QUOTE(Tarc @ Wed 2nd November 2011, 6:07pm)
QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 2nd November 2011, 4:19pm)
Who's next? The Wikimedia Foundation headquarters?
The lengths these backwards knuckle-draggers will go to enforce their warped fundamentalism is nauseating. There's nbeen a slow-burning shitstorm at the Muhammed article regarding images over the last few weeks, too.
QUOTE(mbz1 @ Wed 2nd November 2011, 1:20pm)
and not while wikipedia will host such
antisemitic garbageWhether it is antisemitic or not (I find it to be more of a criticism of Dershowitz for being a hypocritical asshole rather than for being a Jew) is largely irrelevant. Just because the Wikipedia hosts an antisemitic poster doesn't mean that their are abetting or perpetuating the antisemitism.
They have the
Jyllands-Posten poster too. Do you decry the Wikipedia for hosting "anti-Muslim garbage" ?
I do not believe that because the Wikipedia hosts an antisemitic poster it means that they are abetting or perpetuating the antisemitism. Not at all, but antisemitic pictures should be added to the right category:
Category:Antisemitic pictures , which this is not, and it makes all the difference.
On the other hand
this poster is added to the category "Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy" with the key word here being "controversy", but honestly I do not believe wikipedia should host any images concerning Muhammed at all. If it is so important for Muslims not to have the images of their Prophet, if it is prohibited by their believes why to make people suffer?
This post has been edited by mbz1: