NationStates Jolt Archive

Isn't amusing that the itty-bitty jihadis are so scared over a few innocent cartoons? 12 cartoons in a single newspaper was all it took.

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004413.htm

Poor little jihadis! If they're afraid of a few cartoonists then what chance do they have against the rest of the world? ;)

racist!! i kinda feel for them, after all they dont even make drawings for their prophet, and this guy is drawing him in a humorous way

Islam trembles before Danish Cartoonists!

Islam =/= Jihadist.

Asshole.

Isn't amusing that the itty-bitty jihadis are so scared over a few innocent cartoons? 12 cartoons in a single newspaper was all it took.

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004413.htm

Poor little jihadis! If they're afraid of a few cartoonists then what chance do they have against the rest of the world? ;)

im not muslim (in fact im catholic) and im offended by what you just said

Isn't amusing that the itty-bitty jihadis are so scared over a few innocent cartoons? 12 cartoons in a single newspaper was all it took.

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004413.htm

Poor little jihadis! If they're afraid of a few cartoonists then what chance do they have against the rest of the world? ;)

*sigh*

And who says education in the states is not in trouble.....

*sigh*

And who says education in that states is not in trouble.....

canadian?

if so then http://postfarm.net/uploads/gtfo_copy3.jpg

you have no voice in this matter

Muslims are offended when anyone draws Mohhamad. It's basicly the equivalent of peeing on their holy book. Drawing him in a cartoony fashion only pours gasoline onto the fire.

Meh, not that funny. South Park pokes fun at them better in a funnier man of funnity.

This is the fourth thread about this today. Stop posting it already! And Michelle Malkin? That really does take the prize for stupidest source...

Muslims are offended when anyone draws Mohhamad. It's basicly the equivalent of peeing on their holy book. Drawing him in a cartoony fashion only pours gasoline onto the fire.

Yeah, but you don't threaten to kill them and bomb their offices for it...

This is the fourth thread about this today. Stop posting it already!

This gives me an idea for a thread...;)

I believe Lewis Black said it best when he said that the reason Islamic people are the way that they are, is that they lack a sense of humor. This article confirms what Lewis Black said.

No, they just lack comedy clubs. Listen to Mencia.

OMFG! How many more of these threads are gonna be made? What is this now, 5?

Lame thread.
Ignorant OP.

Islam =/= Jihadist.

Asshole.
Just about every Muslim government is in hysterics over a couple cartoons, in addition to the widespread (and highly effective) boycotts and protest demonstrations throughout Islamic societies. Does that make the Islamic mainstream a bunch of jihadists?

I believe Lewis Black said it best when he said that the reason Islamic people are the way that they are, is that they lack a sense of humor.

If something is funny, we laugh.


This:

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/danish_cartoon.jpg

Is not funny by any stretch of the imagination. It is what we call "flamebait". The cartoonist would be banned from this forum.

Just about every Muslim government is in hysterics over a couple cartoons, in addition to the widespread (and highly effective) boycotts and protest demonstrations throughout Islamic societies. Does that make the Islamic mainstream a bunch of jihadists?

Ok ... logic time ...

Step 1: Cartoonist makes cartoon to deliberately offend Muslims.
Step 2: Muslims get offended.
Step 3: People are appalled that Muslims got offended.
Step 4: People say Islam is a hateful, humorless religion.

How does being offended by someone spitting in your face make you a jihadist? Logic breaks down at Step 3.

Ok ... logic time ...

How does being offended by someone spitting in your face make you a jihadist? Logic breaks down at Step 3.

There is a huge difference between simply being offended and threatening people with death, beatings, and terrorist attacks. Not all Muslims do it, but when someone theatens others with violence or even death because they did something totally legal that is considered offensive to their religious beliefs, that is extremism.

They are trying to silence freedom of speech and expression through threats, and I credit these cartoonists with not backing down. If anything, they should make more of them as resistance to the attempt by fundamentalists to impose their will on everyone.

There is a huge difference between simply being offended and threatening people with death, beatings, and terrorist attacks. Not all Muslims do it, but when someone theatens others with violence or even death because they did something totally legal that is considered offensive to their religious beliefs, that is extremism.

They are trying to silence freedom of speech and expression through threats, and I credit these cartoonists with not backing down. If anything, they should make more of them as resistance to the attempt by fundamentalists to impose their will on everyone.
Agreed and seconded. :)

If something is funny, we laugh.


This:

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/danish_cartoon.jpg

Is not funny by any stretch of the imagination. It is what we call "flamebait". The cartoonist would be banned from this forum.

I understand that, but comon, I'm Roman Catholic. People make fun of Catholics all the time on TV. I just laugh about it. People make fun of Jesus on TV (Family Guy do this regularly), and I just laugh too. I just believe that life is too short to get your panties in a wad over a stupid cartoon.

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/danish_cartoon.jpg

Is not funny by any stretch of the imagination. It is what we call "flamebait". The cartoonist would be banned from this forum.

They have every right to say it. Regardless of the accuracy, to attempt to silence them for fear of violence from terrorists is nothing more than extortion against the freedoms guaranteed by the nations of Europe.

There is a huge difference between simply being offended and threatening people with death, beatings, and terrorist attacks. Not all Muslims do it, but when someone theatens others with violence or even death because they did something totally legal that is considered offensive to their religious beliefs, that is extremism.

They are trying to silence freedom of speech and expression through threats, and I credit these cartoonists with not backing down. If anything, they should make more of them as resistance to the attempt by fundamentalists to impose their will on everyone.

Good post, keep it up! :)

I understand that, but comon, I'm Roman Catholic. People make fun of Catholics all the time on TV. I just laugh about it. People make fun of Jesus on TV (Family Guy do this regularly), and I just laugh too. I just believe that life is too short to get your panties in a wad over a stupid cartoon.

Remember in that episode when somthing happens to someone and they go, "Thank you Jesus", and Jesus goes, "Well, actually, it wasnt me it was..." and then the that Hindu God goes "No, no, it's ok, I'm used to it." haha

Ok ... logic time ...

Step 1: Cartoonist makes cartoon to deliberately offend Muslims.
Step 2: Muslims get offended.
Step 3: People are appalled that Muslims got offended.
Step 4: People say Islam is a hateful, humorless religion.

How does being offended by someone spitting in your face make you a jihadist? Logic breaks down at Step 3.

There is nothing wrong with being offended, but the sheer violence and uproar sure does not dispel the notion that Muslims are extremist in their religion as compared with most groups.

Step 1: A privately owned newspaper in Denmark publishes a deliberately offensive cartoon.
Step 2: Muslims get offended.
Step 3: Danish government says it cannot limit the freedom of speech, but condemns the cartoons as tasteless.
Step 4: Several Danish expatriates in the gulf, who have nothing to do with the offending cartoonist besides sharing a nationality, get beaten.
Step 5: Gunmen shoot off guns and intimidate the EU office in Gaza city.
Step 6: Almost all Muslim countries withdraw their representatives from the government of Denmark.
Step 7: Muslims boycott Legos.

Steps 4 through 7: These Muslims are definitely too uptight and unhinged.

Remember in that episode when somthing happens to someone and they go, "Thank you Jesus", and Jesus goes, "Well, actually, it wasnt me it was..." and then the that Hindu God goes "No, no, it's ok, I'm used to it." haha

I liked the one where God is in the bar and lights it on fire...he's like "Jesus Christ!"..."Yeah Dad?"..."Get the Escalade!".

Either that or Passion of the Christ 2..."let he who is without sin...kick the most ass!".

Muslims are offended when anyone draws Mohhamad. It's basicly the equivalent of peeing on their holy book. Drawing him in a cartoony fashion only pours gasoline onto the fire.

But they don't mind blowing up said holy book with suicide bombers

There are a lot of images of Mohammed that pre-date this incident but not a word has been said.
Don't believe me? Hit the linky:
http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/

There is nothing wrong with being offended, but the sheer violence and uproar sure does not dispel the notion that Muslims are extremist in their religion as compared with most groups.

Step 1: A privately owned newspaper in Denmark publishes a deliberately offensive cartoon.
Step 2: Muslims get offended.
Step 3: Danish government says it cannot limit the freedom of speech, but condemns the cartoons as tasteless.
Step 4: Several Danish expatriates in the gulf, who have nothing to do with the offending cartoonist besides sharing a nationality, get beaten.
Step 5: Gunmen shoot off guns and intimidate the EU office in Gaza city.
Step 6: Almost all Muslim countries withdraw their representatives from the government of Denmark.
Step 7: Muslims boycott Legos.

Steps 4 through 7: These Muslims are definitely too uptight and unhinged.


There are several other steps you could add, such as bomb threats against said newspaper, demands that the danish queen (who has NOTHING to do with politics in Denmark) apologize, that the danish government punish the news paper, its staff and passes laws against drawing cartoons that might offend religions.

It seems like the middleeast have thrown common sense to the wind and expects Denmark to submit to all their demands.

Muslims are offended when anyone draws Mohhamad. It's basicly the equivalent of peeing on their holy book. Drawing him in a cartoony fashion only pours gasoline onto the fire.
Well they should get thicker skin. I have the right to draw anything I want, and I fucking will!

Canada City']But they don't mind blowing up said holy book with suicide bombers
Nice.

Ok here's the problem:

The cartoon offends me. ME.

I have an incredible sense of humor. I have the striking ability to laugh at myself and do so on a regular basis - just look at some of mine and Eutrusca's exchanges. I can even show humor concerning certain aspects of my religion - for example, look at the brief exchange between me and DK talking about a Pygmalion approach to recruiting young terrorists.

However, the cartoons in question and the response to the outcry are not designed to piss off only those who would blow up your house, but designed to piss off every single Muslim on the planet. All of us.

It is the continuation of the idea that every Muslim is a mad frothing terrorist.

Everyone here who has known me for more than 5 posts can state with full certainty that I am as far removed from being a terrorist as a person can possibly get.

So why would you want to take a shit on a Qur'an in front of me?
Why would you want to defame my Prophet?

If you want to piss off Jihadists, show a sexy lady wearing nothing but a headscarf. If you want to piss off Jihadists, eat some bacon. If you want to piss off Jihadists, vote in Democratic elections in secular nations.

Don't, however, deliberately seek to piss off the rest of us. We never did anything to you.

So why would you want to take a shit on a Qur'an in front of me?
Why would you want to defame my Prophet?


Don't, however, deliberately seek to piss off the rest of us. We never did anything to you.
Hey, people defame symbols of Christianity, even Christ Himself, all the time. We don't call for them to be crucified though. There is such a thing such as freedom of speech. If it offends you, so be it. That doesn't give you the right to silence others though.

If it offends you, so be it. That doesn't give you the right to silence others though.

And when did I ever call for anything to be silenced?

Hey, people defame symbols of Christianity, even Christ Himself, all the time. We don't call for them to be crucified though. There is such a thing such as freedom of speech. If it offends you, so be it. That doesn't give you the right to silence others though.

Hear Hear!

Hey, people defame symbols of Christianity, even Christ Himself, all the time. We don't call for them to be crucified though. There is such a thing such as freedom of speech. If it offends you, so be it. That doesn't give you the right to silence others though.
Well said.
So why would you want to take a shit on a Qur'an in front of me?
Why would you want to defame my Prophet?
Just to piss you off.

Just to piss you off.

Then don't be surprised when I kick your teeth in. Mmkay?

And when did I ever call for anything to be silenced?
Your tone was almost threatening. Intimidation is a means of silencing.

Your tone was almost threatening. Intimidation is a means of silencing.

Threatening? A little, yes. Perhaps. It's the nature of being offended.

I guess there's just no way to make you understand that common courtesy is actually a good thing.

Threatening? A little, yes. Perhaps. It's the nature of being offended.

I guess there's just no way to make you understand that common courtesy is actually a good thing.
I don't disagree, but I would advise you not to take such sarcastic cartoons so seriously. Satire is commonplace no matter where you look. The best way to counter it is to act aloof, as if it hardly matters in your life. The point of satire is to arouse (as well as amuse); if it fails that, its failed completely.

Then don't be surprised when I kick your teeth in. Mmkay?
Fortunately, the law doesn’t see satire as grounds for assault.
I guess there's just no way to make you understand that common courtesy is actually a good thing.
Do you ever make fun of Jesus?

Then don't be surprised when I kick your teeth in. Mmkay?
You yourself are just making Muslims look violent, despite your protestations that Islam is about peace and love.

Isn't amusing

According to the Islam it is blasphemous to make images of the prophet.

-- I don't see how that's amusing.

According to the Islam it is blasphemous to make images of the prophet.

-- I don't see how that's amusing.
For a Muslim. Just like its blasphemous for a Christian to say anything ill of God.

I don't disagree, but I would advise you not to take such sarcastic cartoons so seriously. Satire is commonplace no matter where you look. The best way to counter it is to act aloof, as if it hardly matters in your life. The point of satire is to arouse (as well as amuse); if it fails that, its failed completely.

I agree for the most part and it's not really so much the cartoon itself that offends me. I don't find it funny or in any way what I consider wit, but that is an entirely subjective opinion.

What truly offends me is the literally millions of people throughout the world who are saying I don't even have the right to get a little indignant. Just search around the internet.

Thing is, though, all of these same people get their goats up or their gears ground by one thing or another that I would find silly to get riled up about, yet I grant them their indignation.

Why am I not given that same right? Because I pray towards the east on a rug with my face on the ground? That attitude is what offends me.

According to the Islam it is blasphemous to make images of the prophet.
Good thing I’m not Muslim then.

You yourself are just making Muslims look violent, despite your protestations that Islam is about peace and love.

Oh for the love of ....

Ok I'm going to say this one more time and let's try to get it through our thick heads, shall we?

"Religion of peace" does NOT mean "I will let you walk all over me and spit on me". Islam tells us not to be the aggressors, but if any man puts his hands on you, you make damn sure those hands can't be put on anyone else.

Get it now? I hope so ... I really hate repeating myself.

Why am I not given that same right? Because I pray towards the east on a rug with my face on the ground? That attitude is what offends me.
Its hardly that really. You have the right to criticise the cartoon, yet criticising the freedom of speech is far more touchy an issue, unless its in exceptional circumstances, such as the incitement of violence etc.

Good thing I’m not Muslim then.

So since you're not Muslim, it's ok to disrespect Muslims on principle? I'm not black, so is it ok for me to call everyone "******"?

Simple courtesy ... why is that so hard for so many people?

but if any man puts his hands on you, you make damn sure those hands can't be put on anyone else.
Sorry, but making fun of you isn’t putting my hands on you.
Do you support the death penalty?

Threatening? A little, yes. Perhaps. It's the nature of being offended.

I guess there's just no way to make you understand that common courtesy is actually a good thing.
We can all agree that the cartoons were not very nice, but the cartoonist has the freedom of speech to make his opinions clear. Your violent fixation on a offensive cartoon is misplaced, considering that the over the top reaction by the Muslim world is far more disturbing than the tastelessness of the original cartoon. What did Legos ever do to the Muslim world??

Its hardly that really. You have the right to criticise the cartoon, yet criticising the freedom of speech is far more touchy an issue, unless its in exceptional circumstances, such as the incitement of violence etc.

Aye ... and I've never criticised freedom of speech. I hold it very dear. I've criticised the cartoon as not being funny and I've criticised the cartoonist for being extremely rude, but have not called for him to be silenced or to stop drawing what he wants to draw.

I, on the other hand, am being told to just shut up and put up with it. Where does my freedom of speech begin?

So since you're not Muslim, it's ok to disrespect Muslims on principle? I'm not black, so is it ok for me to call everyone "******"?
I assure you, I can disrespect anything I want.
Simple courtesy ... why is that so hard for so many people?Courtesy is nothing more than an invention of The Man to keep us passive and cooperative under his leadership.

I think there is a fine line between humor/satire and outright offending people. And I think in a few cases the guy crossed the line. I liked the one where the guy is saying we're out of virgins but the whole bomb in the turban really didn't get me laughing. I don't think they should stop making cartoons but they should try and do so in a better manner.

Your violent fixation on a offensive cartoon is misplaced

What violent fixation? The hell are you talking about? When have I been violent?

Sorry, but making fun of you isn’t putting my hands on you.

It was an example not related to the cartoon.

Do you support the death penalty?

Under no circumstances.

I assure you, I can disrespect anything I want.

Courtesy is nothing more than an invention of The Man to keep us passive and cooperative under his leadership.

*snicker*

I agree for the most part and it's not really so much the cartoon itself that offends me. I don't find it funny or in any way what I consider wit, but that is an entirely subjective opinion.

What truly offends me is the literally millions of people throughout the world who are saying I don't even have the right to get a little indignant. Just search around the internet.

Thing is, though, all of these same people get their goats up or their gears ground by one thing or another that I would find silly to get riled up about, yet I grant them their indignation.

Why am I not given that same right? Because I pray towards the east on a rug with my face on the ground? That attitude is what offends me.

Well, of course you're indignant. I'm sure Hindus get a little miffed when someone offers them a nice juicy cheeseburger.

But there's a difference between getting upset and sending death threats to the newspaper and cartoonist. There's a difference between boycotting the paper and burning flags of Denmark in protest.

Oh for the love of ....

Ok I'm going to say this one more time and let's try to get it through our thick heads, shall we?

"Religion of peace" does NOT mean "I will let you walk all over me and spit on me". Islam tells us not to be the aggressors, but if any man puts his hands on you, you make damn sure those hands can't be put on anyone else.

Get it now? I hope so ... I really hate repeating myself.
Well if some Arabs decide that a cartoon printed in a newspaper thousands of miles away justified beating up some Danish workers, then the Islamic definition of what constitutes having a "hand put on a Muslim" is absurd and totally out of place in this society.

Courtesy is nothing more than an invention of The Man to keep us passive and cooperative under his leadership.
Actually its a means of displaying respect towards one's fellow man and is an essential element of any civilised society. Humans are a collaborative species, essentially self-interested, yet its within their interest to have strong social bonds. Thus, courtesy is not just some tool of coercion.

Well if some Arabs decide that a cartoon printed in a newspaper thousands of miles away ...

The misguided actions of "some Arabs" does not Islam make.

Actually, the misguided actions of *all* Arabs does not Islam make.

Arabs make up less than 13% of the world's Muslims.

Well, of course you're indignant. I'm sure Hindus get a little miffed when someone offers them a nice juicy cheeseburger.

But there's a difference between getting upset and sending death threats to the newspaper and cartoonist. There's a difference between boycotting the paper and burning flags of Denmark in protest.
Here I agree.

But there's a difference between getting upset and sending death threats to the newspaper and cartoonist. There's a difference between boycotting the paper and burning flags of Denmark in protest.

Burning a flag doesn't hurt anyone. It's a valid form of protest.

I'm not sure about death threats. I haven't heard of any being made, but I haven't paid that much attention. Got a link to that info?

What violent fixation? The hell are you talking about? When have I been violent?
Its not hard to sense you are fuming over this lousy cartoon and threatening violence. Even if you claim otherwise then obviously that leaves plenty of middle easterners violently fixated on a cartoon. Anyways this thread is not about you, personally. It is about the ridiculous and bizarre reaction by the Muslim societies and their governments, which you have avoided addressing. It is safe to say that behavior of those people in the middle east - the mainstream of Islam - is not at all compatible with "freedom of speech" or any of these civilized values.

Its not hard to sense you are fuming over this lousy cartoon and threatening violence.

When have I threatened violence? Ever? Quote one time I have ever threatened violence to anybody, anywhere over this cartoon.

One.

Right now.

Burning a flag doesn't hurt anyone. It's a valid form of protest.

I'm not sure about death threats. I haven't heard of any being made, but I haven't paid that much attention. Got a link to that info?

It was mentioned in the link at the beginning of one of thes threads. I'll try to find it.

I'm not suggesting that burning a flag is anything but harmless. In fact, it's good for the flag business. :)

But Denmark has nothing to do with this cartoon. Nor can they legally do anything about it. Protesting Denmark because of one cartoonist in one danish newspaper is a bit ...out there.

It is about the ridiculous and bizarre reaction by the Muslim societies and their governments, which you have avoided addressing.

Actually, I have not avoided addressing it. I have addressed it. You haven't been paying attention. Clearly, you've attached "foaming at the mouth, fuming, violent threatening" labels to me because I am Muslim.

You don't know anything about me and I doubt seriously you've read one single character I have typed.

Here's one:
Then don't be surprised when I kick your teeth in. Mmkay?MmKay?

But Denmark has nothing to do with this cartoon. Nor can they legally do anything about it. Protesting Denmark because of one cartoonist in one danish newspaper is a bit ...out there.

*shrug* ... some folks seem to think it's ok to defame all of Islam because of the actions of a few ... out there ... adherents. But when Muslims protest all of something for the actions of a few? Hrmmmmmmmm ...

I smell a little hypocrisy ....

Here's one:

That was hyperbole and you know it.

Read what I was replying to.

Oy vey.

Fortunately, the law doesn’t see satire as grounds for assault.

No, it doesn't. However, you never know just who you're pissing off or riling up. If a woman walks through a prison yard full of hardened criminals wearing nothing but a thong and a top hat, then while it may not be her fault she got raped, she really shouldn't be surprised that it happened.

Do you ever make fun of Jesus?

Not really, no. His followers? Oh, sure, all the time.

No, it doesn't. However, you never know just who you're pissing off or riling up. If a woman walks through a prison yard full of hardened criminals wearing nothing but a thong and a top hat, then while it may not be her fault she got raped, she really shouldn't be surprised that it happened.

Unless she is ends up teaching them a lesson ;)

Its not hard to sense you are fuming over this lousy cartoon and threatening violence. Even if you claim otherwise then obviously that leaves plenty of middle easterners violently fixated on a cartoon. Anyways this thread is not about you, personally. It is about the ridiculous and bizarre reaction by the Muslim societies and their governments, which you have avoided addressing. It is safe to say that behavior of those people in the middle east - the mainstream of Islam - is not at all compatible with "freedom of speech" or any of these civilized values.

*applauds* Good post.

*shrug* ... some folks seem to think it's ok to defame all of Islam because of the actions of a few ... out there ... adherents. But when Muslims protest all of something for the actions of a few? Hrmmmmmmmm ...

I smell a little hypocrisy ....

Well, of course. I think the newspaper and cartoonist's rather callous reaction to the protests of the islamic community was more than a little hypocritical. They make a cartoon that effectively tars all muslims with the same brush, but don't understand why many muslims are willing to do the same with Danes.

I certainly hope you weren't referring to ME as hypocritical. Because I try very hard not to be. :(

P.S: Here was that link from the other thread:http://www.natashatynes.org/newswire/2005/12/row_deepens_ove.html

Actually Keruvalia, I can empathize with you.
When I found out about the so called objet d'art called "Piss Christ" (a crucifix in a jar of the artist's urine) I was offended immensely and I'm not even religious. I was more offended that the National Endowment for the Arts paid the artist to make it with tax money. It was needless and senseless and mean and a complete waste of money.
But some Muslims are showing their ass about these cartoons.

I certainly hope you weren't referring to ME as hypocritical. Because I try very hard not to be. :(

NO NO! Not at all. Not directed at you.

P.S: Here was that link from the other thread:http://www.natashatynes.org/newswire/2005/12/row_deepens_ove.html

Ah! Thanks. I shall give it its due attention. Tomorrow. I gotta sleep now. Class early in the morning .... *ugh*.

Well, of course. I think the newspaper and cartoonist's rather callous reaction to the protests of the islamic community was more than a little hypocritical. They make a cartoon that effectively tars all muslims with the same brush, but don't understand why many muslims are willing to do the same with Danes.

Agreed. I don't agree with the notion of scapegoats and such, for instance like in the French Revolution when they decapitated the monarchy to make a symbolic gesture. It hardly excuses the action.

The point is, in American soceity people poke fun at Jews and Christians all the time, just watch one episode of the VERY popular family guy, and you dont see Jewish groups or Christian groups protesting against the American goernment for allowing/promoting this and you dont see them burning and American flag and sending threats. It just seems like muslims cant take a joke, and they really need to just relax and take a hit off the hooka.

The misguided actions of "some Arabs" does not Islam make.

Actually, the misguided actions of *all* Arabs does not Islam make.

Arabs make up less than 13% of the world's Muslims.


Alright then, substitute "Arabs" with "Arabs, Pakistanis, Indonesians, etc."

Anyways, can you see the pattern here?: One after another, Muslim governments have lined up to blast the Danish government and the Danish people.

We're not talking about some ideal form of Islam that you have codified in your head, because ideals have never translated well onto the reality of billions of people.

A lot of Muslim govts are involved in this boycott nonsense, and never before in history has there been such a bizarre mobilization of outrage over some stupid scribble.

Actually Keruvalia, I can empathize with you.
When I found out about the so called objet d'art called "Piss Christ" (a crucifix in a jar of the artist's urine) I was offended immensely and I'm not even religious. I was more offended that the National Endowment for the Arts paid the artist to make it with tax money. It was needless and senseless and mean and a complete waste of money.
But some Muslims are showing their ass about these cartoons.
That is rather vulgar. The fact that its state-funded makes it even worse.

Actually Keruvalia, I can empathize with you.
When I found out about the so called objet d'art called "Piss Christ" (a crucifix in a jar of the artist's urine) I was offended immensely and I'm not even religious. I was more offended that the National Endowment for the Arts paid the artist to make it with tax money. It was needless and senseless and mean and a complete waste of money.
But some Muslims are showing their ass about these cartoons.

What country did they have that in?

But some Muslims are showing their ass about these cartoons.

Some, yes ... but to broad brush all of us is as bad as the cartoon itself.

I think I've been perfectly civil concerning this, but - as you can see from this thread - people still want to paint me with the same broad "mouth frothing violent monger" brush.

Unfortunately, the effect of that is getting me even *more* angry. So, to maintain my civility, I am calling it a night and shall place the appropriate people in my ever increasing ignore list in the morning.

Night all!

What country did they have that in?

I think it was here. I remember it being on exhibit.

Anyhow, I can fully understand Keruvalia's viewpoint. I think labelling the violent actions of a few extremists as representing the whole of Islam is stupid, and I think Islamic people have a right to be offended. Islamic people get victimised for all sorts of things all the time and are expected to remain straight-faced about it, even as mobs run around the city beating up anyone that looks middle-eastern. (see the recent violence in Sydney)

Islam doesn't have the monopoly on violent extremists, either - what of the US "Minutemen" in the 60's who mailed death threats to leftists and anyone who burnt the US flag? Did they represent the whole of the US population?

Agreed. I don't agree with the notion of scapegoats and such, for instance like in the French Revolution when they decapitated the monarchy to make a symbolic gesture. It hardly excuses the action.

The French decapitated the Monarch because he and the nobility were getting richer while they kept getting poorer and the aristocracy did nothing about it.

Anyhow, I can fully understand Keruvalia's viewpoint. I think labelling the violent actions of a few extremists as representing the whole of Islam is stupid, and I think Islamic people have a right to be offended. Islamic people get victimised for all sorts of things all the time and are expected to remain straight-faced about it, even as mobs run around the city beating up anyone that looks middle-eastern. (see the recent violence in Sydney)
No one is saying that this is alright though. Its not just Islamic people who get victimised, anyone is prone nowadays. And, if you noticed, most posters here actually look down on violent attitudes.

Islam doesn't have the monopoly on violent extremists, either - what of the US "Minutemen" in the 60's who mailed death threats to leftists and anyone who burnt the US flag? Did they represent the whole of the US population?
Absolutely not. No one said they did. Nor does anyone condone their actions though, or see it as a respect of the freedom of speech.

The French decapitated the Monarch because he and the nobility were getting richer while they kept getting poorer and the aristocracy did nothing about it.
Whereas the bourgeois capitalists weren't? Please, that is a simplistic interpretation of a very complicated historical period. The King wanted reforms, and even pushed for them; the aristocracy, which feared his power, as well as bourgeois capitalists with vested interests in the status quo were the ones who blocked reform. Add to that that many of the Revolution's instigators were wealthy bourgeois capitalists who wanted more political power rather than any true reform. The decapitations were unjustified, as was the entire Terror.

Well, of course you're indignant. I'm sure Hindus get a little miffed when someone offers them a nice juicy cheeseburger.


Oh it is much worse..

Ganesh sells beers
http://www.hinduhumanrights.org/images/godonbeer.jpg

Shiva is not far behind
http://www.hinduhumanrights.org/images/drink.JPG

Minelli (French company) puts our Gods on shoes..
http://www.hinduhumanrights.org/images/minellishoes.gif

and Harrods put it on..
http://www.hinduhumanrights.org/images/RobertCavalli.jpg

Whereas the bourgeois capitalists weren't? Please, that is a simplistic interpretation of a very complicated historical period. The King wanted reforms, and even pushed for them; the aristocracy, which feared his power, as well as bourgeois capitalists with vested interests in the status quo were the ones who blocked reform. Add to that that many of the Revolution's instigators were wealthy bourgeois capitalists who wanted more political power rather than any true reform. The decapitations were unjustified, as was the entire Terror.

Yes, that must be it. Despite the fact of him siding with the Aristocracy. He was on the side of the nobility in the first place. It wasn't complicated at all.

I find this OP extremely offensive, and I myself am a Buddhist. Many films and books do not allow the image of Mohhamed because of the spiritual figure of Islam he is. While most people argue that the iconic power of Christ is the same comparison to Mohammed to Islam, remember that most 'Christians' today barely know anything of Christianity except for possibly the basics of Genesis, and the ten commandments. Christianity has become a semi-commercialized, part title religion, far from what Christ possibly preached.

Don't believe me? Explain the crusades and how the corruption of the pope caused a war against Islam. Explain why people are so materialistic on Christmas and Easter.

Christmas celebrated the birth of Christ, which was thought to be in the spring, around April, not December. It was only chosen because of the Roman Solstice. Easter had the same scenario.

Islam, however, has kept itself to be spiritually true. And thus it is understandable that Muslims would feel highly offended to do so. While a small number might ignore the comics, most would feel highly angered by it. It would be the equivalent of shitting on the bible.

Pride has alot to do with it as well. They are proud of what they are, not ashamed, and when someone does something that could put their pride in jeopardy, they feel the need to defend their beliefs. It's no different from part to part. It's what happens when people who have strong faith see that they can't have people that they resort to violence.

Suicide bombers, terrorism, they are not from Islam. They are from the Middle East's desperation for power. They want the same influence that European countries, Western countries, Far Eastern countries have, but they can't, so they have to resort to other methods since everybody else is better than them on something in the political scale.

When you draw a cartoon, people will get offended by it. Everything offends at least something. You have to be smart on what you offend though. However, it's hard to understand faith when people these days barely have it. At least Muslims are still faithful to their religion on a spiritual level.

No one is saying that this is alright though. Its not just Islamic people who get victimised, anyone is prone nowadays. And, if you noticed, most posters here actually look down on violent attitudes.

Sure sure, I know that...

Absolutely not. No one said they did. Nor does anyone condone their actions though, or see it as a respect of the freedom of speech.

My point exactly - and so I think that the way Keruvalia has been treated in this thread is more than a little unfair. He hasn't condoned the Danish workers being beaten up. He is obviously offended by the issue however, and being told to grow a thicker skin hasn't helped things. He, as with any of us, has the right to be offended. It seems to me that several of the posters here (not naming names) have only wanted to irritate him further and haven't respected his point of view.

Let's take these in order...

Post 1:

Islam =/= Jihadist.

Asshole.

Are you sure you should sign your real name like that when you post a message? :rolleyes:

Post 2:

If something is funny, we laugh.


This:

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/danish_cartoon.jpg

Is not funny by any stretch of the imagination. It is what we call "flamebait". The cartoonist would be banned from this forum.

But that is not to say he does not have the right to publish it where he chooses. If you don't like it don't buy his cartoons or visit his sites. Freedom of Speech trumps the need to be unoffended. BTW, thanks for singling out that one. It happens to be my favorite. ^_^

Post 3:

Ok ... logic time ...

Step 1: Cartoonist makes cartoon to deliberately offend Muslims.
Step 2: Muslims get offended.
Step 3: People are appalled that Muslims got offended.
Step 4: People say Islam is a hateful, humorless religion.

How does being offended by someone spitting in your face make you a jihadist? Logic breaks down at Step 3.

Correction.

Step 1: Cartoonist makes cartoon to pour scorn on terrorists.
Step 2: Muslims get offended that anyone would insult their precious widdle jihadis.
Step 3: People are appalled that supposedly civilized Moslems don't understand Freedom of Speech or Freedom of the Press.
Step 4: People see that Islam as currently practiced is a hateful, humorless religion.

There! Now your post has been fixed. :p

The fact that you guys act on a Terrorist = Muslim basis undermines your claim that Islam =/= Jihadist. Guilty conscience perhaps? :p

Post 4:

Ok here's the problem:

The cartoon offends me. ME.



Not my problem.

I have an incredible sense of humor. I have the striking ability to laugh at myself and do so on a regular basis - just look at some of mine and Eutrusca's exchanges. I can even show humor concerning certain aspects of my religion - for example, look at the brief exchange between me and DK talking about a Pygmalion approach to recruiting young terrorists.

Your powers of self-recommendation are duly noted but since I don't know you from Adam they mean less than you think.

However, the cartoons in question and the response to the outcry are not designed to piss off only those who would blow up your house, but designed to piss off every single Muslim on the planet. All of us.

Wow! So every Muslim on the planet reads this one Danish newspaper? o_O These Danish newspapers are a lot more happening than I thought. @_@ But let's repeat a radical notion: If you think the newspaper will offend you *Go buy a newspaper that you will like better!* They have the right to print what they choose and you have the right to read what you choose. If those cartoons are the threat to Islam you seem to think they are then why should anyone think that Islam is any good? ^_^;

It is the continuation of the idea that every Muslim is a mad frothing terrorist.

Yeah, I'm sure that every freaking Moslem on this planet is an Ayatollah with a beard. :rolleyes:

Since you started with some pseudomath let me throw you some pseudomath in return. A subset is not a set, but when the set acts like set and subset are one it is legitimate to wonder whether subset is really subset at all. Never heard the line "The Guilty flee where none pursues!"?

But let's set that point aside for the second to make the same one that better people than myself have made on this thread and elsewhere: I tell you this once, I tell you this twice, and I tell you this three times, *Even if the cartoonist said what you thought he said and was wrong in saying IT WOULD STILL BE HIS RIGHT TO SAY IT!* As a better man than I, George Orwell, once wrote: "If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." The moment you try to end that you become an enemy of liberty.



Everyone here who has known me for more than 5 posts can state with full certainty that I am as far removed from being a terrorist as a person can possibly get.

So why would you want to take a shit on a Qur'an in front of me?
Why would you want to defame my Prophet?

So defending Freedom of Speech and of the Press is the same as taking a dump on a Koran in front of you? o_O Sheesh! Get a grip why don't you? >_<

If you want to piss off Jihadists, show a sexy lady wearing nothing but a headscarf. If you want to piss off Jihadists, eat some bacon. If you want to piss off Jihadists, vote in Democratic elections in secular nations.

Don't, however, deliberately seek to piss off the rest of us. We never did anything to you.

The interesting thing is that your "sad puppydog eyes" approach in this part of the post nearly did arouse my sympathy for a few moments. It's unfortunate for you that you blew it in your latter posts.

Post 5

And when did I ever call for anything to be silenced?

The moment you started ranting against those who were in danger of being silenced instead of those who were trying to do the silencing. You chose your side the moment you did that. You are what you do. If you don't like it then choose and change again.

Post 6

Then don't be surprised when I kick your teeth in. Mmkay?

Feh. And up to this moment you were doing so well! You hadn't persuaded me but the "Sad puppydog eyes" approach had aroused my sympathy a lot more than this did. So much for "Islam =/= Jihadist." :rolleyes:

Post 7

Threatening? A little, yes. Perhaps. It's the nature of being offended.

I guess there's just no way to make you understand that common courtesy is actually a good thing.

So what part of the cowardly murder of Theo Van Gough did you consider common courtesy? :mad: I want it noted that right in this post did you do more to prove that Moslem = Jihadi than anything those Danish cartoonists ever did. The nature of being offended provides more responses than merely going into "threat and violence" mode. You dimwits could have just walked away from it or ignored it. You could have responded with sarcasm, witty repartee, and rhetoric. As an extra novel response you could have even tried reading what the cartoon actually said instead of reacting to what you *thought* it said. But noooooo! You creeps just have to consider threats in response to something you don't want to hear as "common courtesy", don't you? Yes, I would say that you guys do indeed react to a guilty conscience. Were it otherwise your reactions would never be this disproportionate.

Post 8

I agree for the most part and it's not really so much the cartoon itself that offends me. I don't find it funny or in any way what I consider wit, but that is an entirely subjective opinion.

What truly offends me is the literally millions of people throughout the world who are saying I don't even have the right to get a little indignant. Just search around the internet.

Thing is, though, all of these same people get their goats up or their gears ground by one thing or another that I would find silly to get riled up about, yet I grant them their indignation.

Why am I not given that same right? Because I pray towards the east on a rug with my face on the ground? That attitude is what offends me.

After posts 6 & 7 it's a little too late to go back to the "Sad puppydog eyes" approach for you. :P Be as indignant as you like on your own time but don't endorse the silencing of those who offend you and then expect my sympathy. I wouldn't have any sympathy for anyone within my own factions who ever tried that sort of drivel so what makes you think you can cry on my shoulder when you endorse that sort of thing? o_O

Post 9

Oh for the love of ....

Ok I'm going to say this one more time and let's try to get it through our thick heads, shall we?

"Religion of peace" does NOT mean "I will let you walk all over me and spit on me". Islam tells us not to be the aggressors, but if any man puts his hands on you, you make damn sure those hands can't be put on anyone else.

Get it now? I hope so ... I really hate repeating myself.

What a shame you don't hate your own hypocrisy as well. :rolleyes: If Islam tells you not to be the aggressors then neither you nor anyone else who would silence those cartoonists have the right to call yourselves Moslems anymore. Sucks to be you.

Post 10

So since you're not Muslim, it's ok to disrespect Muslims on principle? I'm not black, so is it ok for me to call everyone "******"?

Simple courtesy ... why is that so hard for so many people?

It would be your legal right. And I'll admit that I don't know why Muslims don't understand the concept of simple courtesy in allowing freedom of speech either. ~_~

Post 11

Aye ... and I've never criticised freedom of speech. I hold it very dear. I've criticised the cartoon as not being funny and I've criticised the cartoonist for being extremely rude, but have not called for him to be silenced or to stop drawing what he wants to draw.

I, on the other hand, am being told to just shut up and put up with it. Where does my freedom of speech begin?

Seems to me you're exercising it now. :D Being told to shut up isn't quite the same as being murdered because somebody didn't like your film, is it? And since in posts 6, 7 and 9 you made it quite clear that you consider violence a legitimate way of silencing someone who publishes something that not only do *you* not want to read but that you don't want anyone else to read either then permit me to observe that your respect for freedom of speech seems as conveniently elastic as your concept of self-defence. If you don't want people thinking "Moslem = Jihadi" then don't act as if a slam against terrorists is a slam against all Islam.

[Smiles and skips post 12]

Post 13

The misguided actions of "some Arabs" does not Islam make.

Actually, the misguided actions of *all* Arabs does not Islam make.

Arabs make up less than 13% of the world's Muslims.

Then a slam against those same misguided Arabs should never have been construed as a slam against Islam either, right?

Post 14

Burning a flag doesn't hurt anyone. It's a valid form of protest.

I'm not sure about death threats. I haven't heard of any being made, but I haven't paid that much attention. Got a link to that info?

Yes. ^_^

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004413.htm

"Things came to a head over the past week. In Gaza City, Palestinian gunmen took over an EU office to protest the cartoons:
Masked gunmen today took over an office used by the European Union to protest the publication of cartoons deemed insulting to Islam. About five gunmen stormed the building, closing the office down, while 10 other armed men stood watch outside. One of the militants said they were protesting the drawings, one of which depicted Islam's Prophet Muhammad wearing a turban shaped as a bomb."

Most people usually consider guns to be death threats.

Post 15

When have I threatened violence? Ever? Quote one time I have ever threatened violence to anybody, anywhere over this cartoon.

One.

Right now.

Ask and ye shall receive. Seek and ye shall find:

Back to Posts 6&7

Then don't be surprised when I kick your teeth in. Mmkay?

Threatening? A little, yes. Perhaps. It's the nature of being offended...

Whoops! That's 2. My bad! ^o^

But note that contrary to your latter claim post 7 makes it clear that post 6 was not entirely hyperbole.

Post 16

Actually, I have not avoided addressing it. I have addressed it. You haven't been paying attention. Clearly, you've attached "foaming at the mouth, fuming, violent threatening" labels to me because I am Muslim.

You don't know anything about me and I doubt seriously you've read one single character I have typed.

No, I attach "foaming at the mouth, fuming, violent threatening" to you because of posts 6,7 and 9. As of post 11 I seem to be back to addressing Keruvalia-Jekyll instead of Keruvalia-Hyde but please be assured that my impression of you has been formed by what I read. I'll admit that a part of that impression is that none of it would have been worth reading if a lesson in civics weren't needed but pleased be assured that my opinion of you is based entirely on your own merits.

Post 17

*shrug* ... some folks seem to think it's ok to defame all of Islam because of the actions of a few ... out there ... adherents. But when Muslims protest all of something for the actions of a few? Hrmmmmmmmm ...

I smell a little hypocrisy ....

He who smelt it probably dealt it. "protest" is not the word I would use when guns, governments and terrorists come into the picture. But hey, call it protest if it allows you to feel better about defending the indefensible, ok? Just don't be surprised when Muslims becoming upset over the actions of a few being scorned is seen as making yourself an accomplice to what those few do.

Post 18

That was hyperbole and you know it.

Read what I was replying to.

Oy vey.

I did. As stated before Post #7 showed that this was no fluke. so do the way your words in post #9 make clear just how conveniently elastic your definition of "defense" happened to be.

Post 19

No, it doesn't. However, you never know just who you're pissing off or riling up. If a woman walks through a prison yard full of hardened criminals wearing nothing but a thong and a top hat, then while it may not be her fault she got raped, she really shouldn't be surprised that it happened.

That ignores the fact that it is both the right and the duty of civilizaton to make it safe for her to do so and uphold her against the hardened criminals. BTW, I find it interesting that you would consider Islam to a prison yard full of hardened criminals. ^_~

Post 20

Not really, no. His followers? Oh, sure, all the time.

Dingdingding! We have a winner here folks! Congratulations, Keruvalia! You've just lost all moral right to object to any of those cartoons or anything else that mocks you silly Moslems! ^_____^


(Skips post 21

Some, yes ... but to broad brush all of us is as bad as the cartoon itself.

But the cartoon was rather good so that analogy doesn't hold. One point that bears repeating - You guys were the ones to broadbrush yourselves by taking a slam against terrorists as a slam against all Moslems everywhere.

I think I've been perfectly civil concerning this, but - as you can see from this thread - people still want to paint me with the same broad "mouth frothing violent monger" brush.

No I paint you with the "I'm an opponent of Free Speech because I think Islam is too wimpy to survive a few cartoons" brush. Let's get this straight. The fact that you indicated yourself a passive accomplice to any jihad that is launched against Freedom of Speech is your problem rather than mine.

Unfortunately, the effect of that is getting me even *more* angry. So, to maintain my civility, I am calling it a night and shall place the appropriate people in my ever increasing ignore list in the morning.

Night all!

Promises, promises! That just means I can mock you and your posts any way that I like and you'll be unable to defend yourself. Besides if Moslems have the ability to do that then those cartoonists wouldn't be under siege by your goon squads. That said, hope you have pleasent dreams. ^_~

BTW, I have now answered 20 of your 22 posts with this one so don't *ever* say I didn't pay attention to what you wrote again! :p

I understand that, but comon, I'm Roman Catholic. People make fun of Catholics all the time on TV. I just laugh about it. People make fun of Jesus on TV (Family Guy do this regularly), and I just laugh too. I just believe that life is too short to get your panties in a wad over a stupid cartoon.
Quite so. Are there any death threats over this, for example?

http://img79.imageshack.us/img79/8712/div2956ps.th.jpg (http://img79.imageshack.us/my.php?image=div2956ps.jpg)

I don't think so.

This whole situation just shows that a large part of the Muslim community are not up-to-date with the modern world. Concepts like freedom of speech and press elude them. Also, the fact that they've caused such a fuss about this has had the result that the drawings that recently only a few people saw in an obscure newspaper now have spread across the world.

Meh, not that funny. South Park pokes fun at them better in a funnier man of funnity.


I agree and I'm surprised they got away with that 'lit up like the eyes of Allah...' line in Team America.


My thoughts on this whole situation is that once again the 'Muslim' reaction to any perceived slight/insult/criticism on their religion is revealed as being utterly appalling.

The demands that a goverment should apologise for and then censor its own press are as ludicrous as they are disturbing and show a complete ignorance of how a developed society functions.

And of course the threats of violent retribution are as disgusting as they are depressingly common.


You have a right to be offended, you have a right to not buy the newspaper, erm ...and that's it.

Islam, however, has kept itself to be spiritually true. And thus it is understandable that Muslims would feel highly offended to do so. While a small number might ignore the comics, most would feel highly angered by it. It would be the equivalent of shitting on the bible.

Pride has alot to do with it as well. They are proud of what they are, not ashamed, and when someone does something that could put their pride in jeopardy, they feel the need to defend their beliefs. It's no different from part to part. It's what happens when people who have strong faith see that they can't have people that they resort to violence.



This merely explains their actions; it does not excuse them.



Suicide bombers, terrorism, they are not from Islam. They are from the Middle East's desperation for power. They want the same influence that European countries, Western countries, Far Eastern countries have, but they can't, so they have to resort to other methods since everybody else is better than them on something in the political scale.


A buddhist apologist for terrorism and murder? Not exactly sincere in the practise of your own religion are you?



At least Muslims are still faithful to their religion on a spiritual level.


And this is good thing? The rest of the world has to suffer in order for Islam to remain unchallenged.

I agree and I'm surprised they got away with that 'lit up like the eyes of Allah...' line in Team America.

Meh .... got away with it because it was funny. However, you'll notice South Park makes sure they only go after the terrorists and jihadists.

The cartoon from Denmark went after *all* Muslims.

Isn't amusing that the itty-bitty jihadis are so scared over a few innocent cartoons? 12 cartoons in a single newspaper was all it took.

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004413.htm

Poor little jihadis! If they're afraid of a few cartoonists then what chance do they have against the rest of the world? ;)
This would be hilarious ... if it weren't so sad. I'm not one to be in favor of mocking anyone's beliefs, but I'm a rather fierce advocate of the right to free speech. IMHO, any person or group who can't tolerate a free press deserves any mocking or castigation they recieve.

The drawings are now apparently going to be published again, in the French paper France Soir. The point of this is "to start a discussion" about the subject.

The French don't seem to worry about enraging other nations since everyone already hates them anyway. (j/k :D)

IMHO its not ok to go around calling Muslims "jihadis" but democratic society stopped making concessions to Christianity many years ago, I don't think that just because Islam is a minority religion in the west we should treat it any differently

I rather think we should not treat all religions the same.

Come to think of it - you'll have a hard time convincing me that government or society is obliged to pay heed to the existence of Religion ( including my own ) in the first place.

Newcomers can either accept the status quo - or get out and stay out.

Just like to a new kid on the block, the message should be kept simple:
Keep your nose clean and it doesn't get tweaked.
Stick your nose where we don't appreciate it, and you'll rue the day you were born.

OH MY GOD IT'S A COMIC! Some shitty Danish cartoonist makes a couple shitty and retarded comics and everyone loses their fucking shit. Besides, people don't get offended. Offended is just an overweight word people throw around when they don't like something. "Offence" was just created so some guy could make some other guy sound like a dick for making a joke.

Anyone who'd shoot a cartoonist over a few "offensive" drawings really needs their head examined.

Nice.

Thanks, glad everyone ignored it.

This merely explains their actions; it does not excuse them.

And yet you fail to understand under what terms they were forced to act.

A buddhist apologist for terrorism and murder? Not exactly sincere in the practise of your own religion are you?

Ah, but according to your own logic, I'm not to do anything about it now, am I? I can whine and bitch and moan day and night, but I'm not supposed to do anything. So what alternatives do you suggest?

And this is good thing? The rest of the world has to suffer in order for Islam to remain unchallenged.

Yes, not making offending cartoons is such a big suffer.

My thoughts on this whole situation is that once again the 'Muslim' reaction to any perceived slight/insult/criticism on their religion is revealed as being utterly appalling.

The demands that a goverment should apologise for and then censor its own press are as ludicrous as they are disturbing and show a complete ignorance of how a developed society functions.

And of course the threats of violent retribution are as disgusting as they are depressingly common.


You have a right to be offended, you have a right to not buy the newspaper, erm ...and that's it.

Imagine the uproar when us evil westeners would demand middle-east countries to get rod of burka's, because find them offensive.

Imagine the uproar when us evil westeners would demand middle-east countries to get rod of burka's, because find them offensive.

We have every right to if we want to, in the same way they have the right to ignore us.

They have every right to demand whatever they want, that doesn't mean we have to do it.

We have every right to if we want to, in the same way they have the right to ignore us.

They have every right to demand whatever they want, that doesn't mean we have to do it.

Salman Rushdie has the right to write Satanic Verses.

Does Khomeini have the right to issue a hukm to kill him?

Let's say some zealot did indeed kill him. He would say, he is after all practicing his religion.

Would you say he is within his rights and that we ignore his murder? After all Khomeini had the right to be offended and the zealot had the right to follow his religion, no?

I bring up the reference to Rushdie, because allegedly, the Jamaat-e-Islami of Pakistan has announced a bounty for the head of the cartoonists.

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/540
The Danish Foreign ministry has warned Danish citizens not to travel to Pakistan. The Pakistani religious party Jamaat-e-Islami and its youth branch have offered a bounty for anyone who murders the Danish illustators who drew cartoons of Muhammad for the Danish daily newspaper Jyllands-Posten.

Meh. That is soooo typical of too many of them. :rolleyes:

But here's something we can do to show support for the Danes. :)

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004420.htm

I always did like Danish ham. ^_~

Yes, that must be it. Despite the fact of him siding with the Aristocracy. He was on the side of the nobility in the first place. It wasn't complicated at all.
Read the Old Regime by William Doyle to dispel your ignorance. :rolleyes: You seem to think that this was a clear cut affair. Hardly so.

Salman Rushdie has the right to write Satanic Verses.

Does Khomeini have the right to issue a hukm to kill him?

Let's say some zealot did indeed kill him. He would say, he is after all practicing his religion.

Would you say he is within his rights and that we ignore his murder? After all Khomeini had the right to be offended and the zealot had the right to follow his religion, no?


It's funny you mentioned Rushdie. The Muslim outrage really helped him. I bought the book out curiosity and it was crap. Long and boring. I had to force myself to finish it.

If Khomeini had kept quiet, Rushdie would probably still be a struggling writer somewhere.

The same for these cartoonists. What's the circulation they can reach?

I don't know. Sometimes no response is a powerful weapon.

I think there are a few things that we can agree on here...

Everyone should have the right to free speech.
There is nothing wrong with being offended by something that was intended to offend you, but getting violent is unjustified.

Actually Forrest, Rushdie was already popular when that happened... I did some reading on this back when another messageboard was having a bitchy debate about him.

It's funny you mentioned Rushdie. The Muslim outrage really helped him. I bought the book out curiosity and it was crap. Long and boring. I had to force myself to finish it.

If Khomeini had kept quiet, Rushdie would probably still be a struggling writer somewhere.

That turns out to be wrong. Whatever you may think of Rushdie he was an award winning writer long before Khomeini showed himself to be a senile, bedwetting coward. :)

http://www.contemporarywriters.com/authors/?p=auth87

I may not agree with you, Solarlandus, but thank you for acknowledging the facts... far too many people ignore facts that clash with what they believe.

It's funny you mentioned Rushdie. The Muslim outrage really helped him. I bought the book out curiosity and it was crap. Long and boring. I had to force myself to finish it.


Oh I did the same mistake. That book is banned in India (the "secularists" don't want to "offend" muslim sentiments) and when I came to the US, I got that book from the local library and promptly started reading.

Mind you, I am a very voracious reader (must have read somewhere like a 1000 books), but I could not get past 100 pages of that crap..even though the lingo is supposed to be easy for me (he uses a lot of Indian English).

That book is possibly the worst crap I read...I wonder how you finished it.

Actually Forrest, Rushdie was already popular when that happened... I did some reading on this back when another messageboard was having a bitchy debate about him.

Doh! Serves me right for not looking him up.

Probably the bad taste after reading SV, made me assume! ;)

It is to the point where I believe everyone else is batshit insane.

Anyway, let's check the 'Disguised Backpacker' list.

Americans in Europe as Canadians
Japanese in China as Koreans
Lebanese in Australia as Egyptians
Israelis in Syria as Turks
American Soldiers in Iraq as Polish Soldiers
Indians in Pakistan as Banglideshis
*NEW* Danes in Pakistan as Swedes

Oooooo! *Another* reminder that Islamists are on a jihad against Freedom of Speech because they're afraid of cartoons! :D

http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/cartoons/02-02-2006.gif

Don't worry! No pictures of Mohammad in this one. ;)