NationStates Jolt Archive


A conservative's view of the Mohammed cartoon controversy

Dixie Thunder
18-02-2006, 01:23
One of my very best friends who I mistakenly thought did nothing but drink and only thought about drinking posted this to his blog. I thought it was very well written and was right on with his view of the Mohammed cartoon situation and pretty much, Islam in general.

The last point he made I thought was the best. Why should Christians/Jews/Hindus/anyone else but Muslims be subjected to the rules of the Koran? It says no where in the Bible, Torah, or other non-Muslim religious readings that one cannot depict images of Mohammed. Why should non believers have to abide by Islamic law?


Muslims are the only people who make feminists seem laid-back.

The little darlings brandish placards with typical Religion of Peace
slogans, such as: "Behead Those Who Insult Islam," "Europe, you will pay,
extermination is on the way" and "Butcher those who mock Islam." They warn
Europe of their own impending 9/11 with signs that say: "Europe: Your 9/11
will come" -- which is ironic, because they almost had me convinced the Jews
were behind the 9/11 attack.

The rioting Muslims claim they are upset because Islam prohibits any
depictions of Muhammad -- though the text is ambiguous on beheadings,
suicide bombings and flying planes into skyscrapers.

The belief that Islam forbids portrayals of Muhammad is recently acquired.
Back when Muslims created things, rather than blowing them up, they made
paintings, frescoes, miniatures and prints of Muhammad.

But apparently the Koran is like the Constitution: It's a "living document,"
capable of sprouting all-new provisions at will. Muslims ought to start
claiming the Koran also prohibits indoor plumbing, to explain their lack of
it.

Other interpretations of the Koran forbid images of humans or animals, which
makes even a child's coloring book blasphemous. That's why the Taliban blew
up those priceless Buddhist statues, bless their innocent, peace-loving
little hearts.

Largely unnoticed in this spectacle is the blinding fact that one nation is
missing from the long list of Muslim countries (by which I mean France and
England) with hundreds of crazy Muslims experiencing bipolar rage over some
cartoons: Iraq. Hey -- maybe this democracy thing does work! The barbaric
behavior of Europe's Muslims suggests that the European welfare state may
not be attracting your top-notch Muslims.

Making the rash assumption for purposes of discussion that Islam is a
religion and not a car-burning cult, even a real religion can't go bossing
around other people like this.

Catholics aren't short on rules, but they couldn't care less if
non-Catholics use birth control. Conservative Jews have no interest in
forbidding other people from mixing meat and dairy. Protestants don't make a
peep about other people eating food off one another's plates. (Just stay
away from our plates -- that's disgusting.)

But Muslims think they can issue decrees about what images can appear in
newspaper cartoons. Who do they think they are, liberals?
Keruvalia
18-02-2006, 01:25
Why should non believers have to abide by Islamic law?


They don't have to. Says so right in Qu'ran.

Your friend should go back to drinking.
Dixie Thunder
18-02-2006, 01:27
They don't have to. Says so right in Qu'ran.

Your friend should go back to drinking.
Then why is the Muslim world getting pissed off because a non-Muslim broke Islamic law?
Verdigroth
18-02-2006, 01:29
They don't have to. Says so right in Qu'ran.

Your friend should go back to drinking.

well I think on that note...end of thread
PsychoticDan
18-02-2006, 01:32
well I think on that note...end of thread
no, he's absolutely right. Islamic law says you cannot depict Mohamed. I'm not Islamic so i shoudl be able to depict him all i want.
Dixie Thunder
18-02-2006, 01:33
I don't get pissed off and burn down buildings when I see someone do something against Catholic doctrine like have an abortion, execute a prisoner on death row, or eat meat during Lent. My Catholic beliefs have no say-so over Muslims or Protestants or Jews. Jews, Muslims, and Protestants can eat all the meat they want during Lent and I don't know a Catholic who would burn down a building or start a riot over it.

Again, why should a non-Muslim give a fuck about breaking Islamic law?
Keruvalia
18-02-2006, 01:35
Then why is the Muslim world getting pissed off because a non-Muslim broke Islamic law?

The "Muslim world" isn't. A few thousand morons are. You don't see a billion and a half people running around burning flags and buildings and whatnot, do you?

No, you don't.

Therefore, it isn't the "Muslim world".
Keruvalia
18-02-2006, 01:35
I don't get pissed off and burn down buildings when I see someone do something

Neither do the vast majority of people. Some do, most don't.

End of story.
Neo Kervoskia
18-02-2006, 01:36
The "Muslim world" isn't. A few thousand morons are. You don't see a billion and a half people running around burning flags and buildings and whatnot, do you?

No, you don't.

Therefore, it isn't the "Muslim world".
I agree. If the Muslim world actually did pissed and rally, you'd have over a billion people ready to pop a cap in the cartoonist's ass.
Begoned
18-02-2006, 01:36
They warn
Europe of their own impending 9/11 with signs that say: "Europe: Your 9/11
will come" -- which is ironic, because they almost had me convinced the Jews
were behind the 9/11 attack.

I'm not saying that the Jews were behind 9/11, but in no way is the opinion that Jews were behind the attack contradictory to the slogan saying that Europe's 9/11 attack is next. 9/11 in this context means "destructive terrorist attack," regardless of who committed it.


Back when Muslims created things, rather than blowing them up

Well, now you're just stereotyping a bunch by the actions of a few. That's a grossly flawed view.

Muslims ought to start claiming the Koran also prohibits indoor plumbing, to explain their lack of it.

Ah, now he's saying that Muslims don't have indoor plumbing? Are you sure he wasn't drunk?

Hey -- maybe this democracy thing does work!

Or maybe Iraqis are too busy either fighting for their country or avoiding bloodbaths to organize a large-scale rally to protest the cartoons. I doubt that many Iraqis would feel comfortable protesting this with so many US troops around. Fear does tend to get people to obey.

Making the rash assumption for purposes of discussion that Islam is a
religion and not a car-burning cult

Really? And all this time I thought Islam was about burning cars. Muhammad was a real prophet -- he foresaw the invention of cars and started a cult around it. Again you are grossly stereotyping a religion based on fanatics.

Catholics aren't short on rules, but they couldn't care less if non-Catholics use birth control.

What about those that blew up the abortion centers? Making a rash assumption that Catholicism is a real religion and not a abortion clinic bombing cult, they shouldn't impose their views on others.

But Muslims think they can issue decrees about what images can appear in
newspaper cartoons. Who do they think they are, liberals?

I fail to see the connection. Try again.
Dixie Thunder
18-02-2006, 01:37
Neither do the vast majority of people. Some do, most don't.

End of story.

okay, i realize that not every Muslim is rioting over this. That is not the point.

The point is why should non-Muslims be subjected to Islamic Law?
Dixie Thunder
18-02-2006, 01:40
I agree. If the Muslim world actually did pissed and rally, you'd have over a billion people ready to pop a cap in the cartoonist's ass.

Well, now the Muslim world has about 1 million reasons to kill this catoonist. (And that $1 Million US, not 1 million sand dollars)
Tweedlesburg
18-02-2006, 01:42
okay, i realize that not every Muslim is rioting over this. That is not the point.

The point is why should non-Muslims be subjected to Islamic Law?
Lesse how simple we can make this...

They shouldn't. Most Muslims don't care. A few are just using it as an excuse to burn buildings, which they would do cartoons or no cartoons.
The Similized world
18-02-2006, 01:43
They don't have to. Says so right in Qu'ran.

Your friend should go back to drinking.I'm sorry but weren't you pulling out Qu'ran quotes & demanding an official apology from the newspaper just a week ago?
AIChE
18-02-2006, 01:44
One of my very best friends who I mistakenly thought did nothing but drink and only thought about drinking posted this to his blog. I thought it was very well written and was right on with his view of the Mohammed cartoon situation and pretty much, Islam in general.

The last point he made I thought was the best. Why should Christians/Jews/Hindus/anyone else but Muslims be subjected to the rules of the Koran? It says no where in the Bible, Torah, or other non-Muslim religious readings that one cannot depict images of Mohammed. Why should non believers have to abide by Islamic law?


Your friend is Ann Coulter?

Calvin and Hobbes -- and Mohammad (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucac/20060209/cm_ucac/calvinandhobbesandmuhammad;_ylt=Ak.lYlDnm0_ztSuobau25X87vTYC;_ylu=X3oDMTBjMHVqMTQ4BHNlYwN5bnN1YmNhdA--)
Dempublicents1
18-02-2006, 01:52
Your friend is Ann Coulter?

Calvin and Hobbes -- and Mohammad (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucac/20060209/cm_ucac/calvinandhobbesandmuhammad;_ylt=Ak.lYlDnm0_ztSuobau25X87vTYC;_ylu=X3oDMTBjMHVqMTQ4BHNlYwN5bnN1YmNhdA--)

Ah, nothing like a reminder of why I don't like that crazy bitch.
Skibereen
18-02-2006, 01:52
. Protestants don't make a
peep about other people eating food off one another's plates. (Just stay
away from our plates -- that's disgusting.)


What in hell does that have to do with being Protestant?

Other then that, very well written, and said.
Non-biased and to the point. Though you are generalizing quite a bit, but hey whatever.
Dixie Thunder
18-02-2006, 01:53
Your friend is Ann Coulter?

Calvin and Hobbes -- and Mohammad (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucac/20060209/cm_ucac/calvinandhobbesandmuhammad;_ylt=Ak.lYlDnm0_ztSuobau25X87vTYC;_ylu=X3oDMTBjMHVqMTQ4BHNlYwN5bnN1YmNhdA--)

Ah, Grant has been on a Ann Coulter kick lately. I should have known he copied that from her.

None the less, the point is made. Why should non-Muslims be subjected to Islamic Law?
Keruvalia
18-02-2006, 01:54
I'm sorry but weren't you pulling out Qu'ran quotes & demanding an official apology from the newspaper just a week ago?

Yes. The apology was given.

The point, though, is that if a company does something that offends you, you stop patronizing that company and you may verbally express your distaste. Freedom of Speech, Freedom to Peaceably Assemble and Protest, etc.

The cartoons offended me, so I expressed my distaste and moved on.

So what? I am well within my rights to do so.
Begoned
18-02-2006, 01:55
Why should non-Muslims be subjected to Islamic Law?

They shouldn't, and only a very fanatical minority insists that they should.
Santa Barbara
18-02-2006, 01:55
Your friend is Ann Coulter?

Calvin and Hobbes -- and Mohammad (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucac/20060209/cm_ucac/calvinandhobbesandmuhammad;_ylt=Ak.lYlDnm0_ztSuobau25X87vTYC;_ylu=X3oDMTBjMHVqMTQ4BHNlYwN5bnN1YmNhdA--)

Beat me to it!

It's funny you know, if I was an uninformed bigot who wanted to just yab about teh evil Muslims, I could think of ways to be creative and original. Why not the Ann Coulter-ites?
The Similized world
18-02-2006, 01:56
One of my very best friends who I mistakenly thought did nothing but drink and only thought about drinking posted this to his blog. I thought it was very well written and was right on with his view of the Mohammed cartoon situation and pretty much, Islam in general.

The last point he made I thought was the best. Why should Christians/Jews/Hindus/anyone else but Muslims be subjected to the rules of the Koran? It says no where in the Bible, Torah, or other non-Muslim religious readings that one cannot depict images of Mohammed. Why should non believers have to abide by Islamic law?Why am I reminded of "A boy named Sue"?
Dixie Thunder
18-02-2006, 01:57
They shouldn't, and only a very fanatical minority insists that they should.
Yeah, and right now the governments of the Muslim world cannot control that minority.
Dixie Thunder
18-02-2006, 01:57
Why am I reminded of "A boy named Sue"?

the Johnny Cash song or something else?
Keruvalia
18-02-2006, 01:58
The point is why should non-Muslims be subjected to Islamic Law?

They shouldn't, and they're not.

People are allowed to protest things, you know.

My question to you is this: Why should non-Americans be subject to American law? Maybe it's legal in Lebanon to burn a building in protest.
Begoned
18-02-2006, 02:03
Maybe it's legal in Lebanon to burn a building in protest.

Isn't an embassy the territory of its respective country and subject to its laws? The protests are fine -- the burning is not.
Dixie Thunder
18-02-2006, 02:03
They shouldn't, and they're not.

People are allowed to protest things, you know.

My question to you is this: Why should non-Americans be subject to American law? Maybe it's legal in Lebanon to burn a building in protest.

For some reason, I doubt burning a building is legal in Lebanon. And I doubt it is legal in Pakistan either.
The Similized world
18-02-2006, 02:04
the Johnny Cash song or something else?Indeed. Of course, I always suspected Ann Coulter was a guy & deeply inebriated, so I'm not really surprised.
Keruvalia
18-02-2006, 02:05
For some reason, I doubt burning a building is legal in Lebanon. And I doubt it is legal in Pakistan either.

You're probably right, but that's really not the point I was trying to make.

You're not Muslim, right? How, exactly, are you being forced to follow Islamic law? I'd dearly love to know.

Hell ... I *am* Muslim and even I'm not forced to follow Islamic law!
Rotovia-
18-02-2006, 02:05
The "Muslim world" isn't. A few thousand morons are. You don't see a billion and a half people running around burning flags and buildings and whatnot, do you?

No, you don't.

Therefore, it isn't the "Muslim world".
Zing!
CanuckHeaven
18-02-2006, 02:06
Your friend is Ann Coulter?

Calvin and Hobbes -- and Mohammad (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucac/20060209/cm_ucac/calvinandhobbesandmuhammad;_ylt=Ak.lYlDnm0_ztSuobau25X87vTYC;_ylu=X3oDMTBjMHVqMTQ4BHNlYwN5bnN1YmNhdA--)
I guess Dixie Thunder and Ann Coulter go way back? Didn't know that she had a drinking problem though. :D
Begoned
18-02-2006, 02:09
How, exactly, are you being forced to follow Islamic law?

Nobody is forced to, but a select minority are calling for the enforcement of Islamic law by ordering the killings of those who aided in the creation and spreading of the cartoons.
Skibereen
18-02-2006, 02:12
Nobody is forced to, but a select minority are calling for the enforcement of Islamic law by ordering the killings of those who aided in the creation and spreading of the cartoons.
A select few also call for taking 30% of your annual salary what's your point?
Goshda
18-02-2006, 02:12
One of my very best friends who I mistakenly thought did nothing but drink and only thought about drinking posted this to his blog. I thought it was very well written and was right on with his view of the Mohammed cartoon situation and pretty much, Islam in general.

The last point he made I thought was the best. Why should Christians/Jews/Hindus/anyone else but Muslims be subjected to the rules of the Koran? It says no where in the Bible, Torah, or other non-Muslim religious readings that one cannot depict images of Mohammed. Why should non believers have to abide by Islamic law?


Muslims are the only people who make feminists seem laid-back.

The little darlings brandish placards with typical Religion of Peace
slogans, such as: "Behead Those Who Insult Islam," "Europe, you will pay,
extermination is on the way" and "Butcher those who mock Islam." They warn
Europe of their own impending 9/11 with signs that say: "Europe: Your 9/11
will come" -- which is ironic, because they almost had me convinced the Jews
were behind the 9/11 attack.

The rioting Muslims claim they are upset because Islam prohibits any
depictions of Muhammad -- though the text is ambiguous on beheadings,
suicide bombings and flying planes into skyscrapers.

The belief that Islam forbids portrayals of Muhammad is recently acquired.
Back when Muslims created things, rather than blowing them up, they made
paintings, frescoes, miniatures and prints of Muhammad.

But apparently the Koran is like the Constitution: It's a "living document,"
capable of sprouting all-new provisions at will. Muslims ought to start
claiming the Koran also prohibits indoor plumbing, to explain their lack of
it.

Other interpretations of the Koran forbid images of humans or animals, which
makes even a child's coloring book blasphemous. That's why the Taliban blew
up those priceless Buddhist statues, bless their innocent, peace-loving
little hearts.

Largely unnoticed in this spectacle is the blinding fact that one nation is
missing from the long list of Muslim countries (by which I mean France and
England) with hundreds of crazy Muslims experiencing bipolar rage over some
cartoons: Iraq. Hey -- maybe this democracy thing does work! The barbaric
behavior of Europe's Muslims suggests that the European welfare state may
not be attracting your top-notch Muslims.

Making the rash assumption for purposes of discussion that Islam is a
religion and not a car-burning cult, even a real religion can't go bossing
around other people like this.

Catholics aren't short on rules, but they couldn't care less if
non-Catholics use birth control. Conservative Jews have no interest in
forbidding other people from mixing meat and dairy. Protestants don't make a
peep about other people eating food off one another's plates. (Just stay
away from our plates -- that's disgusting.)

But Muslims think they can issue decrees about what images can appear in
newspaper cartoons. Who do they think they are, liberals?

I my self am also a conservative and i am outraged by the steps that muslims took as the result of a cartoon. If they think that they can go out encouraging people to be violent they should br locked up in thr clinker untill they come to their senses. A lot of people say it is the minority of muslims that are extreemists but it is now spreading like a wilde fire and drastic measures are needed to stop this problem before it becomes the majority of muslims.
Keruvalia
18-02-2006, 02:12
Nobody is forced to, but a select minority are calling for the enforcement of Islamic law by ordering the killings of those who aided in the creation and spreading of the cartoons.

So since nobody is forced to, why the fuss?

The guy who called for this bounty is under arrest, so he clearly committed a crime and will be punished for it.

What's the big deal? Some putz in Pakistan gets arrested and suddenly the entire Muslim world is a dangerous powder-keg made up of miscreants and rabble rousers?

It just makes no sense. I'm betting that since this thread started, at least 50 Americans have been arrested for the exact same crime (offering money to have someone killed) and I bet ya dollars to doughnuts that they won't make the news.
Keruvalia
18-02-2006, 02:15
I my self am also a conservative and i am outraged by the steps that muslims took as the result of a cartoon.

And what, pray tell, steps did Muslims take? I, for one, excersized my right to protest. You want to take that away from me? Too bad.

If they think that they can go out encouraging people to be violent they should br locked up in thr clinker untill they come to their senses.

The Imam who offered the bounty did get arrested.

it is now spreading like a wilde fire

No ... it really isn't. Stop living in fear.
Scotiland
18-02-2006, 02:17
"But Muslims think they can issue decrees about what images can appear in newspaper cartoons. Who do they think they are, liberals?"- Ann Coulter
This is complete bullcrap. Liberals are always supporting the right of speech and press, while these conservative Muslim groups are not. I do not understand what she is getting at here.
Dixie Thunder
18-02-2006, 02:18
Nobody is forced to, but a select minority are calling for the enforcement of Islamic law by ordering the killings of those who aided in the creation and spreading of the cartoons.

Yes, I am aware of that. What is of concern to me is that the governments of these nations cannot control this minority. What is of concern is that the "religion of peace" is currently going thru the Muslim version of the Crusades and (even if it is just the fanatical minority) trying to make the world into one giant Islamic state, and there is very little resistance against Jihad from the moderate Muslims.

So an editorial cartoonist of Denmark (that has a Muslim population of 2%) must be politically correct and abide by Islamic Law or that small, fanatical minority will raise hell in their countries? Again, I would not be concerned if it weren't for those governments not being able to keep the protests from turning violent. But again, I am not a follower of the religion of peace so I guess I shouldn't understand.
Dempublicents1
18-02-2006, 02:22
Yes, I am aware of that. What is of concern to me is that the governments of these nations cannot control this minority. What is of concern is that the "religion of peace" is currently going thru the Muslim version of the Crusades and (even if it is just the fanatical minority) trying to make the world into one giant Islamic state, and there is very little resistance against Jihad from the moderate Muslims.

So an editorial cartoonist of Denmark (that has a Muslim population of 2%) must be politically correct and abide by Islamic Law or that small, fanatical minority will raise hell in their countries? Again, I would not be concerned if it weren't for those governments not being able to keep the protests from turning violent. But again, I am not a follower of the religion of peace so I guess I shouldn't understand.

Western governments aren't very good at keeping protests from becoming violent either. You get enough angry people together, eventually someone throws a punch or a rock or a shoe or something, which gets other people going, and so on. It's called "mob mentality".

Did you see the footage of L.A. after the Rodney King beating? Have you seen footage from KKK marches all over the country? Did you see the protestors get beat up at the Republican Convention a couple of years ago? These things start out peaceful, but they often don't stay that way - and it has nothing to do with the government.
Santa Barbara
18-02-2006, 02:22
"But Muslims think they can issue decrees about what images can appear in newspaper cartoons. Who do they think they are, liberals?"- Ann Coulter
This is complete bullcrap. Liberals are always supporting the right of speech and press, while these conservative Muslim groups are not. I do not understand what she is getting at here.

She's getting at nothing. She's making a poke at "liberals" in order to please the "conservative" readers. Because remember, "liberals" are bad and "conservatives" are good. In America, there are only two directions: left and right. We won't define either one, of course. Just take it for granted that if you're a "conservative," your enemy is "liberals" and vice versa, and you score points for anything bad you have to say or do against your enemy.

In Ann-Coulter-verse, 2 is the highest number that exists.
Non Aligned States
18-02-2006, 02:24
This is complete bullcrap. Liberals are always supporting the right of speech and press, while these conservative Muslim groups are not. I do not understand what she is getting at here.

That's Ann's modus operandi. If there's something bad, blame someone with a fat brush and throw in the liberals if you can as well.

Who wants to bet we'd never see the likes of Ann going to somewhere like say, oh, Pakistan to spew their rubbish?
Begoned
18-02-2006, 02:24
why the fuss?

The fuss is because of the fanaticism of a few extreme Muslims. Yes, most Muslims demonstrated against the cartoons peacefully, well within their rights, as you did. No problem. Others, however, called for the deaths of the cartoonists, a 9/11 for Europe, etc. This is an extremely disproportionate reaction, and very worrisome. The fact that even such a small number of Muslims believe that people should die for exercising their free speech and call for their deaths is troubling, not to mention ironic.
Keruvalia
18-02-2006, 02:24
What is of concern to me is that the governments of these nations cannot control this minority.

From this article (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060217/ap_on_re_mi_ea/prophet_drawings):

"Pakistan deployed thousands of security forces in major cities as crowds took to the streets."

"Police arrested 125 protesters in the eastern city of Multan for violating a ban on rallies in Punjab province, and detained 70 others in Karachi."

"Police in Punjab province were ordered to restrict the movement of all religious leaders who might address rallies and to round up religious activists "who could be any threat to law and order," a senior police official said in the provincial capital Lahore."

I think they're doing just fine at controlling this thing.

What is of concern is that the "religion of peace" is currently going thru the Muslim version of the Crusades and (even if it is just the fanatical minority) trying to make the world into one giant Islamic state,

No, it isn't. Islam is not going through anything. It's just that a few nuts have decided to make the news. Try to separate the religion from the people, otherwise you may as well claim Fred Phelps speaks for all Christians.

and there is very little resistance against Jihad from the moderate Muslims.

Actually there's a hell of a lot of resistance from conservative, moderate, and liberal Muslims.
Dixie Thunder
18-02-2006, 02:27
Western governments aren't very good at keeping protests from becoming violent either. You get enough angry people together, eventually someone throws a punch or a rock or a shoe or something, which gets other people going, and so on. It's called "mob mentality".

Did you see the footage of L.A. after the Rodney King beating? Have you seen footage from KKK marches all over the country? Did you see the protestors get beat up at the Republican Convention a couple of years ago? These things start out peaceful, but they often don't stay that way - and it has nothing to do with the government.

I understand the mob mentality. The difference is the people rioting in LA, the anti-KKK groups, and the people protesting the republican convention are not engaged in a Holy War against Western Civilization.
Keruvalia
18-02-2006, 02:30
The fuss is because of the fanaticism of a few extreme Muslims.

So?

Once again, some putz gets arrested in Pakistan for doing the exact same thing plenty of other people do every day and he's the only one the world focuses on and suddenly Islam needs reform?

Come on. That's stupid.
The Similized world
18-02-2006, 02:30
So an editorial cartoonist of Denmark (that has a Muslim population of 2%) must be politically correct and abide by Islamic Law or that small, fanatical minority will raise hell in their countries? Again, I would not be concerned if it weren't for those governments not being able to keep the protests from turning violent. But again, I am not a follower of the religion of peace so I guess I shouldn't understand.There have been no violence in Denmark. The closest thing to it, was when a bunch of Neo-Nazi's wanted to go on a Qu'ran-burning march. They were stopped by the police.

A tiny Muslim organisation in Denmark, representing some 800 Muslims & 14 Imams, went to great lenghts to have something done about the comics. They files a suit (which got rejected) against the newspaper, and demanded a police investigation (which was later called off). That's the most extreme actions Muslims have taken in Denmark - all perfectly legitimate & acceptable, and no different from what other religious groups have done in the past (meaning Christians, generally).

The group did, however, send representatives on two tours of the ME region, to gather support against the Danish newspaper. Semi-insane & rediculous as that is, it is none the less perfectly acceptable to do so. They didn't explicitly try to incite riots, threats or anything else, by the looks of it.

A Danish populist party used the "Imam Tour" to argue that all Muslims are deranged animals, and asked that their citizenships be re-examined. Their more radical members also demanded the Imams in question be deported, for "hostile actions against the State". A couple of independent, non-religious, organisations are currently looking into preventing politicians from threatning individual citizen's rights like that in the future.

Any more questions?
Greater londres
18-02-2006, 02:30
Christianity NEVER gets upset about other people violating their rules guys. That whole Life of Brian protesting thing was just imagined, I guess.

No, Christians in the US haven't reacted to anything with riots etc, but they tend to be much, much better off economically (this reads like a classic 'knife and fork' issue) with a stake in the status quo. But do we see protests, petitions, rallies, boycotts? Of course we do, it's just the same, albeit milder.
Keruvalia
18-02-2006, 02:31
I understand the mob mentality. The difference is the people rioting in LA, the anti-KKK groups, and the people protesting the republican convention are not engaged in a Holy War against Western Civilization.

Neither are Muslims.
AIChE
18-02-2006, 02:31
This is an extremely disproportionate reaction, and very worrisome. The fact that even such a small number of Muslims believe that people should die for exercising their free speech and call for their deaths is troubling, not to mention ironic.

Troubling? There always has been some bit of extremism out there. It's nothing new. Is it just troubling when some of our Christian evangelists call for the assassinations of foreign leaders?
R0cka
18-02-2006, 02:34
One of my very best friends who I mistakenly thought did nothing but drink and only thought about drinking posted this to his blog. I thought it was very well written and was right on with his view of the Mohammed cartoon situation and pretty much, Islam in general.

The last point he made I thought was the best. Why should Christians/Jews/Hindus/anyone else but Muslims be subjected to the rules of the Koran? It says no where in the Bible, Torah, or other non-Muslim religious readings that one cannot depict images of Mohammed. Why should non believers have to abide by Islamic law?


Muslims are the only people who make feminists seem laid-back.

The little darlings brandish placards with typical Religion of Peace
slogans, such as: "Behead Those Who Insult Islam," "Europe, you will pay,
extermination is on the way" and "Butcher those who mock Islam." They warn
Europe of their own impending 9/11 with signs that say: "Europe: Your 9/11
will come" -- which is ironic, because they almost had me convinced the Jews
were behind the 9/11 attack.

The rioting Muslims claim they are upset because Islam prohibits any
depictions of Muhammad -- though the text is ambiguous on beheadings,
suicide bombings and flying planes into skyscrapers.

The belief that Islam forbids portrayals of Muhammad is recently acquired.
Back when Muslims created things, rather than blowing them up, they made
paintings, frescoes, miniatures and prints of Muhammad.

But apparently the Koran is like the Constitution: It's a "living document,"
capable of sprouting all-new provisions at will. Muslims ought to start
claiming the Koran also prohibits indoor plumbing, to explain their lack of
it.

Other interpretations of the Koran forbid images of humans or animals, which
makes even a child's coloring book blasphemous. That's why the Taliban blew
up those priceless Buddhist statues, bless their innocent, peace-loving
little hearts.

Largely unnoticed in this spectacle is the blinding fact that one nation is
missing from the long list of Muslim countries (by which I mean France and
England) with hundreds of crazy Muslims experiencing bipolar rage over some
cartoons: Iraq. Hey -- maybe this democracy thing does work! The barbaric
behavior of Europe's Muslims suggests that the European welfare state may
not be attracting your top-notch Muslims.

Making the rash assumption for purposes of discussion that Islam is a
religion and not a car-burning cult, even a real religion can't go bossing
around other people like this.

Catholics aren't short on rules, but they couldn't care less if
non-Catholics use birth control. Conservative Jews have no interest in
forbidding other people from mixing meat and dairy. Protestants don't make a
peep about other people eating food off one another's plates. (Just stay
away from our plates -- that's disgusting.)

But Muslims think they can issue decrees about what images can appear in
newspaper cartoons. Who do they think they are, liberals?


This whole thing was written by Ann Coulter.

What do you mean your friend?


mattr0cka
Dempublicents1
18-02-2006, 02:36
The group did, however, send representatives on two tours of the ME region, to gather support against the Danish newspaper. Semi-insane & rediculous as that is, it is none the less perfectly acceptable to do so. They didn't explicitly try to incite riots, threats or anything else, by the looks of it.

Well, they did include extra cartoons, the origin of which is unknown (and assumed by many to be the imans themselves) which were *much* more offensive than the published cartoons - without distinguishing between them. Thus, most of those who heard from them most likely think that the extra cartoons were also published.

Does that sound like they weren't trying to incite violence?
Dempublicents1
18-02-2006, 02:37
I understand the mob mentality. The difference is the people rioting in LA, the anti-KKK groups, and the people protesting the republican convention are not engaged in a Holy War against Western Civilization.

Do you honestly think every protestor who rioted is?
R0cka
18-02-2006, 02:37
http://www.baltimorereporter.com/?p=1913

Yup see here it is, written by Ann Coulter.

Your friend lied to you.


mattr0cka
Dixie Thunder
18-02-2006, 02:38
From this article (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060217/ap_on_re_mi_ea/prophet_drawings):

"Pakistan deployed thousands of security forces in major cities as crowds took to the streets."

"Police arrested 125 protesters in the eastern city of Multan for violating a ban on rallies in Punjab province, and detained 70 others in Karachi."

"Police in Punjab province were ordered to restrict the movement of all religious leaders who might address rallies and to round up religious activists "who could be any threat to law and order," a senior police official said in the provincial capital Lahore."

I think they're doing just fine at controlling this thing.


Oh, they are? I guess we just have to agree to disagree.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060215/ts_afp/europeislammediapakistan_060215112812

And that doesn't count the nine that were just killed in Lybia today.


No, it isn't. Islam is not going through anything. It's just that a few nuts have decided to make the news. Try to separate the religion from the people, otherwise you may as well claim Fred Phelps speaks for all Christians.

So what do you call the sudden appearance of Muslim terrorism against the West since 1972? I think the Muslim world has a problem.

Actually there's a hell of a lot of resistance from conservative, moderate, and liberal Muslims.
Do you know why there is some visable resistance? Because the US and the rest of the West have big ass bombs and shit, and we're not afraid to use them.
Dixie Thunder
18-02-2006, 02:40
http://www.baltimorereporter.com/?p=1913

Yup see here it is, written by Ann Coulter.

Your friend lied to you.


mattr0cka

yeah, I got it the first time. You don't have to post twice.

If you don't believe me, here is a link to my friend's page. He did not cite Ann Coulter when he posted.
http://www.myspace.com/grantunderwood
R0cka
18-02-2006, 02:43
yeah, I got it the first time. You don't have to post twice.

If you don't believe me, here is a link to my friend's page. He did not cite Ann Coulter when he posted.
http://www.myspace.com/grantunderwood

It's okay you didn't know.

A great opinion piece either way.


mattr0cka
Aryavartha
18-02-2006, 02:51
The guy who called for this bounty is under arrest, so he clearly committed a crime and will be punished for it.

Neither has Mohammed Yousaf Qureshi, the Pakistani Imam nor have Haji Mohammed Yaqoob, the minister in an Indian state have been arrested. I doubt if they ever will be punished.

I think you are referring to Prof. Hafiz Mohd. Saeed, the chief of LeT and Jammat ud Dawa, who was arrested while trying to go to a procession/speech.

A lot of things are going on in Pakistan with some stage managed protests, some protests against the Musharraf regime and some targetted riots by one industrial group against other. Every faction there is jockeying for leverage using the protests.
Begoned
18-02-2006, 02:54
Troubling? There always has been some bit of extremism out there. It's nothing new. Is it just troubling when some of our Christian evangelists call for the assassinations of foreign leaders?

Yes, there has always been a fair bit of extremism, but nothing so major over something so minor. And yes, it is troubling when anybody calls for the assassination of another based only on their differences. However, it is more troubling when a mob of people violently support them and actually kill.

and suddenly Islam needs reform?

I never said Islam needed reform. You're putting words in my mouth. But killing people over a cartoon is getting very far-fetched. I do find this troubling, and it is worth making a fuss about, especially when a large mob of people agree with it.
Dubya 1000
18-02-2006, 02:54
The fact that this thing was written by Ann Coulter discredits the entire article. Also, what does indoor plumbing have to do with sharia law? And that partisan attack on liberals was really quite clever, if only I had wit like hers!(sarcasm is blaring).

That being said, I just thought that these protests would die out, but the protesters aren't quitting, and they haven't decreased in violence either. This leads me to the conclusion that the Muslim world has a serious problem, although I don't think it's nearly as bad as Mrs. Coulter would have us believe. Even if it's a minority. This minority is way too powerful. The protesters in Britain who were waving signs that said "Europe-prepare for your 9/11" should be deported.
Bobs Own Pipe
18-02-2006, 02:56
Your friend should go back to drinking.
I'll agree on the grounds that it's not terribly well written in any event.
Valori
18-02-2006, 03:21
I think the Muslim community has overreacted, however, I also realize that the people who are rioting and burning buildings down are extremists.

The bible says Jesus is not a sinner yet many a time I have seen comic strips where Jesus was drinking, or doing drugs, or was surrounded by harlots. Although, I realize that these comic strips or portrayls are meant to be funny, and I take them as that. not as some offensive, blasphemus, art that is attacking my religion. Granted because of how I've been raised, I'm a bit more lenient then others might be.
The Genius Masterminds
18-02-2006, 03:32
I don't get pissed off and burn down buildings when I see someone do something against Catholic doctrine like have an abortion, execute a prisoner on death row, or eat meat during Lent. My Catholic beliefs have no say-so over Muslims or Protestants or Jews. Jews, Muslims, and Protestants can eat all the meat they want during Lent and I don't know a Catholic who would burn down a building or start a riot over it.

Again, why should a non-Muslim give a fuck about breaking Islamic law?

Do you realize that the cartoon-matter wasn't only about if it was against Islam?

It was also about -

1.) Distancing the Muslim World from the West

2.) Creating more distrust, misconceptions and hate between the Muslim World and the West.

3.) Intimidates Islamic Extremists to do more than 9/11

4.) Shows the future generation a false look on Islam

5.) Will continue to disrupt Peace in the world due to further intimidations

6.) The fact that the Danish knew that it was against Islam to do so, and the fact that if they did do it, it would cause a major politico-social earthquake around the world...but what do they do? Continue with their desires.

--

It was not only about "You offended my religion" (although that does account for a lot), but it was also about political and social stability.

Everyone learns something new everyday ;)
Teh_pantless_hero
18-02-2006, 03:54
Let's post pictures of anti-abortion rallies.
Keruvalia
18-02-2006, 04:07
Oh, they are? I guess we just have to agree to disagree.

Then you must also concede that in the light of the Watts riots and the South Central riots, the United States is equally incapable.


So what do you call the sudden appearance of Muslim terrorism against the West since 1972? I think the Muslim world has a problem.

Extremist reaction + political ambition. You do realise that there are millions of Muslims in the United States, Europe, Australia, etc don't you? When you say "Muslim world", you must, therefore, include those places.


Do you know why there is some visable resistance? Because the US and the rest of the West have big ass bombs and shit, and we're not afraid to use them.

No. Muslims do not fear bombs. I fear nothing but Allah. The resistance is there because we are against terrorism, not because we're afraid of you.

However, it is clear to me that you simply want to paint all Muslims with the same broad brush, so I will end my part of this conversation. I will give you a warning, though: there are more White, blue-eyed Muslims in the world than there are Arab Muslims. Remember that next time you're out in public spewing vitriol and hatred for Muslims. The 6'4, 220 pound redneck linebacker lookin' dude might just take offence.
The Black Forrest
18-02-2006, 08:28
Ahhh but where do you find the balance?

Do you realize that the cartoon-matter wasn't only about if it was against Islam?

It was also about -

1.) Distancing the Muslim World from the West


Well those that propose violence against the West over this matter pretty much have distanced themselves from the West. A Belgian Co-worker once said that in his country you will take your life in your hands if you criticize Islam in certain parts.

There are many that think the local laws do not apply to them.

So what do you do?


2.) Creating more distrust, misconceptions and hate between the Muslim World and the West.


Well the Jordanian editor once remarked "What causes more prejuidice; this cartoons or a suicide bomber going into a wedding in Amann?

He was fired for that.


3.) Intimidates Islamic Extremists to do more than 9/11


Intimidates? I really doubt that.

So what are you suggesting? Bow to their demands or fact attack?


4.) Shows the future generation a false look on Islam


A cartoon doesn't make a biggot. Many people already have preconceived notions.

It's unfortunate that the trogs that call themselves Muslims did what they did. It only re-enforced opinions or made some people ignore their frustration.


5.) Will continue to disrupt Peace in the world due to further intimidations


These cartoons are a byproduct of a problem. They aren't the problem.


6.) The fact that the Danish knew that it was against Islam to do so, and the fact that if they did do it, it would cause a major politico-social earthquake around the world...but what do they do? Continue with their desires.


Yes. They should have. If you care going to declare yourself free and claim freedom of expression and the press; it includes the ability to say or print stupid hateful things.

You have the right to be offended. You don't have the right to be not offended.

Where the paper screwed up is the fact they censored cartoons about Jesus. That kind of dashes the freedom of speech arguement.


It was not only about "You offended my religion" (although that does account for a lot), but it was also about political and social stability.

Everyone learns something new everyday ;)

There are many issues involved.

And some people never learn. ;)
The Black Forrest
18-02-2006, 08:32
No. Muslims do not fear bombs. I fear nothing but Allah.

Oh come now. Muslims fear bombs like anybody else.

Your arguement suggests that all Muslims are aready to be suicide bombers. When in fact they are "made."
The Squeaky Rat
18-02-2006, 12:21
The "Muslim world" isn't. A few thousand morons are. You don't see a billion and a half people running around burning flags and buildings and whatnot, do you?

Of course, I do not see them going on the street and marching against those thousand morons either.
The Similized world
18-02-2006, 13:00
Well, they did include extra cartoons, the origin of which is unknown (and assumed by many to be the imans themselves) which were *much* more offensive than the published cartoons - without distinguishing between them. Thus, most of those who heard from them most likely think that the extra cartoons were also published.

Does that sound like they weren't trying to incite violence?
They circulated a 40-something page "asessment" thingy of conditions in Denmark, as relates to Muslims & Islam. The cartoons were only a minor part of it, albeit the attention grabber, it would seem.

Although my knowledge of the group these Imams represent is superficial at best, I do know a thing or two about how the 3 people central to this, and their agenda.
Denmark have some quite lenient free speech laws (by european standards). Unless you're explicitly encouraging violence against people, there isn't much you can't say. Consequently a lot of questionable stuff comes out of the little country, such as the majority of the Neo-Nazi & revisionist material distributed in Europe (and to an extent, USA).

What I'm getting at, is that unless forign governments are interested in nailing these Islamofascist Sharia-loving cunts, it's not realistic to thing they will ever be found in violation of anything free speech related.
They are currently under police investigation, but I would be beyond surprised if that investigation is about free speech violations. My money's on slander & defamation of JP (the newspaper) & social security fraud.

But of course. The insane people we're talking about do want war. They don't wish to live in a free or democratic society, they want a Danish Islamic theocracy. The only positive thing I can say about them, is that they're not trying to hide what they are. If you, like I did, wonder why they bother living in Denmark, it's apparently because they aren't all that welcome in the Muslim nations.

It is very, very doubtful they'll put themselves in a position to be nailed for anything major. Fascists with that sort of influence don't last long if they're unintelligent.

Thankfully, very few Danish Muslims want anything to do with that lot, and the current controversy have birthed several, highly popular, Muslim organisations. A very good thing, since Muslims by & large have been as marginalised as a minority can get in a democratic society. One can only hope the sudden urge to organise doesn't go away when the current drama blows over. Whether that's likely or not though, I really have no idea.
Keruvalia
18-02-2006, 14:39
Of course, I do not see them going on the street and marching against those thousand morons either.

I don't see *anyone* going down the street and marching against them.

What's your point?
Hata-alla
18-02-2006, 15:13
I thought the text was very well written and pretty funny. Some things were false, it's true. Catholics do go into frothing rage sometimes when they hear about abortions. But there's still some sort of sense behind that. A featus does look like a miniature baby, and it might feel like murder. But no-one should be so god-damn testy about a guy who died 1400 years ago. I mean, it's not as if we're drawing buttsecks pictures of him. They were a bunch of non-funny simple cartoons, FCOL.

And it's not even the way the cartoons are drawn that offends them(it would make more sense), it's just the fact they are drawn in the first place. I'm pretty certain 90% of the protestors haven't even seen them. What's the point in that law anyway? And he's got a point. Why should that law affect us?

It all hurts my brain. People can be so stupid...
The Squeaky Rat
18-02-2006, 15:19
I don't see *anyone* going down the street and marching against them.

What's your point?

The morons in question claim they speak for all muslems and get *plenty* of airtime. If I were a muslem I would tell them to shut up and stop claiming they spoke for me - because not speaking up to me feels like saying they are telling the truth.

Terrorism and extremism can be neutered quite effectively by convincingly showing the ones they claim they are fighting for do not support them. But those people need to get of their asses and do something for that..
Neon Plaid
18-02-2006, 15:45
[QUOTE=The Squeaky Rat]The morons in question claim they speak for all muslems and get *plenty* of airtime. If I were a muslem I would tell them to shut up and stop claiming they spoke for me - because not speaking up to me feels like saying they are telling the truth.QUOTE]


Then why is it that when asshats like Phelps, Falwell, or Robertson start spouting hateful bullshit in this country, or when abortion clinics are bombed, or similar things happen, I never see anything on the news about Christians protesting the actions, or speaking out against them? Because most people know that most Christians don't agree with them. They don't have to speak out against it.

If Christians, Jews, etc. don't have to condemn the actions of a few so that they're not associated with them, Muslims shouldn't have to either. It should be a given that the majority are against it, just like with other major religious groups.
The Similized world
18-02-2006, 16:02
Then why is it that when asshats like Phelps, Falwell, or Robertson start spouting hateful bullshit in this country, or when abortion clinics are bombed, or similar things happen, I never see anything on the news about Christians protesting the actions, or speaking out against them? Because most people know that most Christians don't agree with them. They don't have to speak out against it.Actually, a lot of people have trouble differentiating between the Christians as well. The common opinion of US Christians is every bit as stereotypical in Europe as the Muslim one - and it's of course every bit as wrong.
Laerod
18-02-2006, 16:05
Let's post pictures of anti-abortion rallies.
You mean the little darlings that hold up signs? :eek:
The Squeaky Rat
18-02-2006, 16:20
Then why is it that when asshats like Phelps, Falwell, or Robertson start spouting hateful bullshit in this country, or when abortion clinics are bombed, or similar things happen, I never see anything on the news about Christians protesting the actions, or speaking out against them? Because most people know that most Christians don't agree with them. They don't have to speak out against it.

Wrong - they *do*. As long as lots of Christian officials and normal, everyday Christians do not openly and loudly denounce Phelps c.s. I consider that a sign that, while they perhaps do not fully agree with him, they do not disagree enough to protest.

Don't like that ? Speak up.
Keruvalia
18-02-2006, 17:12
Wrong - they *do*. As long as lots of Christian officials and normal, everyday Christians do not openly and loudly denounce Phelps c.s. I consider that a sign that, while they perhaps do not fully agree with him, they do not disagree enough to protest.

Link me to 5 anti-Phelps Christian sites and I'll link you to 50 anti-terrorist Muslim sites. Deal?
Non Aligned States
18-02-2006, 17:18
Of course, I do not see them going on the street and marching against those thousand morons either.

I don't really remember seeing many people doing marches and whatnot against the KKK, Timothy McVeigh, Pat Robertson and Ann Coulter either. In most cases, these people simply can't be bothered to give that much time and effort ultimately to give attention in one way or another to a lunatic who intends to make them look bad with his or her lunacy.
The Squeaky Rat
18-02-2006, 17:20
Link me to 5 anti-Phelps Christian sites and I'll link you to 50 anti-terrorist Muslim sites. Deal?

Nope. If the overwhelming majority of Christians really disliked Phelps, they could easily outshout him. The same is true for the muslems and their extremists.

However, they do not bother. There are no masses of millions protesting. And as long as the protestors do not *vastly* outnumber the guys claiming to speak for all, I will treat the non-protestors as if they are those guys.
Lord Sauron Reborn
18-02-2006, 17:23
Link me to 5 anti-Phelps Christian sites and I'll link you to 50 anti-terrorist Muslim sites. Deal?

Phelps: one guy, minor problem.

Islamic jihad: many people, huge problem.

Scale, anyone?
Keruvalia
18-02-2006, 17:28
And as long as the protestors do not *vastly* outnumber the guys claiming to speak for all, I will treat the non-protestors as if they are those guys.

So since there are no anti-Phelps protests, you'll treat all Christians as though they were Phelps?
Keruvalia
18-02-2006, 17:29
Phelps: one guy, minor problem.

Islamic jihad: many people, huge problem.

Scale, anyone?

That's why I gave a ratio of 5:50 .... pay attention.
The Black Forrest
18-02-2006, 17:53
That's why I gave a ratio of 5:50 .... pay attention.

Well?

Trying to link the two is probably hard.

Sure they spew hate; but how many deaths can you link to Phelps and how many deaths can you link to Islamic Jihaad?
Keruvalia
18-02-2006, 17:56
Well?

Trying to link the two is probably hard.

Sure they spew hate; but how many deaths can you link to Phelps and how many deaths can you link to Islamic Jihaad?

Incidental. This is about protesting Islamists, not about the Islamists themselves. Using the "well Phelps isn't as bad" argument is ducking the issue.

Show me 5 anti-Phelps Christian sites and I will give you 50 anti-terrorist Muslim sites.

Why can that not be done? How hard can it be? Surely the reasonable Christian voices have spoken out vehemently against the hatred that Phelps spreads. I only ask for 5. Come on now.
The Similized world
18-02-2006, 18:02
Incidental. This is about protesting Islamists, not about the Islamists themselves. Using the "well Phelps isn't as bad" argument is ducking the issue.

Show me 5 anti-Phelps Christian sites and I will give you 50 anti-terrorist Muslim sites.

Why can that not be done? How hard can it be? Surely the reasonable Christian voices have spoken out vehemently against the hatred that Phelps spreads. I only ask for 5. Come on now.I'm not disagreeing with you, but wouldn't a 1:5000 or so ratio be more fair?
Keruvalia
18-02-2006, 18:06
I'm not disagreeing with you, but wouldn't a 1:5000 or so ratio be more fair?

Maybe. I don't know. I offered 5:50. If someone wants to counter-offer, so be it. Just remember there are half a billion more Christians than Muslims, so Christian sites should be easier to find.
The Similized world
18-02-2006, 18:15
Maybe. I don't know. I offered 5:50. If someone wants to counter-offer, so be it. Just remember there are half a billion more Christians than Muslims, so Christian sites should be easier to find.Indeed, especially since there's only a handful of major Christianofascists* around.


*Did I just invent a new word?
The Black Forrest
18-02-2006, 18:17
Incidental. This is about protesting Islamists, not about the Islamists themselves. Using the "well Phelps isn't as bad" argument is ducking the issue.

Show me 5 anti-Phelps Christian sites and I will give you 50 anti-terrorist Muslim sites.

Why can that not be done? How hard can it be? Surely the reasonable Christian voices have spoken out vehemently against the hatred that Phelps spreads. I only ask for 5. Come on now.

Easy big guy. I am not defending Phelps.

The fact for the lack of sites is maybe they feel he is just a loon and they have better things to do.

People also handle him different.

Awhile back I heard a story on NPR about him. There was some tiny town that had a homosexual. I forget what was the issue but Phelps people were going to show up and protest.

The towns people decided to hold a revival since the fellow was one of theirs. They out shouted the Phelps people so they packed up and left.

Let me offer a different approach to your challene.

Do a google for "the truth about Phelps" and you will see many 5 pages of links saying he is an artard. Some are Christian and then some are not.

It could be also that sometime no response is the best response. Look at Ann C. Would she have the publicity she has if nobody responded to her? She would probably be some bitter nobody spewing to a small group of bitter nobodies. Kind of like Phelps. ;)

Would Satanic Versus have survived on it's own if not for the Fatwa? I doubt it. The book was crap and it took a Jihad to finish it. ;)

Would these Cartoons have even been know to the world if people simply turned the page? And used to paper to line bird cages? :)

It's a shame that the message was lost with all the burnings. Or was it they were simply acting up for the world of Islam rather then trying to show the West something?

I wish I had an answer but I don't. Religious fanticism(ie the burners) kind of makes it hard to be logical.
The Half-Hidden
18-02-2006, 18:50
The only thing that really indicates that a conservative wrote this blog entry is that he claims that all Muslims either are participating in or agreeing with the violence over the cartoons. So, to cut long story short, bigotry.
The Similized world
18-02-2006, 19:18
The only thing that really indicates that a conservative wrote this blog entry is that he claims that all Muslims either are participating in or agreeing with the violence over the cartoons. So, to cut long story short, bigotry.I really shouldn't find it so amusing that everyone calls Ann Coulter a guy in this thread..

But I do.