International Holocaust Cartoon Contest

[toastman]

but it's not like the drawing is conveying an anti Islam message.

That's the point, they are.
Deliberately insulting couple of billion people is rather silly, more so when you don't know them.

And if you think the Jewish cartoons are filth, why did you post then?

I'm claiming my right to free speech, just to see if I get abused for it.
I was, proving there isn't any of the free speech claimed by Charlie fans.

You didn't prove that at all. Like I said, your pics and pics of Mohamed are not in the same category.
Posting a pic of Mohamed does not convey a message of anti Islam like your pics convey an anti Semitic message.

 

[irosie91]

but it's not like the drawing is conveying an anti Islam message.

That's the point, they are.
Deliberately insulting couple of billion people is rather silly, more so when you don't know them.

And if you think the Jewish cartoons are filth, why did you post then?

I'm claiming my right to free speech, just to see if I get abused for it.
I was, proving there isn't any of the free speech claimed by Charlie fans.

You didn't prove that at all. Like I said, your pics and pics of Mohamed are not in the same category.
Posting a pic of Mohamed does not convey a message of anti Islam like your pics convey an anti Semitic message.

toast---be content-----Freddie has admitted that muslim clerics and scholars advocate
filth and the mosques are filled with filth. Latuff----is the fave cartoonist of the Islamic scum

 

[irosie91]

Well at least we know how Fred really feels about Jews now. No more hiding.

See - If you insult Muslims, free speech - if you insult Jews - gosh.
Even a link to a piece that is very clear in its intentions to test ideas, is considered anti Jewish hate, but cartoons that deliberately go out to cause hatred are 'freedom'.
How silly.

What anti Muslim cartoons are you talking about? I didn't do anything you suggested in your post, nor am I trying to silence your right to free speech.
I am merely pointing out the fact that you are anti semitic bigot.

There you have it.
Prophet cartoons are free speech, but anti that has a go at Jews is bigotry.
Please explain the difference between insulting a religious group, and insulting a religious group.

How is posting a picture of a prophet the same as what you're doing?
If you posted a pick of Yahweh , that would be a different story. But you posted very insulting iffensive anti Semitic pictures.

Within Islam, it's a very serious blasphemy to create a picture of the Prophet, thus it's extremely insulting.
The silly Jewish pictures are equally offencive, but no one seems to understand they're the same level of filth.

no one is forcing muslims to make pictures of the disgusting rapist pig, muhummad.
Why it is that muslims INSIST that non muslims follow the rules of the filth and stink
of islam? I do not adhere to the rules of islam and do not expect muslims to adhere
to the rules of Judaism. Should muslims be murdered for driving cars on Saturday?.
I do not think that a cartoon of the rapist stinking pig of mecca is particularly offensive unless it would be presented in a manner similar to the way the vile and disgusting
anti semitic cartoons about jews which are popular in mosques are presented. For example--- a comparative cartoon would be one of the rapist pig humping his daughter,, fartima. I would agree that such a cartoon should not be published----
too offensive------that kind of smut is the purview of islamo Nazi pigs

 

[Indofred]

Why it is that muslims INSIST that non muslims follow the rules of the filth and stink

and you want others to respect your lot?
Frankly, you're disgusting.

 

[Indofred]

Like I said, your pics and pics of Mohamed are not in the same category.
Posting a pic of Mohamed does not convey a message of anti Islam like your pics convey an anti Semitic message.

Yes - it does.
Since the rule is no pictures, and most of the pictures are deliberately offensive anyway (Bombs in turbans and so on), they are very much anti Islamic - and def offensive.

So, as I asked...

What's the difference between an offensive cartoon, and an offensive cartoon?

 

[eagle1462010]

 

[eagle1462010]

 

[irosie91]

Why it is that muslims INSIST that non muslims follow the rules of the filth and stink

and you want others to respect your lot?
Frankly, you're disgusting.

Have I discussed what I "want" with you? You ask an interesting question.
"....you want others to respect your lot'"? not shit like YOU and YOUR lot.
In fact you and your fellow shit pay a compliment to jews whenever you
disparage them-------you and adolf hitler and the rapist pig of mecca.

For those who do not know-----in the filth and stink of shariah law----
it is absolutely LEGAL for a muslim ----pig or slut ---to broadly insult
non muslims and even attack them physically----but a CAPITAL CRIME---
for the non muslim to respond in kind-------islam is shariah law----islam
stinks like shit as do all those who adhere to its filth. I wonder where the
stinking whore HAYAT is now-------she with you, Freddie? HEROINE
WHORE of the mosque... the slut did that which muslim dogs consider
the ultimate act of piety------murder

 

[irosie91]

Like I said, your pics and pics of Mohamed are not in the same category.
Posting a pic of Mohamed does not convey a message of anti Islam like your pics convey an anti Semitic message.

Yes - it does.
Since the rule is no pictures, and most of the pictures are deliberately offensive anyway (Bombs in turbans and so on), they are very much anti Islamic - and def offensive.

So, as I asked...

What's the difference between an offensive cartoon, and an offensive cartoon?

how is a bomb in a turban "offensive"?? why do muslims publish so much shit if
they find a bomb in a turban all that "offensive"??? Since muslims do not like
pictures-----they should not make pictures. Why should anyone care what
Islamic "rules" are? I will do pictures of anything of which I want to do pictures---
it is not the business of muslim pigs or sluts

 

[Indofred]

This stuff about the prophet and a nine year old girl comes up all the time, but it's always bullshit.
One has to look at norms of 1,600 years ago before one can comment.
Many biblical stories suggest Mary was around 12 when she delivered Jesus.

Children and Youth in History Age of Consent Laws

Given the content of that, were European and American men of the times mentioned all kiddie fiddlers?

One has to see history before one can make a judgement on the actions of a man 1,600 years ago.

In 1875, England raised the age to 13 years; an act of sexual intercourse with a girl younger than 13 was a felony. In the U.S., each state determined its own criminal law and age of consent ranged from 10 to 12 years of age. U.S. laws did not change in the wake of England's shift. Nor did Anglo-American law apply to boys.

Americans could legally fuck a male baby, and/or a 10 year old girl, as long as she didn't struggle (or couldn't prove she did in court), just 140 years or so ago.

Americans are perverts?

Let's put that stupidity to bed, as many Americans put little girls to bed in order to fuck them just a short time ago.

What - you don't like the truth?
Oh, shit.

 

[toastman]

Like I said, your pics and pics of Mohamed are not in the same category.
Posting a pic of Mohamed does not convey a message of anti Islam like your pics convey an anti Semitic message.

Yes - it does.
Since the rule is no pictures, and most of the pictures are deliberately offensive anyway (Bombs in turbans and so on), they are very much anti Islamic - and def offensive.

So, as I asked...

What's the difference between an offensive cartoon, and an offensive cartoon?

Bombs in turbans? We're talking about a picture of Mohamed.

I already answered your question. The Mohamed pic does not convey an anti Islam message , even though it might be offensive to some Muslims. It's just a picture. Your pics CLEARLY convey an anti Jewish message. It's not even close reallr

 

[irosie91]

This stuff about the prophet and a nine year old girl comes up all the time, but it's always bullshit.
One has to look at norms of 1,600 years ago before one can comment.
Many biblical stories suggest Mary was around 12 when she delivered Jesus.

Children and Youth in History Age of Consent Laws

Given the content of that, were European and American men of the times mentioned all kiddie fiddlers?

One has to see history before one can make a judgement on the actions of a man 1,600 years ago.

In 1875, England raised the age to 13 years; an act of sexual intercourse with a girl younger than 13 was a felony. In the U.S., each state determined its own criminal law and age of consent ranged from 10 to 12 years of age. U.S. laws did not change in the wake of England's shift. Nor did Anglo-American law apply to boys.

Americans could legally fuck a male baby, and/or a 10 year old girl, as long as she didn't struggle (or couldn't prove she did in court), just 140 years or so ago.

Americans are perverts?

Let's put that stupidity to bed, as many Americans put little girls to bed in order to fuck them just a short time ago.

What - you don't like the truth?
Oh, shit.

Try again freddiefucker. I am a bit touchy about syntax. To where did Mary deliver Jesus? There are no biblical stories that suggest that Mary gave birth
to Jesus at age 12. People should not discuss books that they did not read or
write in a language with which they are not familiar. Women do not "deliver"
babies----women are DELIVERED OF babies. The doc who assists DELIVERS THE MOTHER OF THE BABY. I do not particularly care that the
rapist pig, muhummad married and raped a child either. It is the least of the crimes in which the disgusting animal engaged----however considering the filth
that your co-religionists produce as "cartoons" and shit mouth rhetoric--
--it is silly of you to complain about cartoons of the pig and his child wife.
BTW----what was the KHUTBAHJUMAAT feces fling about today. I miss
them. They are so idiotic

 

[irosie91]

This stuff about the prophet and a nine year old girl comes up all the time, but it's always bullshit.
One has to look at norms of 1,600 years ago before one can comment.
Many biblical stories suggest Mary was around 12 when she delivered Jesus.

Children and Youth in History Age of Consent Laws

Given the content of that, were European and American men of the times mentioned all kiddie fiddlers?

One has to see history before one can make a judgement on the actions of a man 1,600 years ago.

In 1875, England raised the age to 13 years; an act of sexual intercourse with a girl younger than 13 was a felony. In the U.S., each state determined its own criminal law and age of consent ranged from 10 to 12 years of age. U.S. laws did not change in the wake of England's shift. Nor did Anglo-American law apply to boys.

Americans could legally fuck a male baby, and/or a 10 year old girl, as long as she didn't struggle (or couldn't prove she did in court), just 140 years or so ago.

Americans are perverts?

Let's put that stupidity to bed, as many Americans put little girls to bed in order to fuck them just a short time ago.

What - you don't like the truth?
Oh, shit.

the problem regarding islam and AISHA the baby bride
is that muslims worship the dog muhummad SO MUCH that they
created shariah law based on anything that perverted lump of
shit DID or said. Muslims have told me that islam and its
laws and customs are IMMUTABLE ---not chained to time
or circumstance ------ETERNALLY THE SAME. In fact,
I have had such statement thrown at me as a kind of
"proof" that *** islam is the most terrific because.... ***

 

[irosie91]

Please note-----unlike the LATUFF shit that muslims like to promulgate
and Freddie has posted----this cartoon is SIGNED

 

[irosie91]

This stuff about the prophet and a nine year old girl comes up all the time, but it's always bullshit.
One has to look at norms of 1,600 years ago before one can comment.
Many biblical stories suggest Mary was around 12 when she delivered Jesus.

Children and Youth in History Age of Consent Laws

Given the content of that, were European and American men of the times mentioned all kiddie fiddlers?

One has to see history before one can make a judgement on the actions of a man 1,600 years ago.

In 1875, England raised the age to 13 years; an act of sexual intercourse with a girl younger than 13 was a felony. In the U.S., each state determined its own criminal law and age of consent ranged from 10 to 12 years of age. U.S. laws did not change in the wake of England's shift. Nor did Anglo-American law apply to boys.

Americans could legally fuck a male baby, and/or a 10 year old girl, as long as she didn't struggle (or couldn't prove she did in court), just 140 years or so ago.

Americans are perverts?

Let's put that stupidity to bed, as many Americans put little girls to bed in order to fuck them just a short time ago.

What - you don't like the truth?
Oh, shit.

You shitty Islamic claim that americans could "FUCK" infants legally
unless the baby could PROVE in court that she struggled----is Islamic
bullshit. In fact back in those days sexual intercourse other than between
married persons was considered a crime. In the state in which I grew up----
sex laws are strict to the point of absurdity-----"standard position" sometimes
calle "missionary position" was the only legal position for married
persons. TODAY muslims can fuck anyone who is not a muslim under the
stink and filth of Islamic law.----and they do. ---LEGALLY in shariah shit holes
and since the inception of the disgusting creed

 

[Indofred]

I already answered your question. The Mohamed pic does not convey an anti Islam message ,

Sorry, what were you saying, Toasty?

 

[irosie91]

I already answered your question. The Mohamed pic does not convey an anti Islam message ,

Sorry, what were you saying, Toasty?

never mind, Freddie----shove your stinking ass in the air and worship the rapist

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Well, it's certainly nice when a subhuman makes it so abundantly clear as to the nature of the sorts of cartoons published in its own country.

Not at all.
The Prophet cartoons are freedom of speech, as are these.
If you support one set, you must support he other.

Do you support freedom of speech, thus support these cartoons?

I absolutely support them. Just like I'd support one showing "someone" on all fours, getting pounded in the ass by 'Jihadi John' while a group of nameless ISIS terrorists stand around urinating on him.

Can anyone draw that? Think it especially apt.

 

[Indofred]

Draw what you want about that bastard, Jihadi John - a .45 drawn against him would work best.

 

[Indofred]

never mind, Freddie----shove your stinking ass in the air and worship the rapist