Wikipedia

1. Wikipedia defies 180,000 demands to remove images of the Prophethttp://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/feb/17/wikipedia.islam* Caroline Davies* The Observer,* Sunday February 17 2008
Wikipedia, the free online encyclopaedia, is refusing to removemedieval artistic depictions of the Prophet Muhammad, despite beingflooded with complaints from Muslims demanding the images be deleted.
More than 180,000 worldwide have joined an online protest claiming theimages, shown on European-language pages and taken from Persian andOttoman miniatures dating from the 14th, 15th and 16th centuries, areoffensive to Islam, which prohibits any representation of Muhammad.
But the defiant editors of the encyclopaedia insist they will not bowto pressure and say anyone objecting to the controversial images cansimply adjust their computers so they do not have to look at them.
The images at the centre of the protest appear on most of the Europeanversions of the web encyclopaedia, though not on Arabic sites. On twoof the images, Muhammad's face is veiled, a practice followed inIslamic art since the 16th century. But on two others, one from 1315,which is the earliest surviving depiction of the prophet, and theother from the 15th century, his face is shown. Some protesters areclaiming the pictures have been posted simply to 'bait' and 'insult'Muslims and argue the least Wikipedia can do is blur or blank out thefaces.
Such has been the adverse reaction, Wikipedia has been forced to setup a separate page on its site explaining why it refuses to bow topressure and has also had to set up measures to block people from'editing' the pages themselves.
In a robust statement on the site, its editors state: 'Wikipediarecognises that there are cultural traditions among some Muslim groupsthat prohibit depictions of Muhammad and other prophets and that someMuslims are offended when those traditions are violated. However, theprohibitions are not universal among Muslim communities, particularlywith the Shia who, while prohibiting the images, are less strict aboutit.
'Since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia with the goal of representing alltopics from a neutral point of view, Wikipedia is not censored for thebenefit of any particular group.
'So long as they are relevant to the article and do not violate any ofWikipedia's existing policies, nor the law of the US state of Floridawhere Wikipedia's servers are hosted, no content or images will beremoved because people find them objectionable or offensive.'
The traditional reason given for the Islamic prohibition on images ofprophets it to prevent them from becoming objects of worship in a formof idolatry. But, say the editors, the images used were examples ofhow Muhammad has been depicted by various Islamic sects throughhistory and not in a religious context.
My Take:1. My un-bounded salutations go to, the brave European outfit called " Wikipedia, " who even though they are well aware of Allah's ( and Sulla's ) wrath, and Islam's barabaric record of 1400 years, of gory deeds of murder, rape & plunder of Kafirs, yet are fiercely defending the Freedom Of Expression, and not succumbing to the threats & blackmail, of Sullas around the world.

2. Wikipedia Boys: Keep up your good work, and keep exposing the fiendish deeds of Barbarian-Islam.

Surinder Paul Attri