NationStates Jolt Archive

http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-29178120070827

I guess the Swedes had to tell them that the government in Sweden does not control the press, as is done in Iran.

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran summoned Sweden's charge d'affaires on Monday to protest against the publication of "a disrespectful" drawing of Prophet Mohammad in a Swedish newspaper, Iran's state broadcaster said.

Sure, an art museum can decide not to display something - or a newspaper can decide not to publish something.

But it's their decision - not the government's decision.

I guess the Iranians don't understand this concept.

http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-29178120070827

I guess the Swedes had to tell them that the government in Sweden does not control the press, as is done in Iran.



Sure, an art museum can decide not to display something - or a newspaper can decide not to publish something.

But it's their decision - not the government's decision.

I guess the Iranians don't understand this concept.

Are there going to be riots this time around as there was last time a cartoon about Mohammad was seen as disrespectful?

I completely agree with the OP. There is a difference between a museum or newspaper choosing whether it wants to publish/display something and the government imposing limits on what media can be published. Too bad Iran doesn't realise this...

I just wanna poke the fundamentalist muslims in the eyes. Right in the damned eyes.

I just wanna poke the fundamentalist muslims in the eyes. Right in the damned eyes.

Why not in the sides? I hear that's where most people are ticklish...

I just wanna poke the fundamentalist muslims in the eyes. Right in the damned eyes.

I don't think this is a fundamentalist thing going on with Iran.

Iran wants the world to know that they are a power to be acknowledged - a world player.

This is just a lever they're using to assert that power.

Unlike a walnut, an orange contains citric acid.

But yeah, it does seem odd that Iran is still having trouble with this point. Didn't we clear this up after the Jyllands-Posten controversy?

I don't think this is a fundamentalist thing going on with Iran.

Iran wants the world to know that they are a power to be acknowledged - a world player.

This is just a lever they're using to assert that power.

Yes but the thing is, their constituents possibly actually agree with this move, because many are potentially fundamentalists. Same goes for the fundies all around the world. Iran has support because of these people.

Yes but the thing is, their constituents possibly actually agree with this move, because many are potentially fundamentalists. Same goes for the fundies all around the world. Iran has support because of these people.

It's just Iran taking advantage of that audience.

It's just Iran taking advantage of that audience.

Right! But if there was no audience, Iran would be a completely different place altogether!

I just wanna poke the fundamentalist muslims in the eyes. Right in the damned eyes.

You might wanna take care in making statements like these. The mods usually don't take too kindly to 'em.

You might wanna take care in making statements like these. The mods usually don't take too kindly to 'em.

I'm not suggesting they get raped. Anymore.

I just wanna poke em in the eyes so they won't have to bear the burden of seeing illustrations of their prophet.

You might wanna take care in making statements like these. The mods usually don't take too kindly to 'em.

That's nothing compared to my suggestions for militant islamists, and I was told explicitly that it wasn't a problem.

I'm not suggesting they get raped. Anymore.

I just wanna poke em in the eyes so they won't have to bear the burden of seeing illustrations of their prophet.

Well, as long as you're being reasonable...

That's nothing compared to my suggestions for militant islamists, and I was told explicitly that it wasn't a problem.

I really don't wanna know anything more specific about this. I'm sure your views on the subject are sufficiently opposite to mine that I won't find any value in them, not even curiosity.

Well, as long as you're being reasonable...

Indeed.

I really don't wanna know anything more specific about this. I'm sure your views on the subject are sufficiently opposite to mine that I won't find any value in them, not even curiosity.

There's midgets involved.



... There's always midgets involved.

One thing you may not have heard of is that the former Minister for Foreign Affairs Laila Freivalds, ordered to shut down a Swedish website which contained Muhammad caricatures, about a year and a half ago.

One thing you may not have heard of is that the former Minister for Foreign Affairs Laila Freivalds, ordered to shut down a Swedish website which contained Muhammad caricatures, about a year and a half ago.

Ordered it to be shut down? As in, it succeeded in getting it shut down?

That's... fairly illegal. I mean, entirely illegal.

I really don't wanna know anything more specific about this. I'm sure your views on the subject are sufficiently opposite to mine that I won't find any value in them, not even curiosity.
Total genocide of every single Muslim on earth via a system that requires Muslims to be in a completely different phylum to actually work.

Ordered it to be shut down? As in, it succeeded in getting it shut down?

That's... fairly illegal. I mean, entirely illegal.
If I recall correctly the Ministry for Foreign Affairs told the website's hosting company "Hey, look there what one of your customers is putting on your servers." nothing else. That was however enough as the hosting company went "Whoa, that stuff against our ToS." and took the site down.

There was a lot of fuss about it, media goes mad when politicians mess with the freedom of the press.

If I recall correctly the Ministry for Foreign Affairs told the website's hosting company "Hey, look there what one of your customers is putting on your servers." nothing else. That was however enough as the hosting company went "Whoa, that stuff against our ToS." and took the site down.

There was a lot of fuss about it, media goes mad when politicians mess with the freedom of the press.

Their ToS restricts depictions of religious figures? Somehow I doubt that.

Hasn't Iran got any women left to brutalise for showing too much hair, or any more gangs of British Spy Squirrels to apprehend? It must be a quiet day in Tehran...

Their ToS restricts depictions of religious figures? Somehow I doubt that.
No but I'm sure it does restrict defamatory, offensive or objectionable content. It wasn't just pictures, those caricatures could be interpreted as portraying Muslims as butt ugly evil terrorists from hell.

It's just Iran taking advantage of that audience.

Not only that audience, but the whole Muslim world at large. They're trying to portray themselves as the leaders of Islam worldwide, the guys who will go to bat for the rest. They know perfectly well how the system works, and that the Government has no control over the papers... But if they make a show of this, then they look like they're taking action on behalf of all, even if it is futile.

No but I'm sure it does restrict defamatory, offensive or objectionable content. It wasn't just pictures, those caricatures could be interpreted as portraying Muslims as butt ugly evil terrorists from hell.

Meh. They should, then, host their site on Maddox's server. (www.maddox.xmission.com) :P

One thing you may not have heard of is that the former Minister for Foreign Affairs Laila Freivalds, ordered to shut down a Swedish website which contained Muhammad caricatures, about a year and a half ago.

Which was a huge scandal and precipitated her resignation. Another thing you may not have heard...

Unlike a walnut, an orange contains citric acid.

But yeah, it does seem odd that Iran is still having trouble with this point. Didn't we clear this up after the Jyllands-Posten controversy?

Sweden and Denmark aren't the same country ;)

I don't think this is a fundamentalist thing going on with Iran.

Iran wants the world to know that they are a power to be acknowledged - a world player.

This is just a lever they're using to assert that power.

Like that time the US lodged a formal complaint over a reporter expecting Bush to answer questions, as oppossed to kowtowing down before him, for instance.....

http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-29178120070827

I guess the Swedes had to tell them that the government in Sweden does not control the press, as is done in Iran.



Sure, an art museum can decide not to display something - or a newspaper can decide not to publish something.

But it's their decision - not the government's decision.

I guess the Iranians don't understand this concept.

Or you don't understand that the statement was made for domestic consumption.

What I find interesting is that Jesus is also a very important prophet within Islam - and yet, Iran stays silent when Jesus is used on cartoons.

http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-29178120070827

I guess the Swedes had to tell them that the government in Sweden does not control the press, as is done in Iran.



Sure, an art museum can decide not to display something - or a newspaper can decide not to publish something.

But it's their decision - not the government's decision.

I guess the Iranians don't understand this concept.The concept is called diplomacy. If something happens in a foreign country, with which the state has relations with, that the state does not like, then the formal process is to complain to their ambassador or get your ambassador to complain to their government.

In the diplomatic realm it would be quite scandalous for Iran to be seen to contacting the newspaper directly. This is seen as interfering with a country's sovereign right to govern itself.

Which was a huge scandal and precipitated her resignation. Another thing you may not have heard...
Yes of course, I should have pointed that out.

Have you heard the latest news concerning Nerikes Allehanda? The President of Iran has in a press conference said that he suspects Zionists to be responsible for the publishing of the drawing. Apparently they wish to harm the international relations of the Swedish Government.

Have you heard the latest news concerning Nerikes Allehanda? The President of Iran has in a press conference said that he suspects Zionists to be responsible for the publishing of the drawing. Apparently they wish to harm the international relations of the Swedish Government.

Those Iranian officials can be so whacky - we don't need "zionists" to accomplish that; I've done much worse than this while drunk as a skunk during a weekend in Denmark. They don't take easily to having their language mocked...

http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-29178120070827

I guess the Swedes had to tell them that the government in Sweden does not control the press, as is done in Iran.



Sure, an art museum can decide not to display something - or a newspaper can decide not to publish something.

But it's their decision - not the government's decision.

I guess the Iranians don't understand this concept.

Umm, so what, everyone knows freedom of the press doesn't exist in Iran, what exactly is your point other than starting a conservative circle-jerk to attract the islamophobes of NSG?

Ohhh right, your FAG so that's exactly what you meant, far be it for me to accept the subtleties of international relations to be portrayed by a neocon.

It's called the 'Islamic' Republic of Iran my friend, and even if I think them reactionary, at least they aren't hypocritical for not implementing the ideology of their revolution.

Umm, so what, everyone knows freedom of the press doesn't exist in Iran, what exactly is your point other than starting a conservative circle-jerk to attract the islamophobes of NSG?

Well, there are still people like you and Oceandrive who like to present Iran as a sunny land of milk and honey, where little children frolic in the rivers of chocolate.

I'm also amused by your assertion that all criticism of Iran is 'Islamophobic' (which is a silly word anyway): aren't you the one who loves to run into Israel threads and whine for hours on end about how all criticism of Israel is (allegedly) stifled by cries of anti-semitism? Sometimes I think I should take a leaf out of IDF's book and preserve a list of your more amusing hypocrisy, but happily I have better things to do.

I have to admit, I am very, very scared of Iran. They don't like us much, and they have lots of bombs and such! Arg.

The concept is called diplomacy. If something happens in a foreign country, with which the state has relations with, that the state does not like, then the formal process is to complain to their ambassador or get your ambassador to complain to their government.

In the diplomatic realm it would be quite scandalous for Iran to be seen to contacting the newspaper directly. This is seen as interfering with a country's sovereign right to govern itself.

As diplomatic as it is to tell a foreign country that they've offended you with a cartoon, it's still the act of a dumbass to be offended by said cartoon in the first place.

As diplomatic as it is to tell a foreign country that they've offended you with a cartoon, it's still the act of a dumbass to be offended by said cartoon in the first place.Depends on the cartoon. If a newspaper published a cartoon of Mohammed captioned - 'Mirages ain't the only thing those sand niggers be fooled by'.

Having not seen the cartoon in question, I can't really comment on whether it's offensive or not.

Depends on the cartoon. If a newspaper published a cartoon of Mohammed captioned - 'Mirages ain't the only thing those sand niggers be fooled by'.

Having not seen the cartoon in question, I can't really comment on whether it's offensive or not.

It's not the caption, it's not the context - the fundie Muslims are just offended by any cartoon depicting their prophet. Any. At all.