JOHN MONTEIRO <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ahmed I went on the Wikipedia website as you suggested, but could not see anything which was a problem, maybe I was not looking hard enough. It took me only a few seconds however to see pictures of paintings & carvings which depict the Prophet Mohammed & although these are hundreds of years old, there was no suggestion that these were lurid or lewed in any way. They appear to be quite informative & helpful to non-Muslims........... even atheists or secularists as they prefer to be called................ I do however understand in Islam there is no picture or dipiction of Allah, also none of the Prophet Mohammed permitted in a Muslim house or in the Masjid, nor in any Msulim public place. I dont know if this applies to the internet, though I suspect it does. I feel perhaps you may have a point in this matter, no matter which country you are from, which country you now reside in, or where you travel in the world, because your faith goes with you no matter where you are. But we must take on board (if a non-Muslim country), their belives & their rules must be obeyed too. Can be confusing. As I am not a Muslim I cannot probably feel as you do, since my religion gives me the opportunity to praise God in many forms, whereas Allah for you & all Muslims is the one & only divine one, I too believe in God, albeit via several other methods (via the Gods & Goddesses of the Hindu religion), we are still praising God no matter how we do it. I wonder if you would accept that Prophet Mohammed is shown in a good light on Wikipedia, giving non-believers & those interested in religions of the world a chance to know more about him, his birth, life & death? I found his picture & carving non-offensive, he was shown as he was (he existed, that is a fact) and thankfully appears fully clothed, for which I thank God. But as I said, I am not a Muslim so your sensitivities must be taken into consideration & permitted. You can of course protest to Wikipedia, and every Muslim (& others) who feel the same way, but for me I think being able to SEE what he looked like is a good thing, not at all blasphemous, but that is my opinion. I do not have an opinion on the Prophet Mohammed, nor on Islam itself, though I was given a hardback copy (in Green & Gold) of the Holy Qu'ran by a very good friend who was Saudi Arabian,m on the birth of my daughter (22 February 1991, some 17 years ago) & I still have it. I named my daughter, Ayeesha.............. It is a pleasure to occasionally read some passages in it, especially when someone tells me this or that is in the Holy Qu'ran, I can either confirm or deny its existence in the Holy Book. It is written in Arabic. On the left-had side of the page it is in Arabic with English translated on the right-hand side of the same page. Of course it is well known there are some words in Arabic that cannot be translated into English, as the feeling of the words in Arabic does not exist in English, however the translations are very good and can be understood. However, I digress. I wish you well in your demonstration, but feel that this matter is for you & your religion, to me & possibly some posters on this forum, this is not a slight on Islam now on the good Prophet, but helful & informative. I suspect it may help the cause of Islam, not denegrate it. Best Wishes & Kind Regards to you John Monteiro ---------------------------------------------------------------- Ahmed Shaikh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:ACT -1: Sign the Petition for Removal of Picture DEAR BROTHER AND SISTERS, ASSLAAM O ALAIKUM. WIKIPEDIA site has published the image of our prophet Mohammad SAS. Please sign the petition on the below mentioned link to have it removed. There is an illustration of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) on Wikipedia's website, which is extremely PROHIBITED IN ISLAM AND AGAINST THE BELIEVES OF MUSLIMS. You should RESPECT BELIEVES OF MUSLIMA AND REMOVE THAT PICTURE ON IMMEDIATE BASIS. Regards MUSLIM BELIEVER -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
