Extremist gunmen ? 12 at Paris newspaper. Revenge for cartoon prophet satire. (video)
Options
Comments
-
? em.
-
Bully_Pulpit wrote: »They getting all their ducks in a row, i hate to say it but WW3 is on the horizon. People been speculating for a few years but I think we are realistically the closest to it poppin off than ever before.
and there's my pet peeve.
You ? sound so ? uneducated when you talk that WW3 ? . "? TWO PEOPLE HAD A FIST FIGHT IN A MCDONALDS! ITS WORLD WAR 3!!!!" Yeah that's how ya'll sound.
Please go read a book about WW2 or the Cold War and realize how many light years we are from a actual ? WORLD WAR where the resources of every major nation are 110% dedicated to destroying the enemy.
You've grown up in a age where America has these little ? half-ass wars where 4,000 soldiers die over a decade. You know what you call 4,000 dead in a World War? TUESDAY.
Shiiiiiiet Russia and USA could all out nuke each other right now and it still wouldn't begin to approach the WW3 the Cold War almost resulted in.....where Africa, Asia, South America, Cuba, Australia, ETC would all catch dat radiation work.
Oh yeah. It was that real. South Africa built nukes so they could drop them on Angola and Zimbabwe and mayyyybe their own black population when it popped off, you know that? Israel? ISRAEL!?!?! HAHAHAHAHA. Google "Samson Option". One nuke on the Aswan High Dam and 98% of Egypt's population are ? dead in a tsunami of radioactive water.
World War 3 is like a ? cheap brand name now. It's a cliche. They name wrestling PPVs "World War 3". 12 people die and people call it "World War 3". There's probably a breakfast cereal named "World War 3". A ? has a bad day at work and compares it to "World War 3". Its a joke.
-
Swiffness! wrote: »Bully_Pulpit wrote: »They getting all their ducks in a row, i hate to say it but WW3 is on the horizon. People been speculating for a few years but I think we are realistically the closest to it poppin off than ever before.
and there's my pet peeve.
You ? sound so ? uneducated when you talk that WW3 ? . "? TWO PEOPLE HAD A FIST FIGHT IN A MCDONALDS! ITS WORLD WAR 3!!!!" Yeah that's how ya'll sound.
Please go read a book about WW2 or the Cold War and realize how many light years we are from a actual ? WORLD WAR where the resources of every major nation are 110% dedicated to destroying the enemy.
You've grown up in a age where America has these little ? half-ass wars where 4,000 soldiers die over a decade. You know what you call 4,000 dead in a World War? TUESDAY.
Shiiiiiiet Russia and USA could all out nuke each other right now and it still wouldn't begin to approach the WW3 the Cold War almost resulted in.....where Africa, Asia, South America, Cuba, Australia, ETC would all catch dat radiation work.
Oh yeah. It was that real. South Africa built nukes so they could drop them on Angola and Zimbabwe and mayyyybe their own black population when it popped off, you know that? Israel? ISRAEL!?!?! HAHAHAHAHA. Google "Samson Option". One nuke on the Aswan High Dam and 98% of Egypt's population are ? dead in a tsunami of radioactive water.
World War 3 is like a ? cheap brand name now. It's a cliche. They name wrestling PPVs "World War 3". 12 people die and people call it "World War 3". There's probably a breakfast cereal named "World War 3". A ? has a bad day at work and compares it to "World War 3". Its a joke.
Sorry I ? up your day fam, sheesh -
Damn just hit up live leaks. Dude was begging for his life mans walked up and dumped on him. Crazy world.
-
CNN is reporting that one suspect turned himself in. The gangsta of these people is just immeasurable. My gosh...They not even on suicide missions anymore.... Just off 12 people in cold blood and be like "? , here I am..."
-
news keep calling them "cowards" nothing cowardly about sacrificing your life to make a statement
-
obnoxiouslyfresh wrote: »CNN is reporting that one suspect turned himself in. The gangsta of these people is just immeasurable. My gosh...They not even on suicide missions anymore.... Just off 12 people in cold blood and be like "? , here I am..."
French jail must not be ? . ? taking that bid. Damn. Switched up on em. -
Freeman...... wrote: »obnoxiouslyfresh wrote: »CNN is reporting that one suspect turned himself in. The gangsta of these people is just immeasurable. My gosh...They not even on suicide missions anymore.... Just off 12 people in cold blood and be like "? , here I am..."
French jail must not be ? . ? taking that bid. Damn. Switched up on em.
I dont think they practice the death penalty either... Not that it would really matter with Islamic fundamentalists, but that is just crazy to me that he walked into a police station and turned himself in. -
obnoxiouslyfresh wrote: »Freeman...... wrote: »obnoxiouslyfresh wrote: »CNN is reporting that one suspect turned himself in. The gangsta of these people is just immeasurable. My gosh...They not even on suicide missions anymore.... Just off 12 people in cold blood and be like "? , here I am..."
French jail must not be ? . ? taking that bid. Damn. Switched up on em.
I dont think they practice the death penalty either... Not that it would really matter with Islamic fundamentalists, but that is just crazy to me that he walked into a police station and turned himself in.
I know, it doesnt really make any logical sense....
-
Art should NEVER censor itself. ? that. Expression is what art is here for.
-
But Frances euro population has been staunchly anti-Islamic for awhile. This wont help matters.
-
generally speaking, you don't praise people for committing reprehensible crimesnews keep calling them "cowards" nothing cowardly about sacrificing your life to make a statement
-
There are always repercussions for actions people like to play stupid and excuses blatant ? folk do. That cartoon ain't funny and the creators knew a certain type of folk were gonna take offense.... Now innocents are dead. Why slap a bear then cry poor me when someone gets mauled ?
THEN maybe it's time to ? the ? bear or expel it back into the ? forest.
thats how crackers do animals that aint do ? but be a animal ie elephants lions etc who do what nature intended. at the end of the day they shouldnt have made that offensive as cartoon... ? , Jehova, Allah, Buddah, whoever u wanna call the ? you worship blessed they ass with a consequence for that blatant disespect -
Darth Sidious wrote: »Lot of cowards up in this thread..
This is for all of the 'They shouldn't have poked the bear, they got what they had coming, saying what they did' types.
lib·er·ty
: the state or condition of people who are able to act and speak freely
: the power to do or choose what you want to
: a political right
Derived from the Latin word 'libertas' and french 'liberté'.
France has a long tradition of embodying the spirit of 'liberté'
Maybe you recognize this gift from the French to the US.
The editors and cartoonists of 'Charlie Hebdo' also had a tradition of saying and speaking whatever was on their mind targeting not only muslims but catholics, Persons in power, government and society.
They received so many death threats, the editor was under constants police protection BUT he was undaunted.
Stéphane "Charb" Charbonnier, (Killed) the editor of Charlie Hebdo and a great cartoonist in the French style. Two years ago, he said:
'It may seem pompous, but I'd rather die standing than live on my knees.'
Western democracy, ideals, values and culture inspire this kind of courage. They hate our freedom and our success.
The reason people are in the position they are in the world today is because some would prefer to live on their knees than die standing up.
Cowardly actions like this can blow out a candle but they can't blow out a fire. The Middle East ( and many parts of the world for that matter ) are stagnating under centuries of dogma and corruption and the chickens are coming home to roost and they are afraid and react with violence.
I am far from a coward.... but this sounds like a person who would talk ? to someone then cry and try to sue after getting ur ass whooped as a consequence....... talking bout liberty and free of speech makes it ok for me to disrespect you. -
I knew about the racism in papers and magazines towards blacks and arabs in France .
What was that song by Kanye West and Jay-Z again? What was it called?
-
There are always repercussions for actions people like to play stupid and excuses blatant ? folk do. That cartoon ain't funny and the creators knew a certain type of folk were gonna take offense.... Now innocents are dead. Why slap a bear then cry poor me when someone gets mauled ?
THEN maybe it's time to ? the ? bear or expel it back into the ? forest.
thats how crackers do animals that aint do ? but be a animal ie elephants lions etc who do what nature intended. at the end of the day they shouldnt have made that offensive as cartoon... ? , Jehova, Allah, Buddah, whoever u wanna call the ? you worship blessed they ass with a consequence for that blatant disespect
yes and the concequences for the muslims should be what now??? we should just let them keep terrorizing the world??? what if they decide that something else ? them off??? should we just allow them to dictate to every non muslim what we can and cannot do.
these ? muslims are biting off more than they can chew and when the time comes there is going to be lots of bloodshed and it will be muslim blood. -
Darth Sidious wrote: »Lot of cowards up in this thread..
This is for all of the 'They shouldn't have poked the bear, they got what they had coming, saying what they did' types.
lib·er·ty
: the state or condition of people who are able to act and speak freely
: the power to do or choose what you want to
: a political right
Derived from the Latin word 'libertas' and french 'liberté'.
France has a long tradition of embodying the spirit of 'liberté'
Maybe you recognize this gift from the French to the US.
The editors and cartoonists of 'Charlie Hebdo' also had a tradition of saying and speaking whatever was on their mind targeting not only muslims but catholics, Persons in power, government and society.
They received so many death threats, the editor was under constants police protection BUT he was undaunted.
Stéphane "Charb" Charbonnier, (Killed) the editor of Charlie Hebdo and a great cartoonist in the French style. Two years ago, he said:
'It may seem pompous, but I'd rather die standing than live on my knees.'
Western democracy, ideals, values and culture inspire this kind of courage. They hate our freedom and our success.
The reason people are in the position they are in the world today is because some would prefer to live on their knees than die standing up.
Cowardly actions like this can blow out a candle but they can't blow out a fire. The Middle East ( and many parts of the world for that matter ) are stagnating under centuries of dogma and corruption and the chickens are coming home to roost and they are afraid and react with violence.
I am far from a coward.... but this sounds like a person who would talk ? to someone then cry and try to sue after getting ur ass whooped as a consequence....... talking bout liberty and free of speech makes it ok for me to disrespect you.
Yes it does everyone has the right to disrespect you muslims have to been taught that lesson the millions of them killed because of 9/11 WAS NOT enough for them they want millions more of their people to die. Mark my words people in the west are getting sick of there ? if this continues there will be even more muslims killed. The far right is already growing in europe this situation is going to get very bad for the muslims. -
These extremists ( key word : extremists ) need to be taken out. All of them.
I'm tired of hearing / reading about them ? being in their feelings about ? . People having their lives taken over a ? cartoon? FOH. ? all them ? . ? like this makes me consider collateral damage being inevitable in an effort to wipe that entire ideology off the face of the Earth..
agree. extremists from the tea party, kkk, islamists, etcetc. all need to be sent to russia
-
news keep calling them "cowards" nothing cowardly about sacrificing your life to make a statement
yea shooting unarmed ppl is pretty damn brave
-
Peeny_Wally wrote: »I swear white people love making racist/all around incendiary comments, and calling it "satire".
The third image is of a fairly progressive black politician in France, and the fourth image is of the girls kidnapped by Boko Haram and they're saying "don't touch my welfare/benefits" or something like that.
This magazine is not funny, hateful, racist, and islamophobic, and if they want to say it's their right to do this ? because of 'freedom of speech' then they should remember that with freedom of speech comes responsibility.
At the end of the day, I feel for the people who died, but putting disgusting comments under the umbrella of 'satire' needs to stop. Because it's really only cacs who can get away with this ? . A black paper in a western country printing these types of images featuring white people would be buried.
And seeing as France just completely banned pro-Palestinian rallies, the 'freedom of speech' argument is looking real weak.
Wow great post, I had no idea the magazine was THAT provocative. And France banned pro-Palestinian rallies on top of that? It's clear the attacks are beyond the cartoons. Europeans have ? off the world for centuries and I guess the attacks, as bad as they are, aren't really surprising in the grand scheme of things. With France being supporters of Israeli apartheid and terrorism, as America clearly is, I have a feeling ? like this is gonna happen again. -
fortyacres&amule wrote: »Great Article on This whole thing
On Wednesday morning, the French satirical paper Charlie Hebdo was attacked by three masked gunmen, armed with kalashnikovs, who stormed the building and killed ten of its staff and two police officers. The gunmen are currently understood to be Muslim extremists. This attack came minutes after the paper tweeted this drawing of ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi.
An armed attack on a newspaper is shocking, but it is not even the first time Hebdo has been the subject of terrorist attacks. Gawker has a good summary of past controversies and attacks involving Hebdo. Most famously, the magazine’s offices were firebombed in 2011, after they printed an issue depicting the Prophet Muhammad on the cover.
In the face of such an obvious attack on free speech, voicing anything except grief-stricken support is seen by many as disrespectful.
When faced with a terrorist attack against a satirical newspaper, the appropriate response seems obvious. Don’t let the victims be silenced. Spread their work as far as it can possibly go. Laugh in the face of those savage murderers who don’t understand satire.
Here’s what’s difficult to parse in the face of tragedy: yes, Charlie Hebdo is a French satirical newspaper. Its staff is white. Its cartoons often represent a certain, virulently racist brand of French xenophobia. While they generously claim to ‘attack everyone equally,’ the cartoons they publish are intentionally anti-Islam, and frequently sexist and homophobic.
These are, by even the most generous assessment, incredibly racist cartoons. Hebdo’s goal is to provoke, and these cartoons make it very clear who the white editorial staff was interested in provoking: France’s incredibly marginalized, often attacked, Muslim immigrant community.
Even in a fresh-off-the-press, glowing BBC profile of Charb, Hebdo’s murdered editor, he comes across as a racist ? .
Charb had strongly defended Charlie Hebdo’s cartoons featuring the Prophet Muhammad.
“Muhammad isn’t sacred to me,” he told the Associated Press in 2012, after the magazine’s offices had been fire-bombed.
“I don’t blame Muslims for not laughing at our drawings. I live under French law. I don’t live under Koranic law.”
Now, I understand that calling someone a ‘racist ? ’ after their murder is a callous thing to do, and I don’t do it lightly. This isn’t ambiguous, though: the editorial staff of Hebdo consistently aimed to provoke Muslims. They ascribe to the same edgy-white-guy mentality that many American cartoonists do: nothing is sacred, sacred targets are funnier, lighten up, criticism is censorship. And just like American cartoonists, they and their supporters are wrong. White men punching down is not a recipe for good satire, and needs to be called out. People getting upset does not prove that the satire was good. And, this is the hardest part, the murder of the satirists in question does not prove that their satire was good. Their satire was bad, and remains bad. Their satire was racist, and remains racist.
Several of the cartoons sweeping Twitter stooped to drawing hook-nosed Muslim caricatures, reminiscent of Hebdo’s house style.
Political correctness did not ? twelve people at the Charlie Hebdo offices. To talk about the attack as an attack by “political correctness” is the most disgusting, self-serving martyr ? I can imagine. To invoke this (bad) Shaw cartoon in relation to the Hebdo murders is to assert that cartoons should never be criticized. To invoke this garbage cartoon is to assert that white, male cartoonists should never have to hear any complaints when they gleefully attack marginalized groups.
Changing your twitter avatar to a drawing of the Prophet Muhammad is a racist thing to do, even in the face of a terrorist attack. The attitude that Muslims need to be ‘punished’ is xenophobic and distressing. The statement, “JE SUIS CHARLIE” works to erase and ignore the magazine’s history of xenophobia, racism, and homophobia. For us to truly honor the victims of a terrorist attack on free speech, we must not spread hateful racism blithely, and we should not take pride in extreme attacks on oppressed and marginalized peoples.
To simplify the attack on the Charlie Hebdo offices as “Good, Valiant Westerners vs. Evil, Savage Muslims” is not only racist, it’s dangerously overstated. Cartoonists (especially political cartoonists) generally reinforce the status quo, and they tend to be white men. Calling fellow cartoonists TO ARMS is calling other white men to arms against already marginalized people. The inevitable backlash against Muslims has begun in earnest.
The fact that twelve people are dead over cartoons is hateful, and I can only pray that their attackers are brought to justice. Free speech is an important part of our society, but, it should always go without saying, free speech does not mean freedom from criticism. Criticism IS speech – to honor “free speech martyrs” by shouting down any criticism of their work is both ironic and depressing.
In summary:
Nobody should have been killed over those cartoons.
but ? those cartoons.
My feelings exactly, GOAT'd -
@ Zombie
I am convinced that none of these are your words nor did you care to even thoroughly what you copied and pasted.
"in the beginning of understand the difference between islam and christanity you have to know that there is a difference between what a religious teacher teaches either through direct religious order or by example vs what his followers actually do.
The moral teachings of christ and his apostles are simple love ? and love mankind"
The moral teachings of christ and his apostles while simple are indeed complicated. Many christians have and continue to perpetuate heinous crimes in the name of their religion. With that said, any person with an ounce of intelligence has the ability to first realize that despite what religion one follows people will sin, misinterpret and at abuse. The point of religion is to have a guidelines in which govern oneself, family and community while they live an earthly life. The ultimate reward for following the guidelines is Heaven, at least it is for Muslims and Christians.
"islam on the other hand only extends love to other muslims"
This is true. As Muslim translate to " one who submits to the will of ? " "one who has dedicated his\her life to the worship of ? "
Do followers of Christ submit to the will of ? ?
Islam encourages Muslims to strive for balance. Anyone who says they Love everyone is a liar and unreasonable. In order to have balance one would have to not only Love but also Hate. In Islam what are some of the things that Allah hates.
There are many but for the sake of brevity here are three.
1. Those who transgress bounds
And fight in the Way of Allah those who fight you, but transgress not the limits. Truly, Allah likes not the transgressors. (2:190)
2. Those that are foul-mouthed
Allah does not like that the evil should be uttered in public except by him who has been wronged. And Allah is Ever All-Hearer, All-Knower. (4:148)
3. The Zalimeen (those that oppress others)
Narrated Anas: Allah's Apostle said, "Help your brother, whether he is an oppressor or he is an oppressed one. People asked, "O Allah's Apostle! It is all right to help him if he is oppressed, but how should we help him if he is an oppressor?" The Prophet said, "By preventing him from oppressing others." [Bukhari 624]
Qur'an 3:31-32—Say [O Muhammad]: If you love Allah, then follow me, Allah will love you and forgive you your faults, and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. Say: Obey Allah and the Apostle; but if they turn back, then surely Allah does not love the unbelievers.
? doesn't Love those who do not submit. In order to enter Heaven, the Christian believe you must take Jesus as Lord and Savior. There isn't much Love there for those who do not submit. Now is it? More importantly what this verse in Quran is telling us is, ? will sort out those who do not submit. It is not our job as followers (Muhammed s.a.w. included) to sort out who believes and who doesn't.
Qur'an 30:43-45—Then turn thy face straight to the right religion before there come from Allah the day which cannot be averted; on that day they shall become separated. Whoever disbelieves, he shall be responsible for his disbelief, and whoever does good, they prepare (good) for their own souls, that He may reward those who believe and do good out of His grace; surely He does not love the unbelievers.
The verse is merely reaffirming the day of resurrection, or day of judgement when all of mankind will be held accountable for his or her actions during their life. While, again reminding those who do not believe in ? to turn to ? in worship.
Notice that 3:31-32 makes Allah's love contingent on whether a person believes in Muhammad. This is similar to what we find in 19:46, which declares: "Lo! those who believe and do good works, the Beneficent will appoint for them love."
How you or the quack you copy and pasted from came to such a conclusion is amazing. No where does the verses you copy and pasted remotely suggest such a thing.
In fact one cannot say they are followers of Islam and not recognize and Love all of the Prophets of Allah.
“Say, ‘We believe in ? and in what was sent down to us and what was sent down to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and what was given to Moses, Jesus, and all the prophets by their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and we devote ourselves to Him.’” (Quran, 2:136)
Hence, although Allah is called "the Loving," the Qur'an only means by this that Allah will love people once they believe in him and obey his prophet. The ? of Islam has no love for sinners and unbelievers.
Allah has 99 names and "The Loving" isn't one of them. Which, disqualifies anything written there after. You are correct in saying that Allah as no Love for sinners and unbelievers. But if, we use the names in which Allah describes himself within the Quran. Allah "The All-compassionate", The All-Merciful", The inspirer of faith", "The-sustainer", "The creator" is all of the things to all of Mankind. Which, includes sinners and unbelievers.
Now understand this the quran has peaceful verses but there is a doctrine called abrogation which erases these parts for more violent ones. This happened because at the birth of islam muhammad and his followers were weak militarily so he promoted peace as soon as that changed muhamand co-signed warfare. that happened after the move from mecca to medina.
What is your proof of this doctrine's existence other then heresay? I know you have alot vested in your cowardly stance but at least be respectful and provide some real evidence of your copy and paste jobs.
At the birth of Islam the Muslims were weak period. Muslims were small in number. They were living in a climate of ignorance. Many Muslims were being persecuted thus they didn't just move from Mecca they fled to Medina for safety. The Quran isn't a book of romance. The Quran is a collection of verses from ? dealing with and advising mankind of how to handle social, political, religious,spiritual, and economical situations. So, yes, there are verses that advise not just Muhammed but all of Mankind that during a time of war there are guidelines a believer must still abide by. Even in war believer CANNOT transgress what ? has set forth.
So, you are ? approach to life as, if conflict has not, will not or perhaps just isn't supposed to exist is nothing but you trying to prove some whack ass point like, humans are supposed to sit be oppressed, killed, bullied and ridiculed and not respond appropriately. Some times people have to literally fight for survival which, in the case of Mecca during the time of Muhammed was a time of tribal warfare not just some religious crusade.
-
@zombie
muhammad was also a war leader who slaughtered a whole tribe of ? jews google banu qurayza.
Muhammed wasn't a war leader. Muhammed was also a head of state. Muhammed wasn't just an Imam or preacher. Muhammed wore many hats. Soldier was one of them.
These jews you mentioned were charged with treason after having participated in attacks on Muslims thus violating a signed treaty. Unfortunate their sentence was death. Which, by the way was taken from Jewish law at the time.
But if the city makes no peace with you, but makes war against you, then you shall besiege it; and when the Lord your ? gives it into your hand you shall put all its males to the sword, but the women and the little ones, the cattle, and everything else in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as ? for yourselves; and you shall enjoy the spoil of your enemies, which the Lord your ? has given you.
Source: Deuteronomy 20:12-14
We can debate, discuss any and all aspects of Islam, and Muhammed. What you will find is, you aren't well suited to do so. You have serious deficiency that no amount of discussion will fix.
While I am not a Christian. What I do know is, it is ? alone who gets to pass judgement on whom to grant salvation not me and certainly not you. While, I admit there are Muslims who believe, interpret, and act differently then I do, no Muslim is above reproach.
On the authority of Abu Saeed al-Khudri (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah say, “Whoever of you sees an evil must then change it with his hand. If he is not able to do so, then [he must change it ] with his tongue. And if he is not able to do so, then [he must change it] with his heart. And that is the slightest [effect of] faith.” [/b] -
These crackers out here are really upset that News stations don't want to show the racist cartoons. They out here talking about, they let the terrorist win.
-
not_osirus_jenkins wrote: »This ? muhamand is the ultimate hypocrite a muslim man is limited to having 4 wives this ? had like 9-12.
Quran (4:3) - "Marry of the women, who seem good to you, two or three or four; and if ye fear that ye cannot do justice (to so many) then one (only) or (the captives) that your right hands possess."
Bukhari (62:6) - "The Prophet used to go round (have sexual relations with) all his wives in one night, and he had nine wives."
These are some of his wives but he had more
Sawda ? Zam'a
Aisha ? Abi Bakr
Hafsa ? Umar
Hind (Umm Salama) ? Abi Umayya
Zaynab ? Jahsh
Zaynab ? Khuzayma
Rayhana ? Zayd ibn Amr
Ramlah (Umm Habiba) ? Abi Sufyan
Juwayriyah ? Al-Harith
Moses, Abraham, Solomon and Lamech had multiple wives. And their bible says that was pagan practices.
Moses, abraham and soloman were jews not christians they had no bible ( old and new testament) they only had the torah which is the old testament and the laws as practiced in it were for jews not christians
If jesus told christians not to marry more than one wife and had 12 wives himself then you would have a point. Muhammand had 11 wives but the koran says to have 4 so he himself was not following the word of allah.
Muhammed received revelations at various times, his first came at age 40. Just add perspective because, it's obvious you just spout off anything you hear or read.
To add some perspective here. There was no law prohibiting the number of wives a Muslim could have until Muhammed was the age of 60.
So, lets look at this.
Until age 25 Muhammed was single.
Age 25 he marries and has only one wife (who then passed) until age 50.
Age 50-52 he is single while mourning the death of his first wife.
Age 53-60 he marries multiple times. But never has more then 4 at a time after the verse was revealed limiting a Man to 4. The prophet divorced 5 of his wives, contractually only binding him to the limit of 4. Upon the advice of the community the prophet's ex-wives continued to live in his home and were provided for.
Age 60 he receives the revelation. "It is not lawful for thee (to marry more) women after this, nor to change them for (other) wives, even though their beauty attract thee, except any thy right hand should possess (as hand maidens) and Allah doth watch over all things ". [Al-Qur’an 33:52]
The prophet passes away at age 63.
So, this notion that the prophet was running around with multiple wives while others couldn't or didn't is simply your imagination.
To add on. While multiple wives are indeed acceptable. Here's what the Quran says on the matter.
{Marry women of your choice, two, or three, or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one.} (An-Nisaa’ 3:3)
{Ye are never able to be fair and just as between women} (Al-Nisaa’ 3:129)
