So how about these cartoons then, eh?

[truthseeker]

At this time, my idea is that we think it is extreme when our buildings are being burned because we are insulting others and calling it "free speech". A lot of religions get upset and retaliate in some form when thier belief system is being insulted. I think the Muslim radicals seek to preserve the respect and integrity of thier beliefs and whining about it in a newsletter usually doesn't get people's attention. Of course, burning down a Danish embassy does.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by truthseeker

At this time, my idea is that we think it is extreme when our buildings are being burned because we are insulting others and calling it "free speech". A lot of religions get upset and retaliate in some form when thier belief system is being insulted. I think the Muslim radicals seek to preserve the respect and integrity of thier beliefs and whining about it in a newsletter usually doesn't get people's attention. Of course, burning down a Danish embassy does.

...For all the wrong reasons, as the original complaint is lost in the flames, injuries and now death...because of a cartoon.

[Devadatta]

This has been pretty well covered here.

But here's what I'm wondering: what really are the motivations of these European journalists, especially the ones who printed these cartoons months after the fact. I don't think we can deny that they were being deliberately provocative, but was it just to sell papers, or was just about free speech? What message were they trying to send?

It's occurred to me that maybe what they're really saying is this: we're fed up and we're not going to take it anymore. We're stuck here between the blowback of American military adventures and the rise of Islamic militancy in our own midst. We're tired of being bombed, and living under threat - while still being put in the wrong by both sides. Americans keep accusing us of being soft, well, now we're pushing back.

Now, the danger of this morphing into simple racism and one more step toward a full-out war of civilizations is obvious. At the same time, it's hard not to have a lot of sympathy for the resentment they must feel.

Earlier today online, I saw Bill O'reilly, that great promoter of culture wars, once again sneering at the Europeans for having nothing to believe in, and therefore being weak in comparison to the more ideologically committed Americans on the one hand and to the Muslim extremists on the other. In fact, the democratic pluralist ideal is as potent as any other. As pluralists, Europeans don't want to have to choose between secular & religious points of view, but driven against the wall they finally will. Then both Muslim extremists and American culture warriors may regret what they've wished for.

Like the Rushdie affair this is likely to finally fizzle out, but it has to make you anxious about the trajectory we appear to be on.

[truthseeker]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

...For all the wrong reasons, as the original complaint is lost in the flames, injuries and now death...because of a cartoon.

A cartoon that is insulting the integrity of an entire people and culture.

When the integrity and culture of the United States is insulted, we retaliate with bombs and call it "freeing a people".

[Yaqinud Din]

However, there's a history of anti-Semitic cartoons demonising Jews in the Arabic press, so I find it personally hard to understand how publishing the Danish cartoons can be claimed to be racist.

This is a joke right how can a Semitic people be anti-Semitic?

Being anti-Jew and anti-Semitic is not the same thing so don't make them out to be. It seems to me that anytime anyone disagree with the Jews they call them anti-Semitic thats pure bull.

[Silverbackman]

Originally Posted by Awaiting_the_fifth

Hahem, erm, Insensitive, cough, offensive, haharum, em, huh, Freedom of expression?

mumble mumble


In the news recently, Danish newspaper cartoons featuring Mohammed as the protagonist are offending millions of muslims and their reaction is offending millions of free speach advocates.

I won't put a link here, but the cartoons are easily found on the internet (like everything else)

Opinions?


Peace
ATF

Yes freedom of speech. Freedom of press. What is happening to liberty? It is threatened by Muslim fundmentalist.

Guys, I have to say that this Muhammad cartoon isn't the only thing Muslims are going crazy about. I was recreantly banned from a Muslim forum for stating that I created Mohammed in a WWE Smackdown game. Another reason why is because I disagreed with Muslims rioting over the cartoons. Many of these Muslims are very intolerant. But why is this? It is maybe because most Muslims are fundamentalists.

I have defended Muslims for a long time from many anti-muslim. My own father is an anti-muslim. I even told the forum the forum this and how much I defended it but they still banned me for not sharing the same opinion as me.

Although only a few Muslims are violent extremists, fundamentalist Islam is a major threat to the world. Just think how bad it was back when fundamentalist Christianity had such a hard grip on the world. Think the conquest of Americas, crusades, ect. This is basically what we are dealing with in modern times with fundamentalist Muslims. I have no problem with moderate abrahamics but these fundies can be a major threat.

The Muslims I talked to wanted to ban any type of picture of Muhammad being created. First piggy-banks and now this? It's getting ridiculous! I fear that our freedom if speech is threatened.

I actually was receantly let back on the forum because it was obvious that I was right they were very wrong.

Europe really needs to tell these violent fundmentalists "You shall respect freedom of speech and freedom of press" .

[truthseeker]

Originally Posted by Silverbackman

Yes freedom of speech. Freedom of press. What is happening to liberty? It is threatened by Muslim fundmentalist.

...I was recreantly banned from a Muslim forum for stating that I created Mohammed in a WWE Smackdown game.

I don't know of a serious Christian who would support you in your venture of creating Jesus in a WWE Smackdown game.
There are somethings that the United States Constitution does not cover under Free Speech. And all that Liberty, Freedom of Speech, and Freedom of the Press sounds like a US thing. Of course, I am not well versed in the government statutes of other countries so I guess I can stand to be corrected.

Many of these Muslims are very intolerant. But why is this? It is maybe because most Muslims are fundamentalists.

If you go and put on your Sunday best and I tell you that you look like a dressed down monkey, you'd probably be offended - though you really shouldn't be, because monkeys have lots of human features and maybe you just have a lot of hair and, well, it really isn't that serious because it isn't all that bad to look and smell like a monkey... Ooops! Did I say you smell like one... Uuh, well, it isn't that big of a deal.

I have defended Muslims for a long time from many anti-muslim. My own father is an anti-muslim. I even told the forum the forum this and how much I defended it but they still banned me for not sharing the same opinion as me.

"And I have defended blacks for a long time from many people who hate Ni**ers. My own father hates blacks."

...fundamentalist Islam is a major threat to the world. Just think how bad it was back when fundamentalist Christianity had such a hard grip on the world. Think the conquest of Americas, crusades, ect. This is basically what we are dealing with in modern times with fundamentalist Muslims. I have no problem with moderate abrahamics but these fundies can be a major threat.

fundies? Whoa...

[Faustus]

I'm inclined to agree- though in fairness, there are people in the West (people who do have press platforms, in some cases) who would just as soon see Islam vanish off the map. They aren't a majority by any stretch, but they are there. Anne Coulter, for instance, said quite openly of the Middle East that we should "invade and convert them to Christianity." Of course, most conservatives I know reckon she's a loony toon, so she's hardly representative.

For anyone interested, here are some of the cartoons that you can find in various papers in the Arab world. So much for peace, tolerance and respect for other religions. Ugh.

[thipps]

The below article is relevant to the discussion and shows the double-standards of the danish newspaper in question.

Danish paper rejected Jesus cartoons

Gwladys Fouché
Monday February 6, 2006


Jyllands-Posten, the Danish newspaper that first published the cartoons of the prophet Muhammad that have caused a storm of protest throughout the Islamic world, refused to run drawings lampooning Jesus Christ, it has emerged today.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/internatio...703501,00.html

[seattlegal]

Here is the Vatican's words:

Vatican Statement on Offending Religious Sentiments

2/7/2006 - 6:30 AM PST


"Coexistence Calls for a Climate of Mutual Respect"

VATICAN CITY, FEB. 7, 2006 (Zenit) - Here is a translation of the issued Saturday by the Vatican press office on reactions to the publication in several Western newspapers of caricatures of the prophet Mohammed.

* * *

In response to several requests on the Holy See's position vis-à-vis recent offensive representations of the religious sentiments of individuals and entire communities, the Vatican press office can state:

1. The right to freedom of thought and expression, sanctioned by the Declaration of the Rights of Man, cannot imply the right to offend the religious sentiment of believers. This principle applies obviously for any religion.

2. In addition, coexistence calls for a climate of mutual respect to favor peace among men and nations. Moreover, these forms of exasperated criticism or derision of others manifest a lack of human sensitivity and may constitute in some cases an inadmissible provocation. A reading of history shows that wounds that exist in the life of peoples are not cured this way.

3. However, it must be said immediately that the offenses caused by an individual or an organ of the press cannot be imputed to the public institutions of the corresponding country, whose authorities might and should intervene eventually according to the principles of national legislation. Therefore, violent actions of protest are equally deplorable. Reaction in the face of offense cannot fail the true spirit of all religion. Real or verbal intolerance, no matter where it comes from, as action or reaction, is always a serious threat to peace.

-SOURCE-

[brucegdc]

Sorry, but the first part of the Vatican's statement is pure male cow excrement. A blanket prohibition on "offending the religious sentiment of believers" can't be done - there's far too many varieties out there. To a believer that cattle are holy, a picture of a side of beef would offend their religious sentiment. Symbols holy to one religion are often offensive to others - the swastika has a long history as a religious symbol before being debased by the Nazis... to carry that to its logical conclusion, nothing would be published anywhere.

There is a big difference between offensive speech and hate speech. One of the reasons I have an issue with laws prohibiting denial of the Holocaust is that that statement falls into the former and not the latter. Hate speech would be inciting or threatening harm to others. While I do not approve of offensive speech - and will avoid those who practice it - I do believe they have a right to it - in forums they own. The laws of libel and slander do apply - the proper response is to follow up with the legal remedies against harm done to ones reputation.

Now, the rules in this forum are different from the public media - here, mutual respect is required - but that's in this forum. If someone wishes to go off and create a "yay for Pastafarianism, down with others" forum, that's their business. The owner of this forum has set down the rules - as it should be - it's his funding that provides the space.

The latter part, though, makes sense - it's the newspaper that published them. If you're offended, don't buy the newspaper - and let the advertisers in that paper know you're offended, and boycott them if you wish - but it's not the entire country's fault - and in this case, where a large majority of Muslims have spent years saying "it's not all Muslims fault that the WTC was destroyed", it seems that large groups are falling into the same logical trap of blaming an entire population for a few actions.

One more thought - the idea of not representing Mohammed is to prevent idol worship, as I understand it. It seems to me by getting so riled about that representation the people involved have instead substituted the lack of representation as an idol... taking it a tad too far.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by truthseeker

A cartoon that is insulting the integrity of an entire people and culture.

When the integrity and culture of the United States is insulted, we retaliate with bombs and call it "freeing a people".

Really...when? (I'm serious). When did the US bomb a nation because we felt insulted?

I'd really like to know, and I'd like to know what this has to do with the cartoons, and the current state of world events...

v/r

Q

[Faithfulservant]

Originally Posted by truthseeker

A cartoon that is insulting the integrity of an entire people and culture.

When the integrity and culture of the United States is insulted, we retaliate with bombs and call it "freeing a people".

You cant be serious. If we retaliated everytime we were mocked or slandered.. there'd be noone left to make fun of us. lol

We have pretty thick skin when it comes to how ppl view us. I have british and australian friends that derive great joy in cutting Americans down.. as a matter of fact its considered a sport to them to insult each other as well. You can even see Americans cutting other Americans down more and more frequently.

Im starting to get annoyed with all the political correctness and sensitivity that we are supposed to treat ppl at the risk of terrorist retaliation.

We are not children fighting on a playground because we called each other names. Grow up is what I say. Every culture race and religion on the face of this diverse planet is the focus of some form of insult jibes mockery and slander constantly... Be it in movies.. media.. jokes.. it happens. Everyone else just gets over it. We have a jokes section on this forum that many jokes are printed poking fun at other religions.. is it taken seriously? No. There are whole books printed of political cartoons poking fun at various ppl and organizations.. Are places being bombed and ppl killed for such things? No.

If Muhammed taught like Christ taught I believe that the actions being made in his name are contrary to his teachings. Am I right?

[wil]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Really...when? (I'm serious). When did the US bomb a nation because we felt insulted?

We were insulted by the terms of surrender the Japanese offered prior to Hiroshima and Nagasaki...and then we signed the exact same terms, with more reparations guaranteed on our side afterwords...

Vietnam was the result of a lie by McNamara. I think however he is speaking of Iraq. A country who had nothing to do with 9/11 and couldn't deliver anything to the US. Since WMDs didn't get their due..our new reason for going was freeing the people from an oppressive dictator, the same oppressive dictator we funded against the Ayatolla when he took out our oppressive dictator the Shah... On one hand we ignore UN resolutions on the other we enforce them, tis interesting how our flag blows in the wind....

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by wil

We were insulted by the terms of surrender the Japanese offered prior to Hiroshima and Nagasaki...and then we signed the exact same terms, with more reparations guaranteed on our side afterwords...

Vietnam was the result of a lie by McNamara. I think however he is speaking of Iraq. A country who had nothing to do with 9/11 and couldn't deliver anything to the US. Since WMDs didn't get their due..our new reason for going was freeing the people from an oppressive dictator, the same oppressive dictator we funded against the Ayatolla when he took out our oppressive dictator the Shah... On one hand we ignore UN resolutions on the other we enforce them, tis interesting how our flag blows in the wind....

No, we knew that in order to take the island of Japan it would cost 100,000 more American lives and possibly millions of Japanese lives. You don't seem to know your history...

Vietnam was a war we took over from the French...who were insulted. The South Vietnamese did not want to become Communistic/Socialistic, and the North of Vietnam did, and wanted the entire country under one government.

You know little about Iraq, obviously. For example, did you know that Iraq fired the first shots of the war to come? Killed 27 sailors on the USS Ward, and called it an error... in 1988.

Never atoned for that "descrepancy".

But what has all this got to do with the cartoons that have caused death and destruction, in the name of Allah, and Mohhamad?

v/r

Q