NationStates Jolt Archive

Ok, ever since we've all heard about the cartoons that are a satire of Islam's prophet Muhammaed. Islamic people in the Middle East have been having a hissy fit. Feb 3rd, Islamic people in London decide to hold a protest, showing these signs.

http://home.planet.nl/~timm6065/muslims2.jpg

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/rids/20060203/i/r1365134527.jpg

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/ap/20060203/capt.llp12502031855.britain_denmark_europe_llp125.jpg

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/afp/20060203/capt.sge.hdb74.030206205908.photo01.photo.default-384x254.jpg

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/nm/20060204/2006_02_03t215525_450x314_us_religion_cartoons_media.jpg

Wow... aren't we taking this a little too far now? I mean honestly! Look, you can disagree with the cartoon, you can write to the newspaper editor, and you can boycott the newspaper. But standing out in the freaking street holding signs that are conveying death threats? Comon now.

Also, apparently they wern't kidding with the signs.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/02/04/syria.cartoon/index.html

Welp, since the Islamic people decide to take the route of violence instead of having a sense of HUMOR! I just hope that US newspaper start printing these cartoons.

To the Islamic people on this forum, if my comments pisses you off, too bad. I will not apologize for my comments, and I think Islamic people need to take a lesson from not only Christian people, but Jews on how to handle stupid cartoons. I mean for crying out loud, Jesus and God are fair game for satire everywhere around the world, but you don't see Christians setting buildings on fire and threating an entire city.

To quote Carlos Menica "If you ain't laughing, you ain't living!"

Also to quote Lewis Black "That's what wrong with these people, (referring to Islamic people), they have no sense of humor. A guy can stand up and say 'You know, if you kill yourself for Allah, then you'll be met in heavens by 70 virgins.' and no one will stand up and go 'HAHAHAHAAHAHA! That was great!' These people have no sense of humor."

Also, no I will not apologize for the above rant to the Islamic people. I respect your religion, I respect your belief, but now, I think this has gone too far.

ok...

the same can be said for every religion. I can say something about jesus that i think is funny, but im sure most christians wouldn't.

ok...

the same can be said for every religion. I can say something about jesus that i think is funny, but im sure most christians wouldn't.

Yea, but I doubt Christians would be holding up a sign saying "Death to all those who make fun of Jesus" , nor would they go out and burn down an governmental building.

but you don't see Christians setting buildings on fire and threating an entire city.

...

I think they made a flying leap by burning that embassy. Unfortunantly, the extreamists are showing why those cartoons were made in the first place.

Can we stick to one thread about this topic please? I hate having to repeat myself.

I just hope that US newspaper start printing these cartoons.
This statement suggests that you are just a warmonger and prefer that the violence escalates?

To the Islamic people on this forum, if my comments pisses you off, too bad. I will not apologize for my comments, and I think Islamic people need to take a lesson from not only Christian people, but Jews on how to handle stupid cartoons. I mean for crying out loud, Jesus and God are fair game for satire everywhere around the world, but you don't see Christians setting buildings on fire and threating an entire city.
Because they take their religion far more seriously than you do, they are somehow wrong?

Did you support the invasion of Iraq? Do you want to westernize the people of Islam?

How does any of your comments demonstrate any kind of tolerance?

To quote Carlos Menica "If you ain't laughing, you ain't living!"

Also to quote Lewis Black "That's what wrong with these people, (referring to Islamic people), they have no sense of humor. A guy can stand up and say 'You know, if you kill yourself for Allah, then you'll be met in heavens by 70 virgins.' and no one will stand up and go 'HAHAHAHAAHAHA! That was great!' These people have no sense of humor."
Is it YOUR requirement that Islamic people have the SAME sense of humour that you do?

Also, no I will not apologize for the above rant to the Islamic people. I respect your religion, I respect your belief,
No you do not.

I think they made a flying leap by burning that embassy. Unfortunantly, the extreamists are showing why those cartoons were made in the first place.

Hell I think they made the leap when they decided to hold a protest where signs where of threatening nature.

Yea, but I doubt Christians would be holding up a sign saying "Death to all those who make fun of Jesus" , nor would they go out and burn down an governmental building.
maybe if i were persistent enough :D

That kind of behaviour is illegal in the UK, under both statute and common law. Blair's pusllianimous government should pull its thumbs out of its collective arses and arrest and charge those fuckers, instead of wringing their hands about perfectly legal cartoons.

Expressing your anger at an offensive cartoon is clearly overboard.

This statement suggests that you are just a warmonger and prefer that the violence escalates?

No, I want it because I want it to be shown that the Western world will not be threaten by a few radicals over a stupid cartoon.


Because they take their religion far more seriously than you do, they are somehow wrong?

Did you support the invasion of Iraq? Do you want to westernize the people of Islam?

No, theres nothing wrong being seriuos about your religion, hell I'm a devoult Roman Catholic myself. However, I see Jesus, and Mary be made fun of everyday. That doesn't mean I'm going to go "HEY! You better quit that or I'll kill you!" I just look at it, make up my mind, and move on.

Also, what does the War in Iraq has to do with this? Stay on topic.

How does any of your comments demonstrate any kind of tolerance?

How about tolreance for freedom of speech? How about tolreance of letting people express themselves without having to worry that someone will kill them over it? Wheres the tolreance there?


Is it YOUR requirement that Islamic people have the SAME sense of humour that you do?

All I'm asking is that the Islamic population need to tone it down a bit. You can protest the cartoon (without the threatening sign), you can disagree with it, you can bitch about it. But once you start threatening an ENTIRE city, all bets are off.


No you do not.

Eh, whatever.

Can we stick to one thread about this topic please? I hate having to repeat myself.

I agree with you, on that point at least. As for the rest...

Here's my opinion. This is further evidence that religion, and Islam in particular..
*edit truthful statements which will be interpreted as flame*

Thats the way I see it.

And in more enlightened times, pulling this sort of stunt while wearing a mask would get you a quick dance with Jack Ketch.

Expressing your anger at an offensive cartoon is clearly overboard.

I think the issue was more the violent and threatening reaction which WAS overboard.

I think the OP should keep in mind, however, that every group has it's loony radicals and that the group shouldn't be judged by it.

I think that they've possibly reached a point where they're SICK of taking it up the ass. I don't like the cartoons, I think they're in poor taste. On the other hand, I value my life. :)

Fuck em all.

Fuck the editors of these european papers who reprinted the cartoons just to prove a point about free speech at the cost of further offending the muslim community. There was no need for that. The original printing in the dish newspaper and the reaction of the Danish government(namelyt that they won't curtail free speech) was plenty to get the point across. These other papers deliberately and (in my opinion) maliciously threw gasoline on the fire in a ridiculous and unnecessary attempt to show solidarity over the ssue of free speech.

And Fuck the violent muslims who are living up to the stereotype in those cartoons.

Oh, and fuck the Danish embassy. Made a very pretty fire. :)

No, I want it because I want it to be shown that the Western world will not be threaten by a few radicals over a stupid cartoon.

Don't hold your breath. The Bush admin. has come down on the side of the muslim world on this. Not that we should be suprised. They have been looking for a good excuse to limit free speech for some time now.

"Anti-Muslim images are as unacceptable as anti-Semitic images, as anti-Christian images or any other religious belief," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1577286

And the US media has largely followed suit.

Don't hold your breath. The Bush admin. has come down on the side of the muslim world on this. Not that we should be suprised. They have been looking for a good excuse to limit free speech for some time now.

"Anti-Muslim images are as unacceptable as anti-Semitic images, as anti-Christian images or any other religious belief," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1577286

And the US media has largely followed suit.

Jeez, and I thought that America, of all countries would be on the side of Free Speech. Hell our 1st admendment is based on that.

Fuck em all.

Fuck the editors of these european papers who reprinted the cartoons just to prove a point about free speech at the cost of further offending the muslim community. There was no need for that. The original printing in the dish newspaper and the reaction of the Danish government(namelyt that they won't curtail free speech) was plenty to get the point across. These other papers deliberately and (in my opinion) maliciously threw gasoline on the fire in a ridiculous and unnecessary attempt to show solidarity over the ssue of free speech.

And Fuck the violent muslims who are living up to the stereotype in those cartoons.

Oh, and fuck the Danish embassy. Made a very pretty fire. :)
Yeah, I think you summed it up fairly well.

I think the issue was more the violent and threatening reaction which WAS overboard.

I think the OP should keep in mind, however, that every group has it's loony radicals and that the group shouldn't be judged by it.

The papers are free to print whatever they want. They are not, however, free from the consequences of what they printed.

The papers are free to print whatever they want. They are not, however, free from the consequences of what they printed.

The Islamic people are free to disagree with the cartoon, and to boycott the newspaper, or the government.

However, they are not free to threaten people, or an entire city, or burn down government property.

Jeez, and I thought that America, of all countries would be on the side of Free Speech. Hell our 1st admendment is based on that.
Well, I guess that kinda burst your bubble huh?

Yeah, I think you summed it up fairly well.

It didn't need the profanity for the sake of profanity, and it didn't need the confrontational tone, but otherwise, agreed. /signed as well

Both sides need to start apologizing, and neither side has the right to ‘wait’ for the other side to ‘give’ first. IMO

Well, I guess that kinda burst your bubble huh?

Yea, but I can always start a website and promote the hell out of it.

The Islamic people are free to disagree with the cartoon, and to boycott the newspaper, or the government.

However, they are not free to threaten people, or an entire city, or burn down government property.

No, they're free to do that. They just aren't free from the consequences of doing so.

The papers are free to print whatever they want. They are not, however, free from the consequences of what they printed.

And that justifies violence and threats of violence? Especially threats of violence and actual violence against people who never even had a choice about the printing of the articles.

It's ok to be outraged (although, personally, I think people need to pull the stick out of their ass ab out a lot of things), but outrage should not mean out and out violence.

It didn't need the profanity for the sake of profanity, and it didn't need the confrontational tone, but otherwise, agreed. /signed as well

Both sides need to start apologizing, and neither side has the right to ‘wait’ for the other side to ‘give’ first. IMO

Why should the cartoonist or newspaper apologize? I mean they were just praticing free speech. If they have to apologize for a stupid cartoon, then everyone who has ever offended a peson base on religion should apologize.

No, they're free to do that. They just aren't free from the consequences of doing so.

I believe this phrase comes into handy here.

"Your rights end where the other person's nose begins."

Think about it.

Both sides need to start apologizing, and neither side has the right to ‘wait’ for the other side to ‘give’ first. IMO
Problem is though that the Danish have apologised already, and that "the protesters"/"the offended Muslims" have no organisation that could apologise.

And even if there were, you wouldn't hear the pope apologising for causing the spread of AIDS by opposing condoms either. Religions don't do apologies very well.

Why should the cartoonist or newspaper apologize? I mean they were just praticing free speech. If they have to apologize for a stupid cartoon, then everyone who has ever offended a peson base on religion should apologize.


Free speech doesn't mean not being answerable to the public for what you print. It only means the government can't tell you what to print.

Free speech doesn't mean not being answerable to the public for what you print. It only means the government can't tell you what to print.

However, some of the actions of the protesters in London are clearly illegal. And they should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

And that justifies violence and threats of violence? Especially threats of violence and actual violence against people who never even had a choice about the printing of the articles.

It's ok to be outraged (although, personally, I think people need to pull the stick out of their ass ab out a lot of things), but outrage should not mean out and out violence.

If I recall properly, the Muslim community made an outcry against the cartoons. That should have been an indicator. The republishing of them was deliberately done to piss of Muslims. The papers all but asked for what the Islamic extremists are doing. And they're getting it.

However, some of the actions of the protesters in London are clearly illegal. And they should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

Thank you.

Why should the cartoonist or newspaper apologize? I mean they were just praticing free speech. If they have to apologize for a stupid cartoon, then everyone who has ever offended a peson base on religion should apologize.

Apologize for setting out with no better reason other than to prove their freedom of speech, by insulting a minority group simply for the purpose of insulting them. A pointless exercise in futility.

I think the OP should keep in mind, however, that every group has it's loony radicals and that the group shouldn't be judged by it.

That excuse has been used a few too many times.

I bought-
1. Oh, 90% of muslims aren't arab, so you can't blame us...
2. Oh, Al Qaeda is just a bunch of fringe radicals. You have crazy christians too!
3. Oh, the Taliban is just one theocratic government that hates the west and jews...
4. Oh, Iran is just one theocratic government that hates the west and jews...
5. Oh, that hostage crisis was ages ago, and Iran had a whole different government...
6. Oh, those schools that preech hate for the west in Saudi Arabia aren't that bad...

and so on, and so on...

The facts are piling up. Lets ignore the middle east, Russia, and China for the moment. I just want to key in on two little things.

-Non-arab muslims in the U.S. and europe, who enjoy freedom of speech and have the right to bitch as much as the rest of us- are now advocating violence, in large numbers.
-Don't forget, muslim students in the U.S., getting free education on student visas (in particular the University of South Florida, but widespread), HAD PARTIES AND CELEBRATED ON 9/11. Police were called out to protect them.

So, I am now saying it straight out.

Although there is a sizeable portion of the muslim world that is peaceful, evidence suggests that Islam is predominantly a zenophobic religion which preaches hate of all other religions, and encourages its members to act violently in the name of God.

I'm sorry, but if it walks like a duck, acts like a duck, and looks like a duck...then it's a fucking duck.

However, some of the actions of the protesters in London are clearly illegal. And they should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

Agreed entirely. Violence is never excusable, no matter what the provocation.

I believe this phrase comes into handy here.

"Your rights end where the other person's nose begins."

Think about it.

Actually, they don't. Otherwise our justice system wouldn't work (at all).

Perhaps you missed my point: You're free to do whatever you want. You are not free from the consequences, including being shot by government authorities or going to jail for a long time.

<snip>

Protecting religion means protecting religion. Even if the people who practice it are violent and inconsiderate.

Yea, but I can always start a website and promote the hell out of it.
What do you gain by doing that?

That excuse has been used a few too many times.

I bought-
1. Oh, 90% of muslims aren't arab, so you can't blame us...
2. Oh, Al Qaeda is just a bunch of fringe radicals. You have crazy christians too!
3. Oh, the Taliban is just one theocratic government that hates the west and jews...
4. Oh, Iran is just one theocratic government that hates the west and jews...
5. Oh, that hostage crisis was ages ago, and Iran had a whole different government...
6. Oh, those schools that preech hate for the west in Saudi Arabia aren't that bad...

and so on, and so on...

The facts are piling up. Lets ignore the middle east, Russia, and China for the moment. I just want to key in on two little things.

-Non-arab muslims in the U.S. and europe, who enjoy freedom of speech and have the right to bitch as much as the rest of us- are now advocating violence, in large numbers.
-Don't forget, muslim students in the U.S., getting free education on student visas (in particular the University of South Florida, but widespread), HAD PARTIES AND CELEBRATED ON 9/11. Police were called out to protect them.

So, I am now saying it straight out.

Although there is a sizeable portion of the muslim world that is peaceful, evidence suggests that Islam is predominantly a zenophobic religion which preaches hate of all other religions, and encourages its members to act violently in the name of God.

I'm sorry, but if it walks like a duck, acts like a duck, and looks like a duck...then it's a fucking duck.

So by the actions of thousands, a religion of millions may be judged? By that logic, the actions of a few cruel Christians is reason for me to declare that Christianity is a religion of bigotry and violence. :rolleyes:

Religion does not make good people do good things and does not make bad people do bad things. People do that on their own.

What do you gain by doing that?

Absoutely nothing, except for the satisfaction knowing that I have the testicles to pratice free speech.

Religion does not make good people do good things and does not make bad people do bad things. People do that on their own.

Good people will do good things. Evil people will do evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

Absoutely nothing, except for the satisfaction knowing that I have the testicles to pratice free speech.

Testicles are generally innefective at expressing your opinions or, for that matter, any speech whatsoever.

Not that I've tried or anything. <.<

-Non-arab muslims in the U.S. and europe, who enjoy freedom of speech and have the right to bitch as much as the rest of us- are now advocating violence, in large numbers.
And I would suggest that there were probably more protests without signs advocating violence than there were with them.
Furthermore I would like to suggest that I have not heard of anything like the thing in London from the rest of Europe. Indeed, in Germany, I don't think there were any protests at all, although people are angry that their religion is being made fun of.
As for the US, I don't actually know what you're talking about.

-Don't forget, muslim students in the U.S., getting free education on student visas (in particular the University of South Florida, but widespread), HAD PARTIES AND CELEBRATED ON 9/11. Police were called out to protect them.
Got any links?

Although there is a sizeable portion of the muslim world that is peaceful, evidence suggests that Islam is predominantly a zenophobic religion which preaches hate of all other religions, and encourages its members to act violently in the name of God.
http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,399175,00.html
http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,398792,00.html

Good people will do good things. Evil people will do evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

If men are such monsters with religion, imagine how terrible they would be with out it. -misquote of Benjamin Franklin

(I can't seem to find the original quote....)

Good people will do good things. Evil people will do evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

A pretty turn of phrase, but basically false. Bad People and Good People are the way they are because of their own choices, in the end. While other things may influence them, in the long run, their choices are their own.

Absoutely nothing, except for the satisfaction knowing that I have the testicles to pratice free speech.
So, if a whole bunch of American dailies started posting these apparently distasteful Islamic cartoons, and some American Muslims reacted by throwing bricks through their windows in protest, then that would be okay?

A pretty turn of phrase, but basically false. Bad People and Good People are the way they are because of their own choices, in the end. While other things may influence them, in the long run, their choices are their own.

um... the Crusades?
this would be true if good/bad were immediately evident. the crusades were a great idea for all kinds of good people. In retrospect though, with the raping and pillaging and murdering and hey hey hey you're not very friendly at all! in non-Frink phrase, they were bad in retrospect, but quite possibly full of 'good' people.

So, if a whole bunch of American dailies started posting these apparently distasteful Islamic cartoons, and some American Muslims reacted by throwing bricks through their windows in protest, then that would be okay?

No because the American Muslims destroyed private property. All these people did was to express an opinion, or support something that they believe in or that they believe is right. It's not a crime to support a thought. It is a crime to vandalized private and public property.

um... the Crusades?
this would be true if good/bad were immediately evident. the crusades were a great idea for all kinds of good people. In retrospect though, with the raping and pillaging and murdering and hey hey hey you're not very friendly at all! in non-Frink phrase, they were bad in retrospect, but quite possibly full of 'good' people.

Most of the people who went on the Crusades were criminals or adventurers. Few of them were men of true faith.

And, to counter that, good men do evil all the time, as well. Unless you believe that all Soviets were evil... that all Chinese were evil... that all Cambodians were evil... that all Japanese were evil....

I will praise the day these Muslims grow up from their infantile cultural naivite. Their agression, hypocracy, and the over-the-top media whoring freakout they've staged is simply a symptom of their immaturity. When Muslim nations, and communities stop blaming every problem under the sun on others, put a rational cap on hyper-sensitivity, and take proud ownership of what is theirs, good and bad, this ridiculous behaviour will no longer plague us, or them.
For communities that are notoriously anti-semitic, and anti-western, the hissy-fit they have managed to work up over a trivial cartoon is absurd. Regardless of whether the cartoon itself was offensive, it is nowhere near as offensive as the violence that has spewed forth since its publication, or indeed the violence it was inspired by - violence no doubt supported by the ever-so-riteously enraged demonstrators that europe is being treated to.

Most of the people who went on the Crusades were criminals or adventurers. Few of them were men of true faith.
Its leaders were. They were chivalric knights, the purest Christians of the time.
And they thought they were doing the right thing. For all intents and purposes, they were good people.

Most of the people who went on the Crusades were criminals or adventurers. Few of them were men of true faith.

And, to counter that, good men do evil all the time, as well. Unless you believe that all Soviets were evil... that all Chinese were evil... that all Cambodians were evil... that all Japanese were evil....

All of those nations having been authoritarian in nature during the time in which they committed evils, so that sorta mitigates that point. The people were guilty of no more than doing nothing.

Its leaders were. They were chivalric knights, the purest Christians of the time.
And they thought they were doing the right thing. For all intents and purposes, they were good people.

Not all the leaders. The leader of the First Crusade was too pious to be made King of Jerusalem, but his second-in-command wasn't! He was in it for the gold.

I will praise the day these Muslims grow up from their infantile cultural naivite. Their agression, hypocracy, and the over-the-top media whoring freakout they've staged is simply a symptom of their immaturity. When Muslim nations, and communities stop blaming every problem under the sun on others, put a rational cap on hyper-sensitivity, and take proud ownership of what is theirs, good and bad, this ridiculous behaviour will no longer plague us, or them.
For communities that are notoriously anti-semitic, and anti-western, the hissy-fit they have managed to work up over a trivial cartoon is absurd. Regardless of whether the cartoon itself was offensive, it is nowhere near as offensive as the violence that has spewed forth since its publication, or indeed the violence it was inspired by - violence no doubt supported by the ever-so-riteously enraged demonstrators that europe is being treated to.

I like how the come to secular liberal democracies, so they can protest secular liberal democracies.

All of those nations having been authoritarian in nature during the time in which they committed evils, so that sorta mitigates that point. The people were guilty of no more than doing nothing.

Authoritarian regimes supported, in at least the Chinese case, by a majority of the population. They were tacitly supported in Japan and in the Soviet Union and Cambodia... well, people probably didn't care enough one way or the other and figured their hide was worth keeping.

Of course, if what you say is true, then the men with the most blood on their hands in SS-Totenkopf Division were as guilty of committing crimes against the Jews as the members of the DAK who surrendered in 1943. Or the Eastern Europeans and French who were conscripted into the Wehrmacht as the Allies landed on Normandy.

No because the American Muslims destroyed private property. All these people did was to express an opinion, or support something that they believe in or that they believe is right. It's not a crime to support a thought. It is a crime to vandalized private and public property.
Therefore, knowing full well that the posting of these pictures has incited violent reaction in the Islamic community, you feel that it is your duty to continue to support the posting of these pictures even though it might incite further violence?

Is your thirst for this brand of comedy that strong?

If you couldn't laugh at the Allah cartoons (because the dailies refused to post them), would your life somehow be lacking then?

I think this is like trying to prove a dog is a dangerous animal by driving it into a corner and poking it with a stick until it bites you...

Therefore, knowing full well that the posting of these pictures has incited violent reaction in the Islamic community, you feel that it is your duty to continue to support the posting of these pictures even though it might incite further violence?

Hence the reason I said "to show these Islamic radicals that we will not be threaten by them. If you start doing what they want because they took the violence route, then you just admitted defeat to terrorism. By standing up to these terrorist, we can show that their terrorist tatics are not going to work.


Is your thirst for this brand of comedy that strong?

No, but my thirst for freedom of speech is.


If you couldn't laugh at the Allah cartoons (because the dailies refused to post them), would your life somehow be lacking then?

Yes! (I was just being humerous, don't read too much into the "Yes!")

I think this is like trying to prove a dog is a dangerous animal by driving it into a corner and poking it with a stick until it bites you...

Yes, but then you get the right to shoot it. There it is.

It's like not mobilizing to stop riots in your cities.

Is your thirst for this brand of comedy that strong?


it's got nothing to do with thirst for comedy methinks. The cartoons are dumb, they should have been protesting letting anyone print such dumb cartoons rather than anything else. the point he is making (i think) is a forced desensitization by posting as many cartoons as possible. or, more likely, a massive holocaust following our entrance into war with every muslim on the planet.

I like how the come to secular liberal democracies, so they can protest secular liberal democracies.
Yeah, funny how eager some muslims are to take advantage of their full rights in western countries - but wait, as soon as it's not so much to their taste, GONE.

I also like how arab countries are so eager to safeguard the "religious rights" of european muslims, who live in free societies, and insist on "respect" for Islam, while running their own dictatorial and xenophobic regimes. It all reaks. Tonight is one of those times I wish hypocrites would all go to hell in a sign-shoving, violent, threatening, bloody, handbasket.

Yes, but then you get the right to shoot it. There it is.

It's like not mobilizing to stop riots in your cities.

More like giving cops CS Gas grenades, the grenade launchers to use them, and then pointing them at a WTO protest and telling them to have their way with the protesters.

More like giving cops CS Gas grenades, the grenade launchers to use them, and then pointing them at a WTO protest and telling them to have their way with the protesters.

Not really, that makes people feel bad for the protestors.

Yeah, funny how eager some muslims are to take advantage of their full rights in western countries - but wait, as soon as it's not so much to their taste, GONE.

I also like how arab countries are so eager to safeguard the "religious rights" of european muslims, who live in free societies, and insist on "respect" for Islam, while running their own dictatorial and xenophobic regimes. It all reaks. Tonight is one of those times I wish hypocrites would all go to hell in a sign-shoving, violent, threatening, bloody, handbasket.

Hate begets hate and all that eh? I think I see really strong, really dogmatic hate on both sides of the debate to the point where it's becoming disturbing. I really wish people would at least accept that to be a muslim one does not need to support Al Quaeda or any terrorism. That's like all Christians agree with everything Pat Robertson says or that all Atheists agree with Stalin.

It would help, though, if people would stop perpetrating stereotypes then. Perhaps a renowned Muslim organization can speak out against these pro-violent protests to ease the collective mind of people? Nah...

Not really, that makes people feel bad for the protestors.

I'm sure they wouldn't if some of the protesters were carrying automatics and decided to shoot back.

it's got nothing to do with thirst for comedy methinks. The cartoons are dumb, they should have been protesting letting anyone print such dumb cartoons rather than anything else. the point he is making (i think) is a forced desensitization by posting as many cartoons as possible. or, more likely, a massive holocaust following our entrance into war with every muslim on the planet.

I do think that the cartoons are dumb (except the one about running out of virgins, that one was funny).. The point that I am trying to make is that these islamic people need to get a hold of themselves. They act like they're the only group of people who had this happened to them before. Competely forgetting buddism (South Park, Family Guy) Christianity and Judaism. Islamic people really need to look at these religion to see the correct way to handle these stupid cartoons. By posting these cartoons on the internet, I am praticing free speech and sending out a message to these terrorrist that I will not bow down to them and that I am not afraid of them.

Hate begets hate and all that eh? I think I see really strong, really dogmatic hate on both sides of the debate to the point where it's becoming disturbing. I really wish people would at least accept that to be a muslim one does not need to support Al Quaeda or any terrorism. That's like all Christians agree with everything Pat Robertson says or that all Atheists agree with Stalin.NO-where did I say that being a muslim means you're batshit crazy. But the fact that we see huge swaths of the batshit crazy ones mouth off, while the sane folks stay home, says something too. If a community at large is willing to BE represented by its diabolical extremeists, than is it surprising that onlookers will also represent them in such a way?!
To all the rational muslims: take ownership, and control, of this SHIT. Make YOUR voice heard. Don't be bullied and spoken for by hypocritical, hate-spewing, children.

NO-where did I say that being a muslim means you're batshit crazy. But the fact that we see huge swaths of the batshit crazy ones mouth off, while the sane folks stay home, says something too. If a community at large is willing to BE represented by its diabolical extremeists, than is it surprising that onlookers will also represent them in such a way?!
To all the rational muslims: take ownership, and control, of this SHIT. Make YOUR voice heard. Don't be bullied and spoken for by hypocritical, hate-spewing, children.

The day Christians in the West do what you think the Muslims should do, let me know, will ya?

NO-where did I say that being a muslim means you're batshit crazy. But the fact that we see huge swaths of the batshit crazy ones mouth off, while the sane folks stay home, says something too. If a community at large is willing to BE represented by its diabolical extremeists, than is it surprising that onlookers will also represent them in such a way?!
To all the rational muslims: take ownership, and control, of this SHIT. Make YOUR voice heard. Don't be bullied and spoken for by hypocritical, hate-spewing, children.

Even when the batshit crazies are in control of the government and media back home and will villify you? Even when the price of speaking out isn't yourself being tortured but your family?

It's just not that easy.

I really wish people would at least accept that to be a muslim one does not need to support Al Quaeda or any terrorism. That's like all Christians agree with everything Pat Robertson says or that all Atheists agree with Stalin.

That's a non sequitur and has nothing to do with this. The issue is freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and those who are protesting its free exercise.

In the first place, regardless of your feelings about a given publication, you do not have the right - in the UK at least, and probably everywhere else - to stage attend a demonstration holding a sign that call for: "murder all those who defile islam." Anyone who does should be arrested, and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Opinions about who is, and who is not, an Al-Quaeda supporter do not even enter into the situation.

Secondly, those selfsame governments in the middle east who are calling for boycotts, sanctions, and reprisals, are the same governments that will happily arrest someone for merely owning a bible. It's utter hypocracy. And, again, has nothing to do with opinions on who, or who is not, a member of al-queda.

And as to this whole issue of not republishing; it's a statement of solidarty, and a commitment to freedom of the press. In other words, a refusal to bow to threats or intimidation when the excercise of fundamental rights are threatened.

That's a non sequitur and has nothing to do with this. The issue is freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and those who are protesting its free exercise.

In the first place, regardless of your feelings about a given publication, you do not have the right - in the UK at least, and probably everywhere else - to stage attend a demonstration holding a sign that call for: "murder all those who defile islam." Anyone who does should be arrested, and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Opinions about who is, and who is not, an Al-Quaeda supporter do not even enter into the situation.

Secondly, those selfsame governments in the middle east who are calling for boycotts, sanctions, and reprisals, are the same governments that will happily arrest someone for merely owning a bible. It's utter hypocracy. And, again, has nothing to do with opinions on who, or who is not, a member of al-queda.

And as to this whole issue of not republishing; it's a statement of solidarty, and a commitment to freedom of the press. In other words, a refusal to bow to threats or intimidation when the excercise of fundamental rights are threatened.

So what you're saying is that you don't have a problem with free speech, so long as it's in the papers and not in your face?

Even when the batshit crazies are in control of the government and media back home and will villify you? Even when the price of speaking out isn't yourself being tortured but your family?

It's just not that easy.I don't think the unseen populations of muslims that are NOT rallying in France and the rest of Europe need to fear torture. Yet these communities too, seem to be growing more extreme, secluded, and violent with every passing year.

Living under a dictatorship complicates things - but for those in Europe, the irony is all the greater.

I'm sure they wouldn't if some of the protesters were carrying automatics and decided to shoot back.

That's insurrection. Not protesting.

Anyway, I've actually been to a WTO protest - well next to one, so I went to check it out. It was mostly smelly upper middle class kids, putting on a big puppet show for no reason I could divine. Trust me, if that had been teargassed, the outcry would have been bigger than the tienaman square thingy. (Which I actually think the chinese government were right about).

That's insurrection. Not protesting.

Anyway, I've actually been to a WTO protest - well next to one, so I went to check it out. It was mostly smelly upper middle class kids, putting on a big puppet show for no reason I could divine. Trust me, if that had been teargassed, the outcry would have been bigger than the tienaman square thingy. (Which I actually think the chinese government were right about).

No, it started as a protest. Then, once the shooting starts, it's a riot. It isn't an insurrection until they start shooting at the National Guard.

The day Christians in the West do what you think the Muslims should do, let me know, will ya?
i suppose you're alluding to the Bush administration. Though it may be crazy, i would like to highlight an important difference.

One group that we could agree is in some way unballanced, and irrational, was elected in a democratic process, and retains limitations, and accountability.

The other is a self-appointed mass of 'activists' who hog public opinion and overshadow others in their extended circle, yet without onlookers having any sense of their proportion in it. We know exactly what Bush's support base is - but we do not understand the depth or prevalence of this type of extremism among muslims. Representation of community and religious groups is not clear-cut like political representation. SO again, will the rational muslims out there please reclaim your collective sanity and reputation. You do not deserve this debasement.

So what you're saying is that you don't have a problem with free speech, so long as it's in the papers and not in your face?

Not at all. A sign saying, "Denmark must apologize", "Islam is sacred and holy", "respect our traditions" and things in those vein are fine. Indeed, public assembly to peaceably protest greivence is a cornerstone of the marketplace of ideas. (Subject to reasonable time manner and place restrictions).

Holding a sign saying "death to the defilers" is not. It has always been against the law.

If the countryside alliance had organized its protest in such a fashion, the courts would still be dealing with the criminal cases. There is no doubt of that.

Nor am I even suggesting that everyone in the protest should be arrested. Only those with signs that incite others to break the law/riot/to terrorism, should be dealt with in that fashion; and any complicit organizers.

And there are other ways of dealing with this. Whitehouse v. Lemon, for example.

I also think that it is personally cowardly that many of these people wear masks. Moreover, they hide behind free speech when they wish to intimidate others with possible threats of death or violence, yet demand it should be curtailed when they feel "offended."

No, it started as a protest. Then, once the shooting starts, it's a riot. It isn't an insurrection until they start shooting at the National Guard.

You don't go to a protest with an automatic.

<snip>

Please tell me where it was that I said the name, "Bush" in that post, if you can.

It's not about Bush, it's about Christians owning up to their own unChristlikeness and speaking out against the vocal, extremist minority.

You don't go to a protest with an automatic.

This is America. Everyone has a gun.

<snip>

So, you want to curtail what the Muslims are saying because you don't like their messege. Pot, this is kettle. He says you're black.

So, you want to curtail what the Muslims are saying because you don't like their messege. Pot, this is kettle. He says you're black.

Where did I say that? Obviously reading is a problem for you.

Please tell me where it was that I said the name, "Bush" in that post, if you can.

It's not about Bush, it's about Christians owning up to their own unChristlikeness and speaking out against the vocal, extremist minority.
You made yourself manifestly unclear, and I made a highly rational assumption, which was wrong. For this I apologize, though in future, you may want to say waht you mean at the outset.

You will find many Christian groups advocating peace, same-sex marriage, charity, and cultural acceptance. You also wil not find mass demostrations of christians threatening death upon those who disingenuously mock them. I fail to see how you can be an apologist for this behaviour by merely finding other inadequate examples of extremism and attempting to equate them.

All moderate people should make their voices heard. too bad it just so happens that moderates are seemingly by definition reticent and timid of being media whores.

Where did I say that? Obviously reading is a problem for you.

I have this miraculous ability of readin what people really mean in what they write, even if they are not aware of it themselves. It's called 'bias'.

You made yourself manifestly unclear, and I made a highly rational assumption, which was wrong. For this I apologize, though in future, you may want to say waht you mean at the outset.

You will find many Christian groups advocating peace, same-sex marriage, charity, and cultural acceptance. You also wil not find mass demostrations of christians threatening death upon those who disingenuously mock them. I fail to see how you can be an apologist for this behaviour by merely finding other inadequate examples of extremism and attempting to equate them.

All moderate people should make their voices heard. too bad it just so happens that moderates are seemingly by definition reticent and timid of being media whores.

You will find Muslims advocating the same things: that's what the Interfaith Council is about, afterall.

And you'll find Christians protesting every imagined slight they can find. They don't even bother with the real ones, anymore.

I have this miraculous ability of readin what people really mean in what they write, even if they are not aware of it themselves. It's called 'bias'.

As in you are biased, and therefore do not really bother to read?

You made yourself manifestly unclear, and I made a highly rational assumption, which was wrong. For this I apologize, though in future, you may want to say waht you mean at the outset.

A rational assumption is still an assumption.

As in you are biased, and therefore do not really bother to read?

No, I read it. I read what you said and I saw your bias.

I suppose the biggest problem is that you don't see your hypocracy, in advocating that some people's free speech be curtailed. The fact that they want someone else's free speech to be curtailed is of no consequence.

They have a right to be angry, you insulted their religion. I find it funny that Europe insults Islam and when the Muslims get angry about you get mad at them! Its not their fault, its yours. You owe them an apology.

No, I read it. I read what you said and I saw your bias.

I suppose the biggest problem is that you don't see your hypocracy, in advocating that some people's free speech be curtailed. The fact that they want someone else's free speech to be curtailed is of no consequence.


Making and demonstrating with signs that say "Death to anyone whom I dont like", or anything like that isnt free speech.
It never has been.
Its the same principle that says you cant yell "Fire" in a crowded movie theater.
People could get hurt.

When what you say can cuase actual physical harm to a person, you arent involving just yourself anymore, and the law takes precedence.

Speaking your mind in a public forum is free speech.
Yelling "Kill those fucking infidels".... is not.

Making and demonstrating with signs that say "Death to anyone whom I dont like", or anything like that isnt free speech.
It never has been.
Its the same principle that says you cant yell "Fire" in a crowded movie theater.
People could get hurt.

When what you say can cuase actual physical harm to a person, you arent involving just yourself anymore, and the law takes precedence.

Speaking your mind in a public forum is free speech.
Yelling "Kill those fucking infidels".... is not.

You seem to love free speech... with restrictions.

And the courts of the US has ruled time and time again that saying "Kill those fucking infidels" is not inciting one to commit a murder and that it falls under the protections of the First Amendment.

What's the old saying? "Sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me"? The words can't hurt you. And if you say that the words of those Muslims might cause you harm, you may as well be saying, and just as logically, that the papers printing those cartoons is causing you harm. I think we'd both agree that they don't.

You seem to love free speech... with restrictions.

And the courts of the US has ruled time and time again that saying "Kill those fucking infidels" is not inciting one to commit a murder and that it falls under the protections of the First Amendment.

What's the old saying? "Sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me"? The words can't hurt you. And if you say that the words of those Muslims might cause you harm, you may as well be saying, and just as logically, that the papers printing those cartoons is causing you harm. I think we'd both agree that they don't.


So then parading around with a sign saying "Kill all niggers, now!" is perfectly acceptable to you?

Is that "free speech"...or an attempt to start a riot?

Everyone should, and always must have the right to say whatever they want, to whomever will listen, but no one has the right to threaten anyone elses safety.

Theres simply a right and a wrong way to use the right of free speech, and carrying signs that will likely bring harm to people, is probably not the best use of it.

Words cant break your bones, but they can get a crowd whipped up to an angry mob in no time.
Thats how people get killed.

I think the difference is this: Until now the anti-islam sentiment has been fuelled by war and rhetoric, but it has ostensibly targetted "extremism", feigning indifference to those moderate muslims that are now marching. This incident has shown for the first time in the mainstream press what the west really thinks- that all muslims are potential terrorists, and that their religion is inherintly evil.

So then parading around with a sign saying "Kill all niggers, now!" is perfectly acceptable to you?

Is that "free speech"...or an attempt to start a riot?

Everyone should, and always must have the right to say whatever they want, to whomever will listen, but no one has the right to threaten anyone elses safety.

Theres simply a right and a wrong way to use the right of free speech, and carrying signs that will likely bring harm to people, is probably not the best use of it.

Words cant break your bones, but they can get a crowd whipped up to an angry mob in no time.
Thats how people get killed.

It's free speech. If you ever walk past a KKK demonstration you'll see that exact thing. And no one is able to incite a riot. People ignore them. They walk past.

And you have every right to threaten someone else's safety: so long as you are non-specific and don't actually carry out your threat.

And it's the crowd that breaks your bones, not the words. The justification you're using is the same that was used in Europe to censor plays and operas in the 17th and 18th Centuries.

It's free speech. If you ever walk past a KKK demonstration you'll see that exact thing. And no one is able to incite a riot. People ignore them. They walk past.

Incorrect.
Carrying a sign such as the one I described, would be illegal even in most Southern States.

And you have every right to threaten someone else's safety: so long as you are non-specific and don't actually carry out your threat.

Again, incorrect.
Me standing outside your house, pontificating about how everyone should rise up and kill one member of your family....at random....would still be illegal, Im thinking....as well it should be.

And it's the crowd that breaks your bones, not the words. The justification you're using is the same that was used in Europe to censor plays and operas in the 17th and 18th Centuries.

Youre a fool if you dont think people cant be manipulated into violence, and rather easy at that.
Thats why its illegal to incite a riot.

You would advocate lynchings, in the name of "Free Speech".

And it's the crowd that breaks your bones, not the words. The justification you're using is the same that was used in Europe to censor plays and operas in the 17th and 18th Centuries.

On a very simplistic level you are correct. The sound that comes from peoples mouths do not break bones.

However, words used to incite the crowd to action do break bones.

Yell fire in a theater and see if the judge will listen to it was the people and not your words that injured those people.....

Incorrect.
Carrying a sign such as the one I described, would be illegal even in most Southern States.

got law?

Again, incorrect.
Me standing outside your house, pontificating about how everyone should rise up and kill one member of your family....at random....would still be illegal, Im thinking....as well it should be.

You standing outside my house puts you on my property: If you were dumb enough to do that, you would find that while I agree with your right to free speech, I think you still have to reap the consequences. In this case, it would be a .308 Winchester in the chest.

Youre a fool if you dont think people cant be manipulated into violence, and rather easy at that.
Thats why its illegal to incite a riot.

Easy, huh? Inciting a riot requires that people pay attention to you. People paying attention to you requires that you not be a nut-job. Which members of the KKK and those Islamic extremists are seen as.

You would advocate lynchings, in the name of "Free Speech".

Do not claim to speak for me, fool. Free speech is free speech. Lynching has nothing to do with speech. The only form of lynching I would condone would be lynching effigies. I would never advocate lynching.

On a very simplistic level you are correct. The sound that comes from peoples mouths do not break bones.

However, words used to incite the crowd to action do break bones.

Yell fire in a theater and see if the judge will listen to it was the people and not your words that injured those people.....

And you're defending those who inciting the crowds. The yell of "fire!" came not from the Muslims but from the newspapers. And it came twice.

Oh, and the jusdge would probably make the wrong decision.

Once again you sheeple eat the propaganda put out by the powers that be.

Why is the font the SAME on all those signs?

Why are the protests written in ENGLISH and not in Arabic or German or a European language of one of the offending countries?

At the very least, its blows my mind that a radical TINY segment of a population acts in a certain way and you ignorant people assume the whole population agrees with them and wants us all dead.

The powers that be want a war in the middle east to control dwindling oil reserves and you idiots fall for their propaganda.

Dont believe me? Think Im a wacko conspiracy nut? Then why are we in Iraq???

Why all the pressure on Iran NOW when the FACTS ARE THIS:

1. They are MINIMUM 3 years away from having a working NUKE

2. They are opening their Oil market next month.

GET A CLUE PEOPLE, STOP FALLING FOR THE PROPAGANDA.

Wow... aren't we taking this a little too far now? I mean honestly! Look, you can disagree with the cartoon, you can write to the newspaper editor, and you can boycott the newspaper. But standing out in the freaking street holding signs that are conveying death threats? Comon now.


But surely they are practicing freedom of speech...

Once again you sheeple eat the propaganda put out by the powers that be.

Why is the font the SAME on all those signs?

Why are the protests written in ENGLISH and not in Arabic or German or a European language of one of the offending countries?

At the very least, its blows my mind that a radical TINY segment of a population acts in a certain way and you ignorant people assume the whole population agrees with them and wants us all dead.

The powers that be want a war in the middle east to control dwindling oil reserves and you idiots fall for their propaganda.

Dont believe me? Think Im a wacko conspiracy nut? Then why are we in Iraq???

Why all the pressure on Iran NOW when the FACTS ARE THIS:

1. They are MINIMUM 3 years away from having a working NUKE

2. They are opening their Oil market next month.

GET A CLUE PEOPLE, STOP FALLING FOR THE PROPAGANDA.



You obviously have an above average command of the english language.

That excuse has been used a few too many times.

I bought-
1. Oh, 90% of muslims aren't arab, so you can't blame us...
2. Oh, Al Qaeda is just a bunch of fringe radicals. You have crazy christians too!
3. Oh, the Taliban is just one theocratic government that hates the west and jews...
4. Oh, Iran is just one theocratic government that hates the west and jews...
5. Oh, that hostage crisis was ages ago, and Iran had a whole different government...
6. Oh, those schools that preech hate for the west in Saudi Arabia aren't that bad...

and so on, and so on...

The facts are piling up. Lets ignore the middle east, Russia, and China for the moment. I just want to key in on two little things.

-Non-arab muslims in the U.S. and europe, who enjoy freedom of speech and have the right to bitch as much as the rest of us- are now advocating violence, in large numbers.
-Don't forget, muslim students in the U.S., getting free education on student visas (in particular the University of South Florida, but widespread), HAD PARTIES AND CELEBRATED ON 9/11. Police were called out to protect them.

So, I am now saying it straight out.

Although there is a sizeable portion of the muslim world that is peaceful, evidence suggests that Islam is predominantly a zenophobic religion which preaches hate of all other religions, and encourages its members to act violently in the name of God.

I'm sorry, but if it walks like a duck, acts like a duck, and looks like a duck...then it's a fucking duck.

You know what, I'm jotting this shit down for next time someone comes out with a topic like this.

And you're defending those who inciting the crowds. The yell of "fire!" came not from the Muslims but from the newspapers. And it came twice.

Oh, and the jusdge would probably make the wrong decision.

Nope. Fire is something out of your control(speaking being in a burning building) that is why fear causes injuries and why you are not allowed to yell it for no reason.

Anger is something you have the ability to controll. Thus you are not exempt from being held by your actions.

And you're defending those who inciting the crowds. The yell of "fire!" came not from the Muslims but from the newspapers. And it came twice.

Oh, and the jusdge would probably make the wrong decision.

No..you are the one defending these hypothetical riot-starters, by implying antything they do say to a crowd, is permissable, by your warped idea of what free speech should be.
The truth is, people can, will, and often are, manipulated into such actions by such people who then claim free speech.

They are almost always convicted.

The yelling of "fire", is actually refferenced by sevral law documents, and no judge would make any other decision.
So...its assuredly you...who would make the wrong choice.

Although there is a sizeable portion of the muslim world that is peaceful, evidence suggests that Islam is predominantly a zenophobic religion which preaches hate of all other religions, and encourages its members to act violently in the name of God.

I'm sorry, but if it walks like a duck, acts like a duck, and looks like a duck...then it's a fucking duck.

Given there's no colour bar in Islam, how exactly is it xenophobic?

The issue isn't cartoons or Islam or death threats. The issue is what all the major religions have done. They all have their extremists and hypocrits. They all quote scripture as they march to war.

It's an over-generalization to pick out one factor and present it as somehow being representative of the entire religion.

In the U.S. we have the KKK marching in Ohio and other places, claiming the Christian God is on their side. It would be wrong for anyone to criticize Christianity because of what the KKK does.

Those protestors aren't representative of Islam. They are a small group. They are an insignificant fringe element. They are fools, just as the people who throw money at the 700 Club are fools.

No..you are the one defending these hypothetical riot-starters, by implying antything they do say to a crowd, is permissable, by your warped idea of what free speech should be.
The truth is, people can, will, and often are, manipulated into such actions by such people who then claim free speech.

And what you claim to be free speech is not, in fact free speech, but an authoratarian sham. A relic of monarchists trying to vainly hold onto power.

They are almost always convicted.

got stats?

The yelling of "fire", is actually refferenced by sevral law documents, and no judge would make any other decision.
So...its assuredly you...who would make the wrong choice.

So if everyone were jumping off a cliff, I would be making the wrong choice by not following them?

Nope. Fire is something out of your control(speaking being in a burning building) that is why fear causes injuries and why you are not allowed to yell it for no reason.

Anger is something you have the ability to controll. Thus you are not exempt from being held by your actions.

Fire may be beyond one's control, but the ability to shuffle out of a theater in an organized manner is not. Maybe you recall 9/11, the reports of people behaving relatively calmly, despite the fact that the explosion of an impacting aircraft yelled, very loudly, "FIRE!"

It is, therefore, the fault of those who stampede at the yell of "Fire!" who have done the killing. Not the person who shouted it, despite their malicious intent.

Fire may be beyond one's control, but the ability to shuffle out of a theater in an organized manner is not. Maybe you recall 9/11, the reports of people behaving relatively calmly, despite the fact that the explosion of an impacting aircraft yelled, very loudly, "FIRE!"

It is, therefore, the fault of those who stampede at the yell of "Fire!" who have done the killing. Not the person who shouted it, despite their malicious intent.

:D ok dude. Whatever.

:D ok dude. Whatever.

*Pulls a Nixon*

I win!

*Withdraws*

But surely they are practicing freedom of speech...

It's a time/manner/place restriction, not a restriction of content, which is what is protected.

Under the logic being used here, the first ammendment could sometimes be used as a bar to conspiracy charges, because the person who planned it was only "expressing themselves" and no-one actually "had to do" what they said.

Same reason as being arrested for closing down the M25 isn't a restriction of free speech. Or blocking the doorway to an accident and emergency unit.

Self-explainatory really.

Freedom of speech = what you say is protected.
Freedom of speech !=protection of how you get your point across.

ok...

the same can be said for every religion. I can say something about jesus that i think is funny, but im sure most christians wouldn't.I, however, think that most christians would laugh with you.

Fire may be beyond one's control, but the ability to shuffle out of a theater in an organized manner is not. Maybe you recall 9/11, the reports of people behaving relatively calmly, despite the fact that the explosion of an impacting aircraft yelled, very loudly, "FIRE!"

It is, therefore, the fault of those who stampede at the yell of "Fire!" who have done the killing. Not the person who shouted it, despite their malicious intent.wrong, yelling Fire when there isn't one, is a crime, because it does cause a panic, disrupt the peace, and should emergency services be called, it would be filing a false claim/report.

if you don't think it's illegal.... go ahead and call 911 and report a false fire, or go and pull a fire alarm and admit you did it.

Auntie Beeb showed us a lovely image - life feed, no less - of the fine and upstanding muslim citizens marching behind a placard saying
Europe is cancer, Islam is the cure.

Lets return the favour

Islam is cancer - Europe is the cure.

Meanwhile, I#m boycotting all muslim-owned/operated/influenced products.

Auntie Beeb showed us a lovely image - life feed, no less - of the fine and upstanding muslim citizens marching behind a placard saying
Europe is cancer, Islam is the cure.

Lets return the favour

Islam is cancer - Europe is the cure.

Meanwhile, I#m boycotting all muslim-owned/operated/influenced products.
oh, that's cute. That's clever.
Why do people never learn that just rejecting someone because some of them are being completely screwy does NO GOOD WHATSOEVER!! Seriously. It's obviously a depressing sign of a malais in international religious tolerance that's done this stuff. There are terrorists, who happen to be Islamic. They do screwy stuff, and as a result, a great deal of them get blown up, along with a bunch of other folk. One of the results of this is that people on both sides get incredibly pissed off with one another, largely due to a wonderful sort of deviancy amplification that the good old press have fun with. So perfectly wel educated Muslim women are given venomous looks when they get on a tube, and stupid, stupid Muslim people find an excuse and a scapegoat for whatever frustrations they may have. The Islamic community is quite blatantly discriminated against, and in any marginalised group, there are always daft buggers who decide that arson will solve their problems. Further discrimination is hardly going to solve ANYONE'S problems, is it?

I dont in ANY way approve of what those magazines published. But I JUST HATE when people threaten an whole country(including europe), Its not like the danish gouverment can change what the magazines print,(because its not a dictator ship)and just because ONE magazine prints a cartoon doesnt mean that the whole country likes it and laughs at it. .AND rest of europe why are they threatening them? What had the rest of europe have to do with anything? I think all people should have there own religion without being mocked. The printers should be fired...
And what if they bomb something in denmark Then BANG there is full scale war and MANY people die because of some dumb shit bag that takes everything serius(i still dont like the cartoon) I think it´s wrong to make fun of someone´s religion,BUT i also think it is very wrong to burn down an embassy:headbang: it´s just plain stupid behavior. I dont think mohammed would like what they are doing. Please reply P.S Peace Love And Understanding :) :fluffle:

This statement suggests that you are just a warmonger and prefer that the violence escalates?
It's the fundamentalists that are threatening violence, not Stone Bridges. Ye gads, I can't believe that so many of my fellow leftists actually support these people.

Is it YOUR requirement that Islamic people have the SAME sense of humour that you do?
Don't know about Stone Bridges, but for me it would be a recommendation. They can be angry, but they can't commit violent acts over it. I suggest that they learn to calm down and learn to live with it.

Tolerance is a two-way street. If we're going to tolerate Islam, then Islam should tolerate parody of the religion. We've been spoofing Christianity for quite some time and the Christians have learned to live with it. So, too, should Muslims.

(New Genoa said that better than I ever could.)

I fully agree, these Muslims have gone *way* too far... they're so totally fucked up in the head I lack the words to describe it. :mad:
They're just proving that every single one of the cartoons (like the one with the bomb turban) is absolutely true :rolleyes:

Islam is cancer - Europe is the cure.
I wonder whether this could be true.

There already is a large Muslim expatriot population in Europe. Most of those do get exposed to the liberal attitudes held there. Undoubtedly some of them will hate it, and I'm afraid there is little we can do about that.
But those who get used to it, the second generation and third generation, they will be a whole new generation of Muslims, with money, education and European attitudes. And it is possible that those Muslims will shape the direction Islam is taking as a whole.

I only read the first post of this thread, and I can't stomach any more "war is wrong" discussions.

I'm here just to tell the muslims that the japanese keep printing lots of comic books with naked ladies, why you aren't mad at Japan?
Oh, and we keep seeing movies where people drink alchol, and we do so ourselves...
You guys are making fun of yourself allowing us to do the above, let us join in the fun mkay?
Or continue the war and die, your call.

I fully agree, these Muslims have gone *way* too far... they're so totally fucked up in the head I lack the words to describe it. :mad:
They're just proving that every single one of the cartoons (like the one with the bomb turban) is absolutely true :rolleyes:

Well quite, it demonstrates the inherent hypocrisy that permeates the Arabic world, which produces similarly vehement propaganda, and lauds the deaths of white western citizens, yet reacts such disengenouosly in relation what is essentially satirical art.

Were the "silent majority", the christian faith or the middle classes to react ina similar maner in relation to all cartoons published as to their risable idiosyncrasies, no publishing firms would remain open.

I wonder whether this could be true.

There already is a large Muslim expatriot population in Europe. Most of those do get exposed to the liberal attitudes held there. Undoubtedly some of them will hate it, and I'm afraid there is little we can do about that.
But those who get used to it, the second generation and third generation, they will be a whole new generation of Muslims, with money, education and European attitudes. And it is possible that those Muslims will shape the direction Islam is taking as a whole.

No. The right is rising inexorably, and frankly, Enoch Powell war speaking in valediction, the streets will run red with blood. 7/7 illustrated the vehemency of nationalism that can be unleashed, further attacks will do so better.

Though I'm sure most of you have seen this already, thought it might be worth an update.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4682560.stm

Perhaps, dare I say it, the Middle East no longer wishes to engage in dialogue with the western world?

I'm still ashamed to be a member of this period of history, it must be said. :(

If WWIII breaks out over a fucken cartoon we've got proof humans are the stupidest species ever.

Though I'm sure most of you have seen this already, thought it might be worth an update.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4682560.stm

Perhaps, dare I say it, the Middle East no longer wishes to engage in dialogue with the western world?

I'm still ashamed to be a member of this period of history, it must be said. :(

Oh my god. This is just getting so stupid now its almost beyond belief. Those people in the embassy probably didnt even have anything to do with the cartoon. I just suppose its part of the blinkered mindset to see everybody as part of a group that has wronged you.

No. The right is rising inexorably, and frankly, Enoch Powell war speaking in valediction, the streets will run red with blood. 7/7 illustrated the vehemency of nationalism that can be unleashed, further attacks will do so better.
We'll see.
To be quite honest, I'm not sure what sort of image the US media makes out of all this, but I have always been surprised by the idea many Americans have about Muslims taking over.

It is true that some communities have trouble integrating, and the weak economies in some countries don't help if the people can't find a job. The vast majority of the people even in those communities have no intention whatsoever of being violent.

There is no great war of ideas going on. No one is even considering getting the government involved in this particular dispute.
A Danish boulevard magazine wanted to make a point. They knew they were being disrespectful to a religion, and it does seem a little bit arrogant to do what they did. It was clear what would happen, and they would have the story they wanted: About evil immigrants threatening everyone.
The Muslim community played right into people's hands here by being genuinely angry about it, and it shouldn't be surprising. Obviously, most of them didn't go protesting, but then, the people who made these threads didn't care.

It's not an issue of free speech. It never was. "Free Speech" would imply that the government had something to do with this.

It was an issue of trying out what you can get away with, and added to that a big portion of cynicism - this paper will be the centre of attention for weeks. It was disrespectful, it was a false generalisation and it was completely uncalled for.

It was trolling, no more, no less.

To the OP:

You realise that the Muslim Council of Britain has actually condemned those protestors and calld for their prosecution don't you?

link (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2025704,00.html)

To the OP:

You realise that the Muslim Council of Britain has actually condemned those protestors and calld for their prosecution don't you?

link (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2025704,00.html)
So has the Conservative party.

Interestingly, though, this is a bit of a Hobson's choice. Either these extreme elements are allowed to go on the rampage or they are denied the freedom of speech that they seem to be protesting against. Either way is to give in. :(

It's the fundamentalists that are threatening violence, not Stone Bridges. Ye gads, I can't believe that so many of my fellow leftists actually support these people.
I don't condone the violence of the extremists but I also don't condone inflaming the situation by continuing to post cartoons that denigrate their religion. I think that anyone that wants to inflame the situation is a warmonger.

Don't know about Stone Bridges, but for me it would be a recommendation. They can be angry, but they can't commit violent acts over it. I suggest that they learn to calm down and learn to live with it.
You want them to be tolerant but you don't think that we, and I use that word loosely, should be more understanding?

Tolerance is a two-way street. If we're going to tolerate Islam, then Islam should tolerate parody of the religion. We've been spoofing Christianity for quite some time and the Christians have learned to live with it. So, too, should Muslims.
Such an intolerant remark. Why should Muslims tolerate the same things that Christians tolerate? It is quite obvious that the people of Islam have far more reverence for Allah than so called Christians do for their God.

God is infinite, God is omnipotent, God is holy.

However, that doesn't mean I can stop Freedom of the Press because they offend my beliefs or my God. They have the right to satirize and mock my beliefs. I just wait patiently for the day when they go on to their eternal reward for it.

I mean, why can't Muslims see it that way? It seems that by your religion (I make no claims to be a scholar on Islam or the Qu'ran) that the people who mock Mohammad, as they do in that script, will go to Hell, plain and simple.

I guess what I'm trying to say is: Why must you defend Allah and Mohammad? Cannot Allah defend himself and the Prophet Mohammad?

I hope that what I've just said isn't interpreted as flaming, by either side.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4682262.stm

On Saturday, Asghar Bukhari, chairman of the Muslim Public Affairs Committee, said the demonstration in London on Friday should have been stopped by police because the group had been advocating violence.

He said the protesters "did not represent British Muslims".

Mr Bukhari told the BBC News website: "The placards and chants were disgraceful and disgusting, Muslims do not feel that way.

"I condemn them without reservation, these people are less representative of Muslims than the BNP are of the British people."

He said that Muslims were angry over satirical cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad published in European papers but it was "outrageous" for anyone to advocate extreme action or violence.

"We believe it [the protest] should have been banned and the march stopped.

"It's irrelevant whether it's Muslims causing hatred or anyone else - freedom of speech has to be responsible."
On Saturday more protesters, organised by the Hizb ut-Tahrir group, gathered outside the Danish embassy in London.

It appeared that the rally was far more restrained than the one on Friday.
Taji Mustafa, a spokesman for Hizb ut-Tahir, told BBC's Sunday AM that the posters, images shown by the television programme, had featured in Friday's protests which his group had "nothing to do with".

"It had absolutely nothing to do with us, and we condemned those - they are not acceptable," he said.

"And many Muslim groups have condemned Friday's protests and the images that were used there.

"Our protest yesterday was very peaceful."

He said the group advises Muslims "not to stoop to the level of those who want to resort to insults on the Prophet of Islam" and instead to engage in peaceful, responsible protests.

So has the Conservative party.

Interestingly, though, this is a bit of a Hobson's choice. Either these extreme elements are allowed to go on the rampage or they are denied the freedom of speech that they seem to be protesting against. Either way is to give in. :(

Not at all, we can quite target those who espouse violence without limiting free-speech as such.

It would have given us more credibility to deal with the extremists if Nick Griffin hadn't been found innocent though.

I saw some one on TV who represented the British Muslims who said that these People in the Streets are Islamic Extremists who had Hijacked the situation.

I've been following this protest and I can't understand something; as a christian, I believe that God can look after His own honor. Far better than I can, in fact. If your diety cannot defend Himself adequately, why serve Him (or whomever)?
I say to anyone who wants to make any cartoons about Christ or Christianity - "Publish and be damned!"
Literally.

I've been following this protest and I can't understand something; as a christian, I believe that God can look after His own honor. Far better than I can, in fact. If your diety cannot defend Himself adequately, why serve Him (or whomever)?
I say to anyone who wants to make any cartoons about Christ or Christianity - "Publish and be damned!"
Literally.

I'm not sure if this is true or not but I once heard some one say that the Prophet Mohammed Said that Islam was more about Politics than religion.

http://www.blacktable.com/images/0304pics/phelpssign.jpg
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-01/09/xinsrc_41201020911233281456929.jpg
http://www.askwhy.co.uk/truth/NoZionJew1.jpg
http://www.nrk.no/img/381479.jpeg

See, the radical Muslims...Oh wait.
These are the radical Christians. Silly me. Couldn't tell the difference.

Don't judge the forest for the trees.

One wonders what what the Muslims would of though of the cartoons when the Arab was most cultural and intellectual race around

http://www.blacktable.com/images/0304pics/phelpssign.jpg
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-01/09/xinsrc_41201020911233281456929.jpg
http://www.askwhy.co.uk/truth/NoZionJew1.jpg
http://www.nrk.no/img/381479.jpeg

See, the radical Muslims...Oh wait.
These are the radical Christians. Silly me. Couldn't tell the difference.

Don't judge the forest for the trees.

Maybe not all christian:

"http://www.askwhy.co.uk/truth/NoZionJew1.jpg"

And see doesnt want to pay her TV licence:

"http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-01/09/xinsrc_41201020911233281456929.jpg"

Don't judge the forest for the trees.

Good advise!

1. Because they take their religion far more seriously than you do, they are somehow wrong?

2. Is it YOUR requirement that Islamic people have the SAME sense of humour that you do?
1. No. They are "somehow" wrong because their first response to anything is violence.

2. No. But ANY sense of humor is better than NO sense of humor!

http://www.blacktable.com/images/0304pics/phelpssign.jpg
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-01/09/xinsrc_41201020911233281456929.jpg
http://www.askwhy.co.uk/truth/NoZionJew1.jpg
http://www.nrk.no/img/381479.jpeg

See, the radical Muslims...Oh wait.
These are the radical Christians. Silly me. Couldn't tell the difference.

Don't judge the forest for the trees.
1. I don't see them carrying any signs which threaten to exterminate anyone.

2. One of the photos is of Hisidic Jews, not "Christians."

Maybe not all christian:

"http://www.askwhy.co.uk/truth/NoZionJew1.jpg"

And see doesnt want to pay her TV licence:

"http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-01/09/xinsrc_41201020911233281456929.jpg"

The one with the Jews is, I believe, are Christians dressed like Jews protesting Judiasm.

If you look into the corner on the next one you can see " CHRISITIANS OUTRAGED AT BBC..."

Good advise!
Thank you, I wish it was "common sense" though.

Good advise!
[ sounds air-horn! ] Wrong!

The one with the Jews is, I believe, are Christians dressed like Jews protesting Judiasm.

If you look into the corner on the next one you can see " CHRISITIANS OUTRAGED AT BBC..."

Thank you, I wish it was "common sense" though.
Hell, even I've been "outraged" at the BBC at times! Heh!

There's a vast, vast difference between being "outraged" and setting fire to buildings while threatening to kill everyone with whom you disagree.

I, for one, am glad that what you refer to as "common sense" is as rare as hen's teeth.

EDIT: Christians dressed up as Jews? Some proof of this would be nice.

Hell, even I've been "outraged" at the BBC at times! Heh!

There's a vast, vast difference between being "outraged" and setting fire to buildings while threatening to kill everyone with whom you disagree.

I, for one, am glad that what you refer to as "common sense" is as rare as hen's teeth.

EDIT: Christians dressed up as Jews? Some proof of this would be nice.

Members of various Christian organizations burn copies of TV licenses in protest at the decision by the BBC to broadcast the West End musical production of Jerry Springer - The Opera, outside BBC Television Center in west London, January 7, 2005. The public broadcaster has been inundated with more than 20,000 complaints after it revealed it would broadcast the show, which contains 3,000 swear words, on BBC 2 on Jan. 8. (Photo: Yahoo/Reuters)
Yep.

I am sure you are glad that most people take one person from a group, use that person as a stereotype, and then judge everyone in the group with it, Mr. Bigot.

I wonder what the Christian reaction will be to the movie that's coming out on the sixth of June, 'The Beast'. Basically it claims that Jesus never existed.

I suspect a few extremists will get quite violent there too.

I wonder what the Christian reaction will be to the movie that's coming out on the sixth of June, 'The Beast'. Basically it claims that Jesus never existed.

I suspect a few extremists will get quite violent there too.

Why have they have called it "The Beast"?

I think that is a potential flashpoint!

Given there's no colour bar in Islam, how exactly is it xenophobic?

The term xenophobe does not merely apply to a dislike of certain races/colors. Any fear of something strange or foreign can be described as xenophobic.

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/xenophobia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenophobia

I wonder what the Christian reaction will be to the movie that's coming out on the sixth of June, 'The Beast'. Basically it claims that Jesus never existed.

I suspect a few extremists will get quite violent there too.
I saw a preview for that. Looks like it will either be pretty good or a horrible flop.
Either way, I'm going to go see it.

So its a Documentary rather than a film.

So its a Documentary rather than a film.
I don't think so.
It looks more to be a slasher/thriller sort of thing.

The official site:

http://www.thebeastmovie.com/trailer/index.html

After seeing the Trailer and reading about it I'm fairly sure that there will be no Violent Reaction.

Welp, since the Islamic people decide to take the route of violence instead of having a sense of HUMOR! I just hope that US newspaper start printing these cartoons.


That's easy to say when you're not the target.

The fact remains that if a cartoon is published in a newspaper that is aimed at the a readership of Muslims, the newspaper must show some kind of sensitivity and tolerence to Muslims.
It's simple tact.
Simply put, to insult religion is to attack the most beliefs of humanity; religion is a way of life, an explanation and plan of life and death. To insult it is a grave dishonor.
The newspaper should be blamed for their complete inablity to show any kind of diplomacy and thought towards their readership.

*snip*
Here's what pisses me off:

The cartoons in question were lousy cartoons. They encouraged the marginalization of a visible and vulnerable minority group. For THAT reason, I think people should have been cancelling subscriptions and writing letters of objection. It's no different than if a cartoon were published depicting black people as big-lipped carricatures with a slice of watermelon in one hand an a fried chicken leg in the other.

But, instead, two huge mistakes were made. First of all, the behavior of the protestors simply bears out the stereotypes. They are throwing a collective tantrum over a matter than they should have responded to like adults. Even worse, they are throwing that tantrum for the stupidest possible reason: the religious aspect. They should be angry because of the affront to their human dignity, not because of some slight to their imaginary friend. They should be angry because of the disrespect shown to THEM, not the disrespect shown to a superstition that (like all superstitions) most definitely should be mocked and marginalized.

Simply put, to insult religion is to attack the most beliefs of humanity; religion is a way of life, an explanation and plan of life and death. To insult it is a grave dishonor.

unless it's Christianity on these boards, in which case it seems to be a-ok!

I would like to know why they blame the whole of Europe when Britain (and I'm now sure many others) have yet to publish the Cartoons:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2006/02/04/wcart04a.jpg

(This is from the March in London.)

Such an intolerant remark. Why should Muslims tolerate the same things that Christians tolerate? It is quite obvious that the people of Islam have far more reverence for Allah than so called Christians do for their God.

That's it, right there. It's that "holier than thou" attitude that really, really grabs people. That justification as to why the rest of the world hates Muslims. "We don't perform any of your dastardly, evil things, like nudity, drinking alcohol, or eating with our left hands while standing on our heads, etc. Therefore, we're entitled to act with more vehemence. You would, too, if you weren't such lousy people."

No wonder people are beginnging to bring the hate. Any word on the Usual Offenders in the Middle East? Iran, Palestine, Saudi Arabia?

The fact remains that if a cartoon is published in a newspaper that is aimed at the a readership of Muslims, the newspaper must show some kind of sensitivity and tolerence to Muslims.
It's simple tact.
Simply put, to insult religion is to attack the most beliefs of humanity; religion is a way of life, an explanation and plan of life and death. To insult it is a grave dishonor.
The newspaper should be blamed for their complete inablity to show any kind of diplomacy and thought towards their readership.
And a lack of tact became a crime that justifies violence and censorship when?

When that lack of tact insults people at their most basic level.

When that lack of tact insults people at their most basic level.
And what is that?

And why is that? An 'insult' after all is just words. It doesn't touch you unless you choose to let it.

EDIT: There is no right to not be insulted. There is a basic right to freedom, and to not have your house burned. Do you want to change that?

And why is that? An 'insult' after all is just words. It doesn't touch you unless you choose to let it.

Amen to that.

The official site:

http://www.thebeastmovie.com/trailer/index.html
The trailer doesn't indicate much.

Frankly, there may be a few protests, but most Christians, even the self-proclaimed ones, aren't the type to protest, much less get violent about it. Most of them will simply ignore it or play "ain't it awful" with other Christians.

When that lack of tact insults people at their most basic level.
Talk about a childish attitude.

So your hurt feelings justify violence and censorship, do they? If somebody says or prints words that make you angry, you have the right to shut them up however you like?

Man, some people really need to get over themselves. There will always be somebody saying things you don't like. There will always be people who disagree with you. There will always be people who say nasty things about you, your culture, your beliefs, or whatever else. Get over it. You probably say plenty of things that piss off somebody else. Let others have their opinions, let them say what they like, and enjoy the same freedom yourself. Quit acting as though you should be empowered to shut up those who say things you don't like.

The Danish Newspaper should have realised that Muslims are quite Volitile and not printed the pictures.

Muslims should have shown restraint and applied pressure to the Governments to sort out the problems, rather than attacking Embassies.

Both sides, in my view, are as guilty as each other.

The Danish Newspaper should have realised that Muslims are quite Volitile and not printed the pictures.

Unfounded. Please demonstrate how Muslims are more volatile than any other arbitrarily defined population.


Muslims should have shown restraint and applied pressure to the Governments to sort out the problems, rather than attacking Embassies.
Why should the government be in the business of censoring cartoons? Shouldn't we expect adult human beings to, say, act like adults?

Given there's no colour bar in Islam, how exactly is it xenophobic?

Xeno = alien

Xenophobia = fear/hatred of aliens

alien = that which isn't muslim in this case.

Therefore, since these protesters are displaying a fear/hatred of that which isn't muslim, it appears that they are Xenophobic.

You seem to love free speech... with restrictions.

And the courts of the US has ruled time and time again that saying "Kill those fucking infidels" is not inciting one to commit a murder and that it falls under the protections of the First Amendment.

What's the old saying? "Sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me"? The words can't hurt you. And if you say that the words of those Muslims might cause you harm, you may as well be saying, and just as logically, that the papers printing those cartoons is causing you harm. I think we'd both agree that they don't.

It's free speech. If you ever walk past a KKK demonstration you'll see that exact thing. And no one is able to incite a riot. People ignore them. They walk past.

And you have every right to threaten someone else's safety: so long as you are non-specific and don't actually carry out your threat.

And it's the crowd that breaks your bones, not the words. The justification you're using is the same that was used in Europe to censor plays and operas in the 17th and 18th Centuries.

Would you agree there is a difference to printing some offensive cartoons and burning a building?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2006/02/04/wcart04a.jpg

(This is from the March in London.)

That's awesome. I'm often amazed at just how delicate Western sensibilities are. So easily offended by a sign. Man ... ya'll should boycott.

Don't hold your breath. The Bush admin. has come down on the side of the muslim world on this. Not that we should be suprised. They have been looking for a good excuse to limit free speech for some time now.

"Anti-Muslim images are as unacceptable as anti-Semitic images, as anti-Christian images or any other religious belief," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1577286

And the US media has largely followed suit.
No they have not. That's ridiculous. I'm about as anti-Bush as you can get, but that's a stupid statement. What the Administration said, basically, was the same as what every European gov't. said.

"While we don't like the cartoons, we believe that a newspaper has the right to publish them."

That's awesome. I'm often amazed at just how delicate Western sensibilities are. So easily offended by a sign. Man ... ya'll should boycott.

The Muslim Council of Britain or something like that wanted a boycott against the Extremists.

No they have not. That's ridiculous. I'm about as anti-Bush as you can get, but that's a stupid statement. What the Administration said, basically, was the same as what every European gov't. said.

"While we don't like the cartoons, we believe that a newspaper has the right to publish them."

Political Correctness in the US! theres no chance stopping it now!

In some towns and Citys we had to call Christmas decerations the "Winter Lights" so that we were not offending other religions. Thank you PC Brigade!

Muslims should have shown restraint and applied pressure to the Governments to sort out the problems, rather than attacking Embassies.
Do you realise that the one thing that the government could do about this was to abolish free speech and start censoring newspapers? Do you think that that is a reasonable solution?

Jeez, and I thought that America, of all countries would be on the side of Free Speech. Hell our 1st admendment is based on that.
free speech comes second to common sense. why do something just because it's legal? you're a fool.

however, i do feel muslims are way overboard on this. look, everyone criticizes christians (which i am not) when they say something offensive or do something wrong. but you can still say, hey, i respect your religion. but when people here are criticising islam everyone says "oh, you're close minded" or "oh, you're not respecting their religion." NO. stop setting up double standards.

This may sound a little daffy, but I’m going to try to put things in perspective. Here is a little "off the top of my head" scenario.

You live on Street A
Jim lives on Street B

Jim is always saying how he is going to kick someone’s ass. One day, Jim attacks and kills someone because they disagree. Jim gets off scott free because the rest of the neighborhood doesn’t want to offend Jim. These types of events continue for some time, with Jim always being forgiven.

One day, you innocently say something about Jim. You don’t threaten Jim or his way of life. You don’t attack Jim or his family. You make a harmless comment. The next day your neighbor tells you that Jim took offense, and said he was going to kill you. Now, based off of Jims history of violence, would you:

A - Wait for Jim to come and kill you.
B - Try to talk it out with Jim (who is notoriously hard headed).
C - Believe that Jim is full of it, and go about your business.
D - Find Jim and deal with him before he can deal with you.

Option D doesn’t necessarily mean killing Jim, but doing what it takes to keep him from killing you.

Naturally people are going to say different things here. I, however, would have to pick option D. The reasoning behind my choice is simple. I look at Jims past and see that he has followed through on threats like this before. I examine human nature and determine that Jim and I are too different to be able to relate. I realize that I can not go the rest of my life wondering when Jim will act on this. Finally, I realize that Jim needs to be taken out of the neighborhood for the safety of not only myself, but everyone ("The Needs of the many....."). Don’t get me wrong, I would love to try and talk things over with Jim, but others have tried and failed.

In a perfect neighborhood Jim and I could sit down and talk out our differences, but this neighborhood is far from perfect, and the consequences are real. Jim has killed people before. Jim’s beliefs orbit around violence and hurting those who are different. Jim isn’t your father’s enemy, or your grandfather’s enemy. Jim is your enemy, and you have to deal with him now.

Anywho, this is just a scenario to bring world events closer to home. Please don’t flame, as I am not saying my way is write and yours is wrong. Actually, I am very interested to hear how others would deal with "Jim". This being a hypothetical scenario, there is no write or wrong answer.

I wonder what the Christian reaction will be to the movie that's coming out on the sixth of June, 'The Beast'. Basically it claims that Jesus never existed.

I suspect a few extremists will get quite violent there too.Actually, at least here in the US. I know exactly what their reaction will be. It will be the same as it was when The Last Temptation of Christ came out. It will be the same as when NBC made the show The Book Of Daniel this season. It will be the sane as when they heard Brittney Spears was going to be in an episode of Will and Grace this season that reportedly pokes fun at Christian fundamentalism. They will hold a few signs out in front of the studio for a few days. None of the signs will threaten to cut off anyone's head or butcher them or blow up a city. They will threaten to boycott the movie. Of course, none of them would have gone to see it anyway and in a few years, when it shows up on HBO, they will watch it to see what the hubbub was all about.

It's amazing to me to see how all you PC slaves just can't seem to admit that there's an overwhelming violence and support for violence in the Muslim community. It's virulent and pervasive. Yeah, most Muslim's are not the kind of people that will strap on a bomb and blow up a shopping mall. On the other hand, a cursory perusal of modern Muslim culture shows that most of them have no problem supporting and often convey hero status to Muslims that DO strap on bombs and blow up malls. All you have to do is take a peek at what television shows, comic books, newspapers, magazines, etc... are the most popular in the Muslim world. Children in places like Saudi Arabia run around with T-shirts with the picture of their favorite terrorist. They argue about who is the best terrorist the same way we used to argue about wether King Kong could kick Godzilla's ass.

Europe is going to see a lot more violence in the coming years as secular democracy and the respect for individualism and civil rights clashes with Muslim theocratic values. I hope strong people with respect for individual rights regarding speech, the press and freedom of religion are up to the task of defending them. I am confident that Europeans, the place where many of these values were born and nurtured, will be. Many Muslims need to learn that, if they want to live in a free society where they are aloud to express themsleves, they need to respect other people's rights.

As an afterthought, it still amazes me that when a Christian organization threatens a boycott or does a book burning or tries to get "Intelligent Design" taught in Science class it's okay to pilory them. I hear loud criticism all the time when Christians try to get censorship laws passed. I am one of those that do criticize them, in fact. But for some reason when Muslims do it we still hear whines about "respecting their religion."

Face it Muslims are sick fuckers and people who look to a GOD are basically children hoping to get off this earth to a better place. I think a collective mass suicide should be held of all religions and neo nazis.

I thank you.

Oh and People who think the Galactica 2003 is actually adult should follow suit.

Rich

Political Correctness in the US! theres no chance stopping it now!

In some towns and Citys we had to call Christmas decerations the "Winter Lights" so that we were not offending other religions. Thank you PC Brigade!
I know. It's ridiculous. But no one was going to come kill your children if you called them Christmas lights.

Face it Muslims are sick fuckers and people who look to a GOD are basically children hoping to get off this earth to a better place. I think a collective mass suicide should be held of all religions and neo nazis.

so, you're gonna commit suicide? keep the trash you speak out of this forum.

I'm starting to re-examine my support for Islam. I'll have to ask some Muslims at school what they think. Islam sort of took Medieval life and made it into a religion.

That's awesome. I'm often amazed at just how delicate Western sensibilities are. So easily offended by a sign. Man ... ya'll should boycott.

Oh and I am sure you would be all so quiet if they were Europeans with signs saying kill all muslims. Kick them back to where they belong.

What causes more prejudice?

These cartoons or a suicide bomber going into a wedding in Amman?

Well Europe it looks like this is your war now as much as it is ours. Good to be back together.

The Islamic people are free to disagree with the cartoon, and to boycott the newspaper, or the government.

However, they are not free to threaten people, or an entire city, or burn down government property.


Why not? I'm free to threaten you.

It might not be legal in the US, but I can still do it.

Well Europe it looks like this is your war now as much as it is ours. Good to be back together.

Sorry, we still disagree with torturing random people.

Yea, but I doubt Christians would be holding up a sign saying "Death to all those who make fun of Jesus" , nor would they go out and burn down an governmental building.

Nope... they would likely just put a burning cross in their backyard instead.

Muslims have very strict views on images of the prophets (including Jesus) or God being displayed.... the cartoons were crass and their inclusion ill considered.

I'm not condoning killing anybody for it... but I won't say it's no big deal either.

Why not? I'm free to threaten you.

It might not be legal in the US, but I can still do it.

That makes no sense.

It's amazing to me to see how all you PC slaves just can't seem to admit that there's an overwhelming violence and support for violence in the Muslim community. It's virulent and pervasive. Yeah, most Muslim's are not the kind of people that will strap on a bomb and blow up a shopping mall. On the other hand, a cursory perusal of modern Muslim culture shows that most of them have no problem supporting and often convey hero status to Muslims that DO strap on bombs and blow up malls. All you have to do is take a peek at what television shows, comic books, newspapers, magazines, etc... are the most popular in the Muslim world. Children in places like Saudi Arabia run around with T-shirts with the picture of their favorite terrorist. They argue about who is the best terrorist the same way we used to argue about wether King Kong could kick Godzilla's ass.



If you happened to be born a muslim, you probably would have grown up with the same T-shirts. Don't forget that people in the Muslim world are still people like you and me. They aren't evil. They have simply grown up looking at the world in a different way. And they are quite upset about the being ridiculed. No one likes being treated with a lack of respect. And their way of dealing with it is different from ours. Sure, we can point out their inconsistencies. They seem overly concerned about a stupid cartoon slight, and yet not concerned enough about killing people. But that is their culture, where honour is more important than life.

One must remember that this current clash is a clash between cultures. Never forget that these people are not bad or evil. They are different.

Of course, I'm not suggesting that we just let them have their own way. If they come over with guns to kill my family, I'll be getting mine guns ready. But I will still try to respect them and their culture.

It's amazing to me to see how all you PC slaves just can't seem to admit that there's an overwhelming violence and support for violence in the Muslim community. It's virulent and pervasive. Yeah, most Muslim's are not the kind of people that will strap on a bomb and blow up a shopping mall. On the other hand, a cursory perusal of modern Muslim culture shows that most of them have no problem supporting and often convey hero status to Muslims that DO strap on bombs and blow up malls. All you have to do is take a peek at what television shows, comic books, newspapers, magazines, etc... are the most popular in the Muslim world. Children in places like Saudi Arabia run around with T-shirts with the picture of their favorite terrorist. They argue about who is the best terrorist the same way we used to argue about wether King Kong could kick Godzilla's ass.



So is this information from an academic study of middle-eastern culture, or firsthand experience?

That makes no sense.

It makes plenty of sense. I can do whatever I want, I'm just not supposed to.

I couldn't help but laugh at a few of those signs. I have to find the nearest Islamic protest and stand there with a sign that says "Muhommad is my bishi".

The world is in desperate need of a sense of humor.

Face it Muslims are sick fuckers and people who look to a GOD are basically children hoping to get off this earth to a better place. I think a collective mass suicide should be held of all religions and neo nazis.

The sad thing is that you probably don't even realise the irony of what you just typed.

I pity you.

They're just proving that every single one of the cartoons (like the one with the bomb turban) is absolutely true
That's not the case, but the particular Muslims holding the "Slay those who insult Islam" are just perpetuating the stereotypes of them as terrorists.

There already is a large Muslim expatriot population in Europe. Most of those do get exposed to the liberal attitudes held there. Undoubtedly some of them will hate it, and I'm afraid there is little we can do about that.

But those who get used to it, the second generation and third generation, they will be a whole new generation of Muslims, with money, education and European attitudes. And it is possible that those Muslims will shape the direction Islam is taking as a whole.
This really should be true, but in many places, 2nd generation Muslim immigrants have faced difficulty without help and have been allowed to become insular and angry. As the riots in France demonstrated.

I don't condone the violence of the extremists but I also don't condone inflaming the situation by continuing to post cartoons that denigrate their religion. I think that anyone that wants to inflame the situation is a warmonger.
The whole thing is an ugly mess, but it is important that we respect freedom of speech. We shouldn't back down in our defense of that freedom because of violent threats.

Fundamentalist Muslims (I distinguish them from the moderates, such as the Muslim Council of Britain) are throwing a tantrum. I think it would be unwise to let them win.

You want them to be tolerant but you don't think that we, and I use that word loosely, should be more understanding?
I agree that we should be more understanding. I don't like the cartoon and agree that it was tasteless (it wasn't even clever or funny) but I also don't think that people should be fired over it, boycotted over it, banned for it, and I certainly don't think that it merits violence of any kind.

Such an intolerant remark. Why should Muslims tolerate the same things that Christians tolerate? It is quite obvious that the people of Islam have far more reverence for Allah than so called Christians do for their God.
Muslims should tolerate the same things that Christians tolerate because I think all religions should be held to the same standard, legally. It is of no relevance that Muslims are more religious than Christians. I'm not Muslim or Christian: I refuse to be held to their standards.

I wonder what the Christian reaction will be to the movie that's coming out on the sixth of June, 'The Beast'. Basically it claims that Jesus never existed.

I suspect a few extremists will get quite violent there too.
Are you expecting me to be any more tolerant of violent Christians than of violent Muslims?

I would like to know why they blame the whole of Europe when Britain (and I'm now sure many others) have yet to publish the Cartoons:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2006/02/04/wcart04a.jpg

(This is from the March in London.)
They didn't think it at all mistaken to blame an unrelated dairy company, and the Danish government for the cartoons, so Europe isn't much of a leap after that.

That's awesome. I'm often amazed at just how delicate Western sensibilities are. So easily offended by a sign. Man ... ya'll should boycott.
Yet that protestor - despite openly supporting the man who has caused the deaths of over 3,000 people in western coutries in the past 5 years - was not met with reactionary violence or even government censorship. Yes, we're definitely just as bad. :rolleyes:

Well Europe it looks like this is your war now as much as it is ours. Good to be back together.
Even if you want to take 9/11 as the start of this "war", surely when several European nations sent troops to Afghanistan, it was our war as much as yours? How about 11th March 2004?

Well Europe it looks like this is your war now as much as it is ours. Good to be back together.

It isn't my war... it never will be... and I don't suppose you are anywhere near the shooting, so it isn't yours either.

It really is quite enlightening to hear the case for "cultural and religious respect" preached to me by groups and nations that repeatedly refuse to show it towards others. Anti-semitism is rife throughout the Arab world, women are treated as second class citizens, presses throughout the Middle East repeatedly print insidious slander about "infidels", western flag burning is rife (incidentally I feel the burning of a nations flag is just as offensive as any cartoon) and finally lets point out the fact that the recently elected Hamas plans on introducing something that equates to "an unbeliever tax". Where is the Muslim anger regarding this? Where is their priggish defence of 'the right not to be offended' when it is Muslims who are causing the offence?

If I were a Muslim, I would be more offended by footage of Iraqi terrorists beheading their victims or the frenzy of bomb attacks throughout the Middle East all committed in the name of Allah than I would be about a silly cartoon. If Muslims are concerned that Islam is being accused of barbarism and ignorance then perhaps they ought not overreacting in a manner that is barbaric and ignorant. If Muslims are concerned that Islam is being cast as a violent religion then perhaps they ought not respond to the depictions with violence and threats of violence.

Virtually every world religion has been mocked or caricatured at some point or another, and yes, occasionally, the response oversteps the boundaries of what is acceptable but in this instance the extremity and popularity of the reaction is so utterly beyond comparison that to even talk about the Christian response to the Jerry Springer opera in the same sentence is utterly absurd.

The fact that Islamic anger towards the cartoon is still even the centre of this story is something that I find incredulous, what about British anger toward the fact that 5-700 Muslims were permitted to march around London praising the fantastic four and threatening repeats of July the 7th, what about Danish anger that its embassy has been burned down and had fatwahs issues against some of its citizens, what about the outrage of western society in general that the sacrosanct value of freedom or speech is under attack.

Yet at the same time I read, see and hear things everyday that I find offensive – but that’s tough shit, being offended from time to time is the price of living in a free society and blasphemy is the price of living in a secular one. Whether or not the basis of my offence is racial, cultural or religious is irrelevant, as is whether or not the offence is widespread. And to be honest, I think the cartoons were stupid and without purpose, yet what they have come to symbolise is not – that no matter how ignorant and offensive what a person says is, they damn well have the right to say it.

Are you expecting me to be any more tolerant of violent Christians than of violent Muslims?

Of course not. I was merely pointing out that Islamic extremists don't have a monopoly on violence.

So is this information from an academic study of middle-eastern culture, or firsthand experience?Jesus, where have you been? Do you ever watch TV, I mean other than network news? Do you read newspapers? Watch documentaries? Read books? What I wrote in that paragraph isn't even controversial. Its widely ackowledged that schools in Muslim countries teach violent anti-westernism. You can just do a Google search and find video from TV stations in Saudi Arabia that preach world-wide Islamic revolution. I once saw a clip from a widely-watched Saudi TV show that had a little kid, couldn't have been older than twelve, standing with his finger pointed in the air and talking about how blood was going to flow in the streets of Spain during a documentary on HBO.


I hope you're not seriously saying that you were unaware of the extreme hatred for western culture displayed daily in the Muslim world.

On another note, here's a funny cartoon! :)

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-11/892321/11391570560592dt.gif

Political Correctness in the US! theres no chance stopping it now!

In some towns and Citys we had to call Christmas decerations the "Winter Lights" so that we were not offending other religions. Thank you PC Brigade!
You know, I had the opposite experience. In my home town, we've always had "Roman lights," because the tradition of putting lights on evergreens and around one's home is drawn from a Roman festival tradition. A couple of years back there was a troop of Christians who pitched a fit about how the lights should be called "Christmas" lights, even though "Christmas" lights predate the entire Christian religion (not to mention predating modern "Christmas" by well over a thousand years).

Of course, I find the whole thing very silly. The celebration of Saturnalia (from which the whole lighting concept is drawn) was every bit as goofy as the celebration of the birth of some demigod two thousand years ago. I don't understand how anybody can get this upset over something so trivial when there are actual problems to worry about.

Which ties right back into the topic. How can these people be so pathetically upset over a CARTOON, when there are children dying of hunger? How can they muster up so very much anger over printed ink, when there are men and women dying of preventable diseases all over the world? How the hell do they get off wasting so much time and so many resources on a demonstration of their own selfishness, when there are so many other ways that this energy should be spent?

Of course, I'm not suggesting that we just let them have their own way. If they come over with guns to kill my family, I'll be getting mine guns ready. But I will still try to respect them and their culture.Well, better get your guns ready, then.


http://home.planet.nl/~timm6065/muslims2.jpg

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg....1365134527.jpg

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg....ope_llp125.jpg

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg....lt-384x254.jpg

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg....oons_media.jpg

It isn't my war... it never will be... and I don't suppose you are anywhere near the shooting, so it isn't yours either.Yes it is. You just don't know it yet.

You will.

It really is quite enlightening to hear the case for "cultural and religious respect" preached to me by groups and nations that repeatedly refuse to show it towards others. Anti-semitism is rife throughout the Arab world, women are treated as second class citizens, presses throughout the Middle East repeatedly print insidious slander about "infidels", western flag burning is rife (incidentally I feel the burning of a nations flag is just as offensive as any cartoon) and finally lets point out the fact that the recently elected Hamas plans on introducing something that equates to "an unbeliever tax". Where is the Muslim anger regarding this? Where is their priggish defence of 'the right not to be offended' when it is Muslims who are causing the offence?

If I were a Muslim, I would be more offended by footage of Iraqi terrorists beheading their victims or the frenzy of bomb attacks throughout the Middle East all committed in the name of Allah than I would be about a silly cartoon. If Muslims are concerned that Islam is being accused of barbarism and ignorance then perhaps they ought not overreacting in a manner that is barbaric and ignorant. If Muslims are concerned that Islam is being cast as a violent religion then perhaps they ought not respond to the depictions with violence and threats of violence.

Virtually every world religion has been mocked or caricatured at some point or another, and yes, occasionally, the response oversteps the boundaries of what is acceptable but in this instance the extremity and popularity of the reaction is so utterly beyond comparison that to even talk about the Christian response to the Jerry Springer opera in the same sentence is utterly absurd.

The fact that Islamic anger towards the cartoon is still even the centre of this story is something that I find incredulous, what about British anger toward the fact that 5-700 Muslims were permitted to march around London praising the fantastic four and threatening repeats of July the 7th, what about Danish anger that its embassy has been burned down and had fatwahs issues against some of its citizens, what about the outrage of western society in general that the sacrosanct value of freedom or speech is under attack.

Yet at the same time I read, see and hear things everyday that I find offensive – but that’s tough shit, being offended from time to time is the price of living in a free society and blasphemy is the price of living in a secular one. Whether or not the basis of my offence is racial, cultural or religious is irrelevant, as is whether or not the offence is widespread. And to be honest, I think the cartoons were stupid and without purpose, yet what they have come to symbolise is not – that no matter how ignorant and offensive what a person says is, they damn well have the right to say it.
I usually don't post hump, but I couldn't have said this better myself. Bravo.

Yes it is. You just don't know it yet.

You will.
Frankly, I'm scared of anybody who needs a God to tell them not to commit murder. I'm scared of anybody who needs to be bribed with Heaven or threatened with Hell before they will behave themselves. I'm scared of anybody who thinks that their ideology is more important than my human rights.

In America, there are a whole lot more people calling themselves "Christian" who fit into this spooky profile. Muslims aren't the ones going on the 700 Club and calling for murder. Muslims aren't the ones trying to take away my civil rights. Muslims aren't the ones trying to force me to practice their religious traditions, or trying to take my tax dollars to support their superstitions. Until you can stop the evangelists from advocating murder in the public forum, you're going to have a damn hard time convincing me that it's Muslims I've got to worry about.

It's amazing to me to see how all you PC slaves just can't seem to admit that there's an overwhelming violence and support for violence in the Muslim community. It's virulent and pervasive. Yeah, most Muslim's are not the kind of people that will strap on a bomb and blow up a shopping mall. On the other hand, a cursory perusal of modern Muslim culture shows that most of them have no problem supporting and often convey hero status to Muslims that DO strap on bombs and blow up malls. All you have to do is take a peek at what television shows, comic books, newspapers, magazines, etc... are the most popular in the Muslim world. Children in places like Saudi Arabia run around with T-shirts with the picture of their favorite terrorist. They argue about who is the best terrorist the same way we used to argue about wether King Kong could kick Godzilla's ass.



The same was also true of catholic children in Northern Ireland during the troubles.

The whole NI thing was about a community that didn't feel that they were accorded the same rights as others in the same country (which was true). However a great many Americans thought it was okay to blow up shopping malls, shoot soldiers, policemen.... and to protest the indignity for those caught being held as political prisoners.

Apparently as long as you are a Muslim it's okay though.

Frankly, I'm scared of anybody who needs a God to tell them not to commit murder. I'm scared of anybody who needs to be bribed with Heaven or threatened with Hell before they will behave themselves. I'm scared of anybody who thinks that their ideology is more important than my human rights.

In America, there are a whole lot more people calling themselves "Christian" who fit into this spooky profile. Muslims aren't the ones going on the 700 Club and calling for murder. Muslims aren't the ones trying to take away my civil rights. Muslims aren't the ones trying to force me to practice their religious traditions, or trying to take my tax dollars to support their superstitions. Until you can stop the evangelists from advocating murder in the public forum, you're going to have a damn hard time convincing me that it's Muslims I've got to worry about.

Damn right!

Damn right!
Hell, I've never ONCE been harassed by a Muslim about how I'm going to hell for not agreeing with them. But I've had a Christian describe to me, in vivid detail, how my flesh will be boiled off my bones because I refuse Jesus. In fact, pretty much all the people who are telling me about the dangers of Teh Muzlum are also the people telling me about the boiling of my sinful flesh.

Even if we were to accept (for the sake of argument) that all Teh Muzlums are all crazy, I still tend to prioritize which crazies I worry about. Islam isn't trying to overthrow science in American public schools. Islam isn't suggesting there is a "war" on their religion just because Macy's says "Happy Holidays." Whatever Islam may be up to, it's gonna have to get a lot more wacko before it can even come close to competing with our home-grown religious nuts. For now, Islam can take a freaking number and get in line.

Frankly, I'm scared of anybody who needs a God to tell them not to commit murder. I'm scared of anybody who needs to be bribed with Heaven or threatened with Hell before they will behave themselves. I'm scared of anybody who thinks that their ideology is more important than my human rights.

In America, there are a whole lot more people calling themselves "Christian" who fit into this spooky profile. Muslims aren't the ones going on the 700 Club and calling for murder. Muslims aren't the ones trying to take away my civil rights. Muslims aren't the ones trying to force me to practice their religious traditions, or trying to take my tax dollars to support their superstitions. Until you can stop the evangelists from advocating murder in the public forum, you're going to have a damn hard time convincing me that it's Muslims I've got to worry about.
I'm an atheist and happen to agree with everything you said until you got to all the bullshit about Muslims. Actually, in much of the world Muslims ARE the ones trying to take away civil rights. Muslims ARE the ones advocating murder. Muslims ARE the ones taking tax dollars and using them to support their superstitions.

Pat robertson aside, I think you'd have a hard time showing me that there is widespread support for violence in Christian America against citizens for printing cartoons. I've lived here my whole life and spend a great deal of time keeping myself informed about what's going on in my country and my world and I don't think I have ever one time seen a Christian holding a sign that said something like, "anyone who ridicules Christ should die from choking on their own blood."

Hide your head all you want. If you don't think there's a fundamental difference between how Christians...

in fact...
scratch that...

If you don't think there's a fundamental difference between how just about every single other large, organized religion shows their displeasure and how Muslims do it then you are just blinded by your political correctness.

Bhuddists showed their opposition to the Vietnam war with hunger strikes and sometimes suicide. Hindus showed their opposition to Brittish rule in India with sit ins and by blocking roads to stall commerce. The ANC showed its opposition to Aprtheid with protests and hunger strikes. The FMLN fought its war of revolution in El Salvador with strikes against military installations.

Muslims send 13 year old boys with bombs strapped to their chests to bus stops waiting to pick up children for school. They blow up wedding parties at hotels. They blow themselves up on buses. When they are done they are called heros and martyrs.

They are not poorer than black people in South Africa were during Apartheid. They are not less empowered than Indian people were during Brittish colonialism. There is just a fundamental difference in Muslim culture that allows, even celebrates death and violence that doesnt' exist in most other cultures.

I'm an atheist and happen to agree with everything you said until you got to all the bullshit about Muslims. Actually, in much of the world Muslims ARE the ones trying to take away civil rights. Muslims ARE the ones advocating murder. Muslims ARE the ones taking tax dollars and using them to support their superstitions.

Show me, please.

Pat robertson aside, I think you'd have a hard time showing me that there is widespread support for violence in Christian America against citizens for printing cartoons.

I think you will have a hard time showing that there is widespread support for violence in Muslim America against citizens for printing cartoons. I think you could find some very loud wackos who happen to be Muslim, but I can find you a hundred more wackos who happen to be Christian. That's the beauty of demographics, baby!


I've lived here my whole life and spend a great deal of time keeping myself informed about what's going on in my country and my world and I don't think I have ever one time seen a Christian holding a sign that said something like, "anyone who ridicules Christ should die from choking on their own blood."

You aren't getting out enough. We've got many religious wackos, of many different flavors.


Hide your head all you want. If you don't think there's a fundamental difference between how Christians...

in fact...
scratch that...

If you don't think there's a fundamental difference between how just about every single other large, organized religion shows their displeasure and how Muslims do it then you are just blinded by your political correctness.

Bhuddists showed their opposition to the Vietnam war with hunger strikes and sometimes suicide. Hindus showed their opposition to Brittish rule in India with sit ins and by blocking roads to stall commerce. The ANC showed its opposition to Aprtheid with protests and hunger strikes. The FMLN fought its war of revolution in El Salvador with strikes against military installations.

Muslims send 13 year old boys with bombs strapped to their chests to bus stops waiting to pick up children for school. They blow up wedding parties at hotels. They blow themselves up on buses. When they are done they are called heros and martyrs.

They are not poorer than black people in South Africa were during Apartheid. They are not less empowered than Indian people were during Brittish colonialism. There is just a fundamental difference in Muslim culture that allows, even celebrates death and violence that doesnt' exist in most other cultures.
You're right in one sense: I don't think Muslims are any more crazy or dangerous than any other superstitious folk are. I view all superstition as equally pestilential.

Oh, one other thing. I'm tired of people using history to justify the present. just because there was such a thing as the Spanish inquisition 400 years ago does not mean its okay to kill people for drawing a cartoon now.

I think what the topic starter doesnt understand is that in Islam, we hold our prohpet with the utmost respect. To say his name (in reference to him) in vain, or to insult him is great sin. I'm sure a Christian, Hindu, Budhist, Jew/etc. could agree on this. Is it not a commandment to not take the lords name in vain?

In Islam our religion is no joke and is taken seriously. So when you insult the religion you make A LOT of people really angree. If a bunch of muslim crazies decided to make cartoons making fun of/insulting Jesus and the cross and what not, I bet you a hell of a lot of people would be pretty pissed. Maybe not so much as to stage mass protests but a few radicals would propose the anihilation of mosques or go hunting down mulsims or some other retarded stuff.

P.S.
Although I think it maybe the feeling of division from the rest of Christian (i.e. majority of other citizens) society which may be a big reason for protests. -- IMO

Show me, please.
Okay. Go to page one of this thread and click the links.

I think you will have a hard time showing that there is widespread support for violence in Muslim America against citizens for printing cartoons. I think you could find some very loud wackos who happen to be Muslim, but I can find you a hundred more wackos who happen to be Christian. That's the beauty of demographics, baby!I agree. In AMERICA there aren't many.


You aren't getting out enough. We've got many religious wackos, of many different flavors.Yeah, but you can't go to a grade school here and see hundreds of children riunning around with there faces on shirts extolling their virtues. Religious wackos here tend to be laughed at until they do something violent after which they tend to be put in prison for the rest of their lives.


You're right in one sense: I don't think Muslims are any more crazy or dangerous than any other superstitious folk are. I view all superstition as equally pestilential.I guess you need to reread that. I said that they WERE more crazy.

1. No. They are "somehow" wrong because their first response to anything is violence.
I have read many of your posts here, especially on political matters, where you have suggested, implied or threatened violence as a reaction to something, or someone that you despise, hate, or loath.

2. No. But ANY sense of humor is better than NO sense of humor!
Are you suggesting that Islamic people are incapable of laughter?

Additionally to the post I made on page 13 (that nobody responded to...) I don't think the Muslims are making all these threats directly in response to the cartoon itself, more that they probably already had these feelings toward non-Muslims, and were waiting for "proof" that people thought that way about Muslims. I think they already had underlying feelings and I don't think this is a response solely to the cartoon, but public opinion it reflects.
I think that's probably true. You just ahve to look at the statements saying things like, 'this is it, this is the start of the Muslim Holocaust we've been predicting'. Many do seem to see it as part of a wider conspiracy almost against all Muslims in the western world.

Many do seem to see it as part of a wider conspiracy almost against all Muslims in the western world.
Many see it the other way too. It's all stupid, and no amount of debating can create a result that says otherwise.

I think that's probably true. You just ahve to look at the statements saying things like, 'this is it, this is the start of the Muslim Holocaust we've been predicting'. Many do seem to see it as part of a wider conspiracy almost against all Muslims in the western world.

Theres something Iv been wondering since people started using the phrase 'Muslim Holocaust.' In that scenario are the Muslims the Jews or the Nazis?

I think what the topic starter doesnt understand is that in Islam, we hold our prohpet with the utmost respect. To say his name (in reference to him) in vain, or to insult him is great sin. I'm sure a Christian, Hindu, Budhist, Jew/etc. could agree on this. Is it not a commandment to not take the lords name in vain?

In Islam our religion is no joke and is taken seriously. So when you insult the religion you make A LOT of people really angree. If a bunch of muslim crazies decided to make cartoons making fun of/insulting Jesus and the cross and what not, I bet you a hell of a lot of people would be pretty pissed. Maybe not so much as to stage mass protests but a few radicals would propose the anihilation of mosques or go hunting down mulsims or some other retarded stuff.

P.S.
Although I think it maybe the feeling of division from the rest of Christian (i.e. majority of other citizens) society which may be a big reason for protests. -- IMO

However one can hardly utilise an anchronistic commandment as legislation within an essentially secular administration. not justify modern violence with archaic, anachronistic and at times apocryphal commandements designed for a two millenia previously, can one?

I rather belive that we do not lambast the gravity with which you take your indoctrinated fallacy, more the reaction of those who are offended, yet assert their right to offend and kill, who torch, yet deplore the "imperialist infidel" for doing so, and who profligate copious anti-western and christian propaganda, yet fail to accept the right of the free press to do so i response.

What everybody seems to be neglecting is the fact that only a small percentage of Muslims are reacting with violence. Millions more are not.

There is nothing wrong with peaceful protests and mass demonstrations. I support them.

In my opinion, the cartonist is dispicable and deserves a sound beating. But I would not support any legeslation or judicial punishment against him.

This statement suggests that you are just a warmonger and prefer that the violence escalates?

Or that he wishes to see freedom of speech continued to be championed


Because they take their religion far more seriously than you do, they are somehow wrong?

If they take their religion seriously, they should behave as it demands. I doubt very much Islam justifies this kind of behaviour. Does it?


Did you support the invasion of Iraq? Do you want to westernize the people of Islam?

How does any of your comments demonstrate any kind of tolerance?

Its quite simple. Its tollerance of anothers opinion. The Danish had the rights within the law to publish those cartoons. Why should a non Muslim nation be subject to Islamic law?

In my opinion, the cartonist is dispicable and deserves a sound beating. But I would not support any legeslation or judicial punishment against him.

We must recognise that there is a significent diffrence between beleieving an action is improper or inapropriate, and enacting legislation against it.

I think what the topic starter doesnt understand is that in Islam, we hold our prohpet with the utmost respect. To say his name (in reference to him) in vain, or to insult him is great sin. I'm sure a Christian, Hindu, Budhist, Jew/etc. could agree on this. Is it not a commandment to not take the lords name in vain?

In Islam our religion is no joke and is taken seriously. So when you insult the religion you make A LOT of people really angree. If a bunch of muslim crazies decided to make cartoons making fun of/insulting Jesus and the cross and what not, I bet you a hell of a lot of people would be pretty pissed. Maybe not so much as to stage mass protests but a few radicals would propose the anihilation of mosques or go hunting down mulsims or some other retarded stuff.

P.S.
Although I think it maybe the feeling of division from the rest of Christian (i.e. majority of other citizens) society which may be a big reason for protests. -- IMO

I understand Islam. But I will say this

If you take your beliefs so seriously, then you should act in a way that they demand. I sincerely doubt that Islam allows this kind of behaviour, but I may be wrong.

If you take your beliefs so seriously, then you should act in a way that they demand. I sincerely doubt that Islam allows this kind of behaviour, but I may be wrong.
Was he at the protests shouting slogans?

In my opinion, the cartonist is dispicable and deserves a sound beating. But I would not support any legeslation or judicial punishment against him.
You'd beat the crap out of him but wouldn't allow anyone to arrest him? Isn't that... y'know... a really warped sense of justice?

We must recognise that there is a significent diffrence between beleieving an action is improper or inapropriate, and enacting legislation against it.

That's exactly what I was saying.

You'd beat the crap out of him but wouldn't allow anyone to arrest him? Isn't that... y'know... a really warped sense of justice?

I wouldn't beat the crap out of him. I just said he deserves it.

Also, there is a difference between smaking someone for being a fool, and a government saying "what you did was illegal."