angry protests, to prevent ad boycotts, out of political correctness or a sense that some communities should get special treatment or, most of all, because they fear violent reprisals." That is EXACTLY why the North American media is not showing the cartoons. In a very non-sublte way, the North American media is allowing itself to succumb to the will of the Radical muslim. This one is just kinda' ignorant: "As for violence, I would guess that Muslims are more victims than perpetrators." You would guess wrong, if you're implying that the perpetrators are non-mulsim. What is true is that Radical muslims hate non-Radical muslims - as it's the Radical faction that is doing most of the killing of all muslims. So, whereas muslims may be the victims, the Radical muslims are the perpetrators, not the West, or the "cons." Basically, what it amounts to is that people of the West, yourself included, don't understand Islam, nor do they understand that the Radical movement's roots go to al-Wahab, in Egypt, at the end of the 18th century - nor, further, is the fall out of the endings of both World Wars understood. What people fail to realize, is that muslim v. muslim violence has been ongoing; same as has been going on with christian v. christian violence; but different in the sense that most of the current and near-history of muslim v muslim violence starts within the corrupted muslim governments. Actually, taking that a step further, I don't think you are well enough informed to the overall issue as to be making statements like the ones that you've made. It's not cut and dry, and it's not white-bread. I would hope that you'd do some research into the root cause of this issue .. starting with Wahabiism, and going forward to discover what people are actually talking about - and then using your articles not only to convey what you've found, but to quell any of the sort of further bickering that you seemed to have created by widening the chasm between Right and Left. Using your voice to point out that you think "cons" hate muslims only incites anger, which, if that is your goal, only solidifies my concept of your short-sightedness. If I'm incorrect, then either I didn't read the article correctly, or you didn't construct it correctly. Though, comments like this: "Frankly, we're a lot more tolerant society than our own intolerant right would like to believe." Makes me wonder what your intent on the article was - if it wasn't to lash out, blindly, at a group of people with whom you do not agree, or possibly even understand. If that's the case, you're verging on the hypocritcal. Finally, this statement displays simple ignorance to machinations of not only the subject matter, but the backstory and details of the muslim world: "Which makes me wonder who the real hate-mongers are: those who are cut off from modern communications technology and are more easily subject to the machinations of ignorant clerics — or those that should know better and who claim to be morally superior." In your article, it appears that you are claiming moral superiority over the "cons"; but, you should know better than to base your opinions on the scanty amount of actually information you used to generate your column. What then, does that make you? If you'd like, let me know what you think. Thank you, Pete

5 I donÂ’t believe in the writings and teachings of Muhammad or think he is actually one of GodÂ’s profits. Having said that, I get no satisfaction in looking at cartoons that mock him. I have had many personal experiences where my religious beliefs have been mocked and insulted. I donÂ’t take it very well and I can understand exactly how this group feels. As I have said before, there is a difference between my faith and theirs. I tell people they are going to hell if they donÂ’t change, but I donÂ’t send them there. I want to kill someone who butchers children all day long but I donÂ’t. I want to impose my faith and beliefs on everyone else, but I donÂ’t. IÂ’m just sitting back and watching this unfold and have no idea how it will play out. Will the libs in the MSM stand up to these people? If they do, it will be like telling Tony Soprano you arenÂ’t going to pay the protection money. There will be consequences, reporters; artistÂ’s writers will be killed. I thought these days might be a long way off, but things seem to be coming to a head pretty quickly. My daughter's High School history class is spending the entire hour talking about this subject today. It will be interesting to talk to her tonight about what the kids think.

6 "Will the libs in the MSM stand up to these people?" Absolutely not. The MSM have placed themselves between a rock and a hard place on this one and they are going to ignore it and hope it goes away. They've gone out of their way for 40 years or so to put any anti-Christian message on the air and then hide behind the 1st amendment and "the people's right to know". Now, they come off as frightened little hypocrites because, in their own words, "we don't want to offend anyone". What they really mean is "we don't want to offend anyone who will chop our heads off." This puts them in a precarious position the next time a really offensive Christian story comes along. So, they are just going to ignore the whole thing and hope it blows over soon. They generally have very limited short-term memory but you might expect them to avoid offending even Christians for at least a day or two.

7 >>>they hate Muslims. I generally only hate the violent muslims-- which is better than these Lefties can say about their hate for christians.

8 As an evangelical Christian(Southern Baptist) you can imagine how many times I could have threatened someone for insulting me or my religion. And I will say that I have argued my heart out with some of the people who seem to hate me for no particular reason other than the fact that I am a Christian. That said, I still believe that these people have freedom of speech and freedom of expression, because the truth of the matter is this. If they don't have freedom, neither do I. And no Muslim in the US should have any more freedom than anyone else, and any Muslim, or anyone else for that matter, who threatens to kill or harm someone who is exercising their right to freedom of speech or expression should be dealt with in the harshest way according to our laws.

9 Muslems, if they truly follow their religion, are not lovable. This does not mean that we should not love them as fellow human beings--even if it means our soldiers must kill them in combat.

10 again how would yyou like if a muslim mocked jesus ...what would you do let it go or stand up for your believe....cathlics will never let you mock the pope.

11 ashley, are you blind or something? The Pope and Jesus and the Virgin Mary are continually mocked by the Left. No, we don't like it. But do you see christians rioting in the streets burning down buildings, kidnapping people and threatening terrorism? The answer is NO. If you don't understand what free speech means, then go back to Arabia where you muslims appear to be far happier.

12 I know lots of Catholics who have mocked the pope.

13 I have to correct myself from my earlier comment about the MSM waiting at least a day or two to offend Christians again. From littlegreenfootballs: "The New York Times wonÂ’t print the Danish cartoons of Mohammed, out of sensitivity to Muslim readers. But they donÂ’t hesitate to reach back seven years and publish the picture of the Virgin Mary made out of elephant dung ..." I'm sure this is an attempt to take attention away from the fact that they still are afraid to publish the cartoons. Pathetic.

14 The sooner we have open war in the streets of America, the better, because then we can rid ourselves of the scum we call liberals and muslims, and the parasites we call government.

15 IM, are you rooster?

16 If laws against offensive blasphemy were to become in vogue, one could make the argument that they would require the banning of Islam itself. After all, that faith blasphemes the Lord Jesus Christ by denying his divinity, crucifixion, and resurrection, and also claims the Bible contains falsehoods. I'me certainly offended by those tenets of a faith that I must therefore believe to be demnically inspired.

17 IM: No Shit! But I'd have to say the smokem if ya gottem we aint got no effective (they seem to keep puttin' a D in front of anything effective) drug policy parasites IN the government!!!

18 No Carlos, I'm just a kindred spirit, and I'm ready to chew gum and kick ass. And I'm all outta gum.

19 The following is a list of fair and impartial contemporary scholars' testimonies about Mohammed: Fair contemporary celebrities, upon reviewing and reading the biography of Allah's Messenger SAAW fully admitted his honor, nobility and leadership. The following are dome of their testimonies: 1. Mahatma Gandhi, in an interview with Young India Newspaper, said, 'I wanted to know the characteristics of the man who possesses the hears of millions of people, without any doubt. I became fully convinced that the sword was not the mean by which Islam gain it positions and grounds. It was rather the simplicity of the Prophet, his truthfulness, promptness, dedication, and devotion to his companions and followers, besides his unmatched courage and his unparalleled trust and confidence in His Lord; Allah, the Almighty, in addition to his full belief in his Mission and Message of Islam. These matters were the qualities and descriptions that paved the way and eased the difficulties, and not the sword. After completing the second volume of the biography of Mohammed, I felt sorry that there wan not enough materials to learn more about his life.' 2. Professor Rama Chrishna Raw, in his book entitled, 'Mohammed, the Prophet', says: 'We can not know the entire personality of Mohammed, but all what I can present of his life is fantastic scenesÂ… There is Mohammed, the Prophet and messenger, Mohammed the fighter, the businessman, the spokesman, the reformer, the orphans' guardian, the slaves' protector, the women's liberator, the judge, and all these roles were enough to qualify him to be a hero.' 3. The Canadian orientlist Dr. Zuwaimer, in his book entitled, 'The East and its customs', says, 'Undoubtedly, Mohammed was on of the greatest Muslim religious leaders. We can rightly say that he was a super efficient reformer, eloquent, brave, courageous, great thinker whom we should not attribute to him any description that contradicts the above qualities. The Glorious Quran, which he brought forth for humanity, is a great testimony for this claim. 4. The German orientlist Britly Saint Heller, in his book entitled, 'The Orientlists and their creeds', says, ' Mohammed was the head-of-the-state, who looked out for the life of his people and their freedom. He punished those who committed crimes and felonies during his lifetime. He called for the worship of One God; monotheism. He was extremely kind in his call to his religion, even with his enemies. He possessed two characteristics in his personality amongst the highest qualities: justice and mercy. 5. The British writer and critique, Bernard Show, in his book Mohammed, which was ordered to be burnt by the British authorities, says, 'This world is in a bad need for a man with the thinking style and ability of that of Mohammed. This Prophet who always placed his religion in a respectable and honorable position. This religion is the strongest to digest all civilizations and be an eternal religion. I notice that many British citizens embraced Islam rightfully. This religion will find great accommodation in Europe.' The clergy men in the middle ages, as a result of discrimination and ignorance, had painted a dim picture for Mohammed. They considered him an enemy for Christianity!. However, after researching his personality, I discovered that he was a great man. I concluded that he was never an enemy for Christianity; rather he should be called the savior of the humanity. In fact, if he is given the leadership in our world today, he will resolve the entire world problems in a manner that secure peace and prosperity for the entire humanity. 6. Senrasten Asoji; Semitic languages professor says in his book, 'The history of Mohammed's life', 'We would not be fair to Mohammed if we denied his great qualities and characteristics. Mohammed led a real battle against ignorance and barbarism insisting on his principles. He continued to fight against the oppressors until he reached a clear victory. His religion is the greatest religion and he is above all great people in history.' 7. Senex, the American orientlist in his book, "The Arabs' Creed', says, ' Mohammed appeared after . His mission was to promote andfive-hundred-and-seventy years of Jesus improve the human minds by introducing the best ethics and morals to them and teaching them monotheism, and informing them about the Hereafter, or life-after-death.' 8. Michael Hearts, in his book, 'The 100 most influential people in history', 'Choosing Mohammed to be the first, most important and greatest men in history may surprise the readers, but he is the only man throughout the history who succeeded on the religious and worldly affairs levels. There are messengers, prophets and wise men who started great missions, but they died before completing them, such as the Messiah in Christianity, Moses in Judaism. But Mohammed is the only messenger who completed his religious message and all it rulings were complete. Complete nations and peoples followed the religion of Mohammed during his lifetime. Besides, he established a government and a state, which is considered as a worldly affair as well. Mohammed united all the tribes and clans in one people and established laws-of-life. He set his nation to preach the religion to the rest of the world. Therefore, he is the only man throughout the history who succeeded on the religious and worldly affairs levels. 9. The Russian writers; Tolstoy, whose literature and writings are considered to be on the best international literature: 'It suffice Mohammed that he salvaged a humiliated bloody nation from the grip of Satanic customs and put them on the road of development and progress. The Shariah laws of Mohammed shall spread all over the world because it agrees with the common sense and wisdom. 10. Dr. Shperk, the Austrian says, 'The entire humanity should be proud that a man like Mohammed belongs to it. Despite his being unlettered man he was able to bring about a legislation system that we will be the happiest people is if we reached its peak and the maximum of that legal system.' 11. The English philosopher, Thomas Carlyle, the Nobel Prize winner says in his book, 'The Heroes', 'It is extremely shameful to anyone to believe that Islam is nothing but a bunch of lies. And, it is equally shameful to believe that Mohammed is a liar and cheater.' We must fight such shameful rumors. The mission that Mohammed achieved and fulfilled is still the lit candle for the past twelve centuries for approximately two-hundred-million people. How would one believe that the principles, which this huge number of people lived and died by were a mere lie and trick!? 12. Ghotte; the German writer also says, 'We, the European people, with all our thoughts and concepts, did not reach yet what Mohammed had achieved. There will be no one to beat Mohammed and his principles that he called for. I have searched the history for the best example, and found it to be in the personality of Mohammed. Truth must prevail as Mohammed was able to subject the entire world by the pure words of monotheism.' These were some excerpts of the some of the renowned international scholars of the world concerning Prophet Mohammed. Why then to say, write or publish harmful items that destroy and harm instead of construct and benefit? I can see that many are not understanding Islam, or just having their ideas from the media without looking for the facts or searching for reality, and I canÂ’t answer all of these issue in one message, so, if you have any question or doubtful regarding Islam just let me know by sending to my email mahallam@hotmail.com and I will answer you by email or message here. Best regards,

20 FACT: If you spent all your time and the time of all people blogging away trying to convince someone that ISLAM is not GODÂ’s message and mercy to all mankind, you will not stop it. CONCLUSIONS: Your hate campaign is an act of self-importance satisfaction.

21 FACT: If you spent all your time and the time of all people blogging away trying to convince someone that ISLAM is not GODÂ’s message and mercy to all mankind, you will not stop it. CONCLUSION: Your hate campaign is an act of self-importance satisfaction.

22 "Respect international law & stop supporting Danish newspaper" To: The Secretary General of the United Nations Organization, United Nations Commission on Human Rights, European Union Heads of State, Members of the European Parliament ENGLISH VERSION: 1- On September 30th, 2005, 12 caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad were published in a Danish newspaper (Jyllands Posten). These caricatures were then republished in other magazines in Germany, Austria and France. 2- However, according to the International Convent on Civil and Political Rights that was ratified by General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966 and entered into force 23 March 1976, these actions are considered crimes and in violation of international law. The 2nd paragraph of article No. 20 of this covenant states: "Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law." 3- Therefore, both as Muslims and 1.5 billion of the 6 billion citizens of the global community, we ask the United Nations Organization and the leaders of the world, in particular the European politicians who supported the Danish newspaper paper and delayed enforcement of international law, including the International Covent on Civil and Political Rights, Declaration of Principles on Tolerance and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to investigate our complaint and judge those who committed this crime in a proper international legal tribunal. 4- We Muslims do not seek violence. According to our religious beliefs, the humanity of a person remains incomplete unless he is free and we hold the conviction that according to this saying of Imam Ali we are obliged to: “Be kind to people! Because if they are not your brothers and sisters in religion, they surely are your brothers and sisters in creation." In a world increasingly moving toward hatred and division, wherein ideas like peace, tolerance and friendship among nations seems quite fragile, it is your duty to keep your sworn commitments that you believe in the shaping of an equal world, free of war and discrimination. We hope you prove to us that you respect us as we respect you as equal, intelligent and civilized humans. Thank you for taking the time to read this. http://www.petitiononline.com/islamic/

23 Being a liberal muslim from Malaysia, i accepted the cartoons as a bad taste of humor and shrugged it of. That's it and 80% of other muslims are doing the same but of course there's a minority that took it seriously. All in all, the media should not lashed the whole muslim nation bacause of the actions of several temperemental extremists. And please, there is a big difference between Islam and Muslim. Big, BIG difference. Look it UP!