Terroist threats, boycotts, demonstrations etc against Denmark and Norway

[Mad Processor]

After a big Danish newspaper and a small christian Norwegian paper decided to print pictures showing the Islamic prophet Muhammed the shit has hit the fan.

Muslims are seemingly very upset over this and big demonstrations have followed. In Gaza, Palestinians burned Norwegian and Danish flags, the editors of the respective magazines got death threats and muslims are encouraging a world wide boycott of Danish and Norwegian food and goods.

Here, the debate rage on. We have a very strong free speech law (like the one in the US), so noone will be charged with anything, but politicians and others have said printing the pictures was nonetheless in bad taste.

You can read more starting with this article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4666298.stm

It also links to further articles on the issue.

Now, to me, this is an interesting debate. On one hand, we free speech. On the other hand, we have people who are insulted. BUT, comedians and regular people say stuff everyday that insults someone. Neo-nazi groups in Scandinavia have been protesting jews for ages and we hardly lift an eyebrow.

I personally find it laughable, when the Iranian president said he wanted to eradicate Israel, not a single muslim country appeared to protest or really do anything to show contempt for the speech, but a drawing of their prophet is a "declaration of war", that it suddenly is appropriate to blow yourself up at a shopping mall in Copenhagen? I find the flag burning insulting. The christian paper who printed the pictures had a wopping 5.400 copies sold last year. And every Norwegian is responsible for this? Would I ever ban flag burning? Hell no, it's another expression that people should be allowed to execute at their will. (I would like to see the reaction if I, after another Palestinian blowing himself on a bus in Israel, walked downtown with a Palestinian flag, set fire to it and started screaming "DEATH TO PALESTINE". )

One imam even managed to say that "free speech where you can say anything you want is totalitarian".

What are your thoughts on this? This is NOT a racial debate, rather a debate on freedom of speech, where to draw the line and what an effect it has on multicultural societies. What questions I want answered are:
Do you think these kinds of things shouldn't be protected by free speech, do you simply think it was in bad taste, or do you think the Islamic community should just "suck it up"?
Where do you see the line being drawn when it comes to free speech?

[Zigga-Zagga]

Islam as a subject is so flammable.

Over the history comedy (weather it's the Daily Show in US or the newspaper comics dissing Germany in WWI) has been often the only way to cricize things. A certain liberty-trough-humour has allways been more acceptable, and I don't mind it that much.

Anyhow, don't Palestinians really have more important things to worry about.

[Mad Processor]

On that note I should probably add that the pictures had indeed a comedic value. One of them featured suicide bombers coming to heaven only to find St. Peter standing there saying "stop, stop, we're all out of virgins". None of that was complained about, the issue was that they dared make drawings of Muhammed himself, which is allegedly illegal under Islamic law.

[Zigga-Zagga]

One would think that the drawer simply did not know of such thing that Mouhammed was not to be pictured.

The problem is that Danmark is part of EU, so this one could really escalade.

[Mad Processor]

He (they?) knew and the Norwegian paper printed it after the Danish (Jyllands posten btw) printed it.

A pretty pathetic note: The editor in chief for the Norwegian magazine has defended himself with freedom of speech, yet he himself has said that he would never print a picture disrespecting Jesus, and he was very strongly opposing a theater play that featured god as a smoking, cursing bastard. Guess to some people it doesn't work both ways.

[Zigga-Zagga]

Well that's just fucked up, gives more an idea of a planned instigation.

[Falero]

Danish are fucking rabid about muslims, the whole domestic debate is borderline open racist. That being said, it´s an incredibly strong reaction from the arab world but the freedom of speech should be defended, not excused. Problem is that a lot of danes, according to media, is taking this shit out on danish muslims.
Funny thing: Apparently sweden got threatened by one of the arab leaders as well. They´re not accurate in their shitslinging but it´s fun to be on the recieving end of that stuff for once. Remember how many people were going on about the whole middleeast and all the peeps there after 9/11? Same generalisations, the other way.

[Mad Processor]

Danish are fucking rabid about muslims, the whole domestic debate is borderline open racist. That being said, it?s an incredibly strong reaction from the arab world but the freedom of speech should be defended, not excused. Problem is that a lot of danes, according to media, is taking this shit out on danish muslims.
Funny thing: Apparently sweden got threatened by one of the arab leaders as well. They?re not accurate in their shitslinging but it?s fun to be on the recieving end of that stuff for once. Remember how many people were going on about the whole middleeast and all the peeps there after 9/11? Same generalisations, the other way.

Yeah I read that Sweden got some shit. They probably got the Scandinavian countries confused and thought Norway was the capital of Sweden, tends to happen a lot.

Many Danes are indeed rather racist against muslims, there have been numerous clashes between Danish right wing extremists and the Somalian community.

How are the reactions to this in Sweden? I listen to "Ekud" or however it is spelled every once in a while, but I haven't really managed to pick up on any debate there.

[Falero]

Yeah I read that Sweden got some shit. They probably got the Scandinavian countries confused and thought Norway was the capital of Sweden, tends to happen a lot.

Many Danes are indeed rather racist against muslims, there have been numerous clashes between Danish right wing extremists and the Somalian community.

How are the reactions to this in Sweden? I listen to "Ekud" or however it is spelled every once in a while, but I haven't really managed to pick up on any debate there.

I think most swedes are just giving it a slight nod, people seem surprisingly unaffected. Some of the more rightwing swedes are spouting off the usual "oh those stupid muslims" and some people are spouting off "oh those stupid danes".

I think the general context is that people think the Danes went quite far, but that the muslim boycotts are way overboard. People don?t get how offense this really is, and if they do they instead at times lacks compassion for the muslim sake.
Most peeps would probably say that the danes should do stupid shit like this, but at the same time if push comes to push they shouldn?t give in their liberties for the sake of economics.

The danish debate about immigration is far more hasher than the swedish and I think a lot of swedes shun their ill attitude. But there are also a lot of people who welcome it.

[REDNOZE300]

On that note I should probably add that the pictures had indeed a comedic value. One of them featured suicide bombers coming to heaven only to find St. Peter standing there saying "stop, stop, we're all out of virgins". None of that was complained about, the issue was that they dared make drawings of Muhammed himself, which is allegedly illegal under Islamic law.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA we're out of virgins HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

a cupple of years ago some swedish painter ( artist ) made some drawings out of Jesus and his pupils as Faggots . the day after there was a huge demonstration . all of the people that showed up there were from Lebanon and Syria . Catholics and orthodox Christians side by side throwing rocks at the Bitch and she was like wtf????? i was rofl when they showed her face on the tv and she was like i have NO idea why people are so mad .

some people ( specialy people from the middle east ) just dont like it when you fuck around with their belifs , period!

[Zigga-Zagga]

Ah great, heard just from the radio that the locals in Iraq have declared an some sort of Jihad-light on the local Danish soldiers. Nice to see that they aren't stereotyping all the Danish to the same.

[DaPunisher]

After a big Danish newspaper and a small christian Norwegian paper decided to print pictures showing the Islamic prophet Muhammed the shit has hit the fan.

Muslims are seemingly very upset over this and big demonstrations have followed. In Gaza, Palestinians burned Norwegian and Danish flags, the editors of the respective magazines got death threats and muslims are encouraging a world wide boycott of Danish and Norwegian food and goods.

Here, the debate rage on. We have a very strong free speech law (like the one in the US), so noone will be charged with anything, but politicians and others have said printing the pictures was nonetheless in bad taste.

You can read more starting with this article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4666298.stm

It also links to further articles on the issue.

Now, to me, this is an interesting debate. On one hand, we free speech. On the other hand, we have people who are insulted. BUT, comedians and regular people say stuff everyday that insults someone. Neo-nazi groups in Scandinavia have been protesting jews for ages and we hardly lift an eyebrow.

I personally find it laughable, when the Iranian president said he wanted to eradicate Israel, not a single muslim country appeared to protest or really do anything to show contempt for the speech, but a drawing of their prophet is a "declaration of war", that it suddenly is appropriate to blow yourself up at a shopping mall in Copenhagen? I find the flag burning insulting. The christian paper who printed the pictures had a wopping 5.400 copies sold last year. And every Norwegian is responsible for this? Would I ever ban flag burning? Hell no, it's another expression that people should be allowed to execute at their will. (I would like to see the reaction if I, after another Palestinian blowing himself on a bus in Israel, walked downtown with a Palestinian flag, set fire to it and started screaming "DEATH TO PALESTINE". )

One imam even managed to say that "free speech where you can say anything you want is totalitarian".

What are your thoughts on this? This is NOT a racial debate, rather a debate on freedom of speech, where to draw the line and what an effect it has on multicultural societies. What questions I want answered are:
Do you think these kinds of things shouldn't be protected by free speech, do you simply think it was in bad taste, or do you think the Islamic community should just "suck it up"?
Where do you see the line being drawn when it comes to free speech?


welcome to america

[Malibu]

Welcome aboard, guys. You're nobody until the Middle East hates you.

[Mad Processor]

Funny little thing, one of the pictures was of muhammed wearing a turban drawn as a bomb. Now, to refute that they are violent terrorists they are threatening to bomb several places in Europe and kill all Norwegian, Danish, French and German residents in Gaza.

Way to gain support guys, you fucking retards.

[Dewey's Diva]

I think it would be an understatement to say Muslims have no sense of humor... or maybe even a misstatement. I think (and I hope this makes sense) those devoted to Islam are too reverent regarding their own beliefs to function in the larger world, one that is not universally spiritual or reverent about anything. It's hard to wrap my brain around not being able to depict the Prophet Muhammed because, as a Christian, depictions of Christ, both reverent and irreverent, are everywhere.

1677

1678

While both are not traditional or reverent, they don't offend me. There is much about Islam that I will never, ever understand.

[DaPunisher]

I think it would be an understatement to say Muslims have no sense of humor... or maybe even a misstatement. I think (and I hope this makes sense) those devoted to Islam are too reverent regarding their own beliefs to function in the larger world, one that is not universally spiritual or reverent about anything. It's hard to wrap my brain around not being able to depict the Prophet Muhammed because, as a Christian, depictions of Christ, both reverent and irreverent, are everywhere.

1677

1678

While both are not traditional or reverent, they don't offend me. There is much about Islam that I will never, ever understand.



islam is like the kid in school whose an asshole just for the sake of being an asshole, until they lighten up and realize if your nice to people theyll be nice back.

[IX Equilibrium]

Funny little thing, one of the pictures was of muhammed wearing a turban drawn as a bomb. Now, to refute that they are violent terrorists they are threatening to bomb several places in Europe and kill all Norwegian, Danish, French and German residents in Gaza.

Way to gain support guys, you fucking retards.


Couldn't have put it better.

[Maz_Boxe]

will it blow over? yes
will it blow over tommrow? no
next week? possibly
will cartoons mocking other religions be released by the muslims? hope so, racism is funny shit

[jiddu]

Muslims need to get bombed more since they have time to worry about danish newspapers

[derubermensch]

Wow. Just Wow. How stupid could those scandinavians be? They know full well what it meant to draw a picture, one intended for comedic effect at that, of the prophet Mohammed and they do it anyway. And then they wonder why people are freaking the fuck out? I can't put into words how stupid those newspapers are.

Rachel: Making an image of Christ doesn't have anywhere near the same ramifications as making an image of Mohammed. No where in the bible does it say "Don't make an image of Jesus." I'm sure you might respond with something to the effect of "Well people make images of God and it says you can't do that in the bible", which leads me to my point since the background for the statement is the dominance of secularism in the West...

All: You can't go applying your Western standards of liberality and what not to people who don't buy into the same bullshit as you. A defense of Free fucking speech is moot at the point at which there is a cultural clash at play. You don't smoke in an African tribe's sacred cave with your friends and then when they piss on you about it, you say I have the freedom to goddamn assembly. It is moronic to think so.

[Mad Processor]

Wow. Just Wow. How stupid could those scandinavians be? They know full well what it meant to draw a picture, one intended for comedic effect at that, of the prophet Mohammed and they do it anyway. And then they wonder why people are freaking the fuck out? I can't put into words how stupid those newspapers are.

If you think they're really wondering you haven't been paying attention. The Norwegian paper in particular (as for the ones published in France and Germany) was more used as a mocking effect. However, they have been sharply critized for doing it by most people. Does that mean the actions are justified and that every Scandinavian is responsible? Several muslims in Norway and Denmark have over the past few years been very vocal that we shouldn't judge every muslim by the actions of a few and call every muslim a terrorist. However, when a Norwegian "paper" with a total sale of 5000 copies over the entire year of 2005 prints some images, suddenly ALL OF NORWAY is responsible for it? The hypocrizy of these imams is so disgusting I can't find the words to describe it. Do I believe these papers should have printed the images? No, it was in bad taste. Were they in their right to do so? Yes. Are the reactions warranted? Hell no.

Rachel: Making an image of Christ doesn't have anywhere near the same ramifications as making an image of Mohammed. No where in the bible does it say "Don't make an image of Jesus." I'm sure you might respond with something to the effect of "Well people make images of God and it says you can't do that in the bible", which leads me to my point since the background for the statement is the dominance of secularism in the West...

Well, neither does the Quran. It does NOT explicitly forbid creating images of Muhammed. According to someone who was interviewed on radio here, it's a matter of culture rather than explicit Quran law.

All: You can't go applying your Western standards of liberality and what not to people who don't buy into the same bullshit as you. A defense of Free fucking speech is moot at the point at which there is a cultural clash at play. You don't smoke in an African tribe's sacred cave with your friends and then when they piss on you about it, you say I have the freedom to goddamn assembly. It is moronic to think so.

Bull-fucking-shit. We're talking about people who LIVE in Denmark, are Danish citizens, that threaten to go on a suicide bombing mission because of these pictures. Want to throw someone out of Gaza? Fine, that's their right, but do NOT show up here and expect western society to change to suit their needs. We HAVE freedom of speech, they need to adjust to it, not the other way around.

I woud wager many Jews living in Norway and Denmark are horrified at how freely neo-nazis are able to roam here. Tough luck, that's the way it works. There is a professor in Sweden who has written a shitload of stuff on the holocaust never happening. Got the Jews pissed off? Big time, but again, tough luck, that's how it works in a free western society.

Don't draw the "smoking in their cave" thing, because the pictures were printed in a Danish newspaper and a christian conservative Norwegian "paper". A better analogy would be the African tribe sitting in YOUR LIVING ROOM complaining about you smoking.

[CTY]

OMG OMG, THEY HATE MORE THAN THE USA AND ENGLAND NOW, OMG OMG OMG! Seriously, all this is stupid. People need to give up organized religion.

[Mad Processor]

A couple of other things dermensch, the pictures have now been published in a couple of Arab newspapers as well. One Jordanian one even asked (paraphrased) "is this worse than pictures of suicide bombers or videos of extremists threatening to cut the throats of hostages?".

And to illustrate how groupthink works, the pictures were publised in september (!), yet the whole thing accelerated when a couple of Arab news stationes picked up on it. Suddenly muslims here were objecting to it as well, even though the debate was pretty regular up to that point.

[DaPunisher]

A couple of other things dermensch, the pictures have now been published in a couple of Arab newspapers as well. One Jordanian one even asked (paraphrased) "is this worse than pictures of suicide bombers or videos of extremists threatening to cut the throats of hostages?".

And to illustrate how groupthink works, the pictures were publised in september (!), yet the whole thing accelerated when a couple of Arab news stationes picked up on it. Suddenly muslims here were objecting to it as well, even though the debate was pretty regular up to that point.



wait so the cartton or whatever that they're bitching about was originally published in september of last year?

[Mad Processor]

wait so the cartton or whatever that they're bitching about was originally published in september of last year?

Yes.

[Dewey's Diva]

Rachel: Making an image of Christ doesn't have anywhere near the same ramifications as making an image of Mohammed. No where in the bible does it say "Don't make an image of Jesus." I'm sure you might respond with something to the effect of "Well people make images of God and it says you can't do that in the bible", which leads me to my point since the background for the statement is the dominance of secularism in the West...


I thought that might be the case... I am not as familiar with the Koran as I should be, but I work at a university with a large Muslim student population and was actually planning to enquire about that point with a Muslim woman that I speak to often.

I guess the question becomes to what degree does respect come into play in a freedom of speech issue. I wonder what the response would have been if this had been an American newspaper publishing this image, rather than a European one.

I guess the "dominance of secularism in the West" has to do with your perspective - although I would identify as a Christian, I am a strong believer in seperation of church and state. Living in a diverse region with many people of different cultures and faiths, I think it is better to remove the trappings of most of it and teach about all of it. I find the fact that Virginia has a "moment of silence" (no matter how broadly it is defined) disconcerting and would remove my kids from the public school if intelligent design was taught as scientific theory. I have my own ways of reconciling my belief in a creator and science of evolution and that is what will be taught to my children. I don't need some dumb ass mudding the waters. Sunday school is on Sundays at church, not the rest of the week at taxpayer expense. But I am starting to digress... I think there isn't enough secularism, at least where I live.

[Dewey's Diva]

OMG OMG, THEY HATE MORE THAN THE USA AND ENGLAND NOW, OMG OMG OMG! Seriously, all this is stupid. People need to give up organized religion.

1680

"I told you all it was the opiate of the masses, dammit. Then again, now you have cable..."

[DaPunisher]

can i post the pics in question, is that ok?

[IX Equilibrium]

can i post the pics in question, is that ok?


of fucking course

[Dewey's Diva]

Just in case anyone cared... cultural sensitivity or political expediency - you be the judge.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/religion_cartoons_usa_dc&printer=1;_ylt=AsuUQe8H8dO4Wd80jJ9KGcMb.3QA;_ylu=X 3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-

US sides with Muslims in cartoon dispute
18 minutes ago


Washington on Friday condemned caricatures in European newspapers of the Prophet Mohammad, siding with Muslims who are outraged that the publications put press freedom over respect for religion.

By inserting itself into a dispute that has become a lightning rod for anti-European sentiment across the Muslim world, the United States could help its own battered image among Muslims.

"These cartoons are indeed offensive to the belief of Muslims," State Department spokesman Kurtis Cooper said in answer to a question. "We all fully recognize and respect freedom of the press and expression but it must be coupled with press responsibility. Inciting religious or ethnic hatreds in this manner is not acceptable."

"We call for tolerance and respect for all communities for their religious beliefs and practices," he added.

Major U.S. publications have not republished the cartoons, which include depictions of Mohammad as a terrorist. That is in contrast to European media, which responded to the criticism against the original Danish newspaper that printed the caricatures by republishing the offensive images themselves.

[DaPunisher]

These are the pics in debate:


http://www.ogrish.com/archives/2006/february/ogrish-dot-com-mohammed_cartoon.jpg

http://www.ogrish.com/archives/2006/february/ogrish-dot-com-mohammed_cartoon2.jpg

[IX Equilibrium]

Red x's, DaPun


It must be the power of Muhammed!

[Falero]

MP how is life an analogy?

[Mad Processor]

Alright, so, in the latest update, there was a huge protest in Copenhagen with kids demonstrating and saying you should "respect religious symbols". To underline their good intents, they decided to start throwing rocks and bottles at the police. Am I the only one who sees that they're not exactly trying to gain more friends here? What the fuck are they thinking?

[Mad Processor]

MP how is life an analogy?

Just like your tie is like Hitler at an ice rink.

[JaKsHitRaCk]

this is not in the bare knux, so i don't gonna be bad.

But by the way, they start to piss me off

[JaKsHitRaCk]

Red x's, DaPun


It must be the power of Muhammed!

http://permanent.nouvelobs.com/photos/20060202.OBS2439.jpg
http://permanent.nouvelobs.com/photos/20060202.OBS2432.jpghttp://permanent.nouvelobs.com/photos/20060202.OBS2433.jpg

[cdsc]

Im not alone when I want every religious person to stop breathing, am I?

[Mad Processor]

Im not alone when I want every religious person to stop breathing, am I?

I support you, 100%

In their latest move to show the world how kind and gentle they are, they've just burned the Norwegian embassy in Syria to the ground and set fire to the Danish one.

[Mad Processor]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4681294.stm
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/02/04/syria.cartoon.ap/index.html

This is just fucking stupid. I have a sneaking suspision that there will be a couple of fights downtown tonight..

[Mad Processor]

This is going completely nuts, Scandinavian right wing extremists have announced demonstrations where they are going to burn the Quran.

[Mad Processor]

I must say, my random playlist just started playing "...For Victory" by Bolt Thrower when I posted that :D

[Mad Processor]

I will take the time to remind people that an attack on an embassy is actually an attack on a sovereign nation since embassy ground is not considered to be a part of the country where it resides, but actually part of the country which has the embassy.

I guess we're officially at war?

[derubermensch]

Bull-fucking-shit. We're talking about people who LIVE in Denmark, are Danish citizens, that threaten to go on a suicide bombing mission because of these pictures. Want to throw someone out of Gaza? Fine, that's their right, but do NOT show up here and expect western society to change to suit their needs. We HAVE freedom of speech, they need to adjust to it, not the other way around.

I woud wager many Jews living in Norway and Denmark are horrified at how freely neo-nazis are able to roam here. Tough luck, that's the way it works. There is a professor in Sweden who has written a shitload of stuff on the holocaust never happening. Got the Jews pissed off? Big time, but again, tough luck, that's how it works in a free western society.

Don't draw the "smoking in their cave" thing, because the pictures were printed in a Danish newspaper and a christian conservative Norwegian "paper". A better analogy would be the African tribe sitting in YOUR LIVING ROOM complaining about you smoking.

You're hardly doing a good job of disguising your prejudice here, all the while doing nothing but exposing the violent contradiction of supposed multicultural toleration and freedoms of expression. And by the way, your analogy isn't applicable at all cause in accordance with multicultural toleration we pride ourselves on, you just told that African tribe you won't smoke in their faces in your living room, and then proceed to smoke in their faces. Nice try

[derubermensch]

Im not alone when I want every religious person to stop breathing, am I?

This thread is amazing. I've never seen so much contradiction in one place.

[Mad Processor]

You're hardly doing a good job of disguising your prejudice here, all the while doing nothing but exposing the violent contradiction of supposed multicultural toleration and freedoms of expression. And by the way, your analogy isn't applicable at all cause in accordance with multicultural toleration we pride ourselves on, you just told that African tribe you won't smoke in their faces in your living room, and then proceed to smoke in their faces. Nice try

How did I expose a "violent contradiction"? Show me.

How did we say we wouldn't smoke in their faces exactly? They should know since they decide to live here that we have freedom of press and they should understand what that means. Nowhere does it say "alright, we're not going to fuck with your religion". We have supreme court precedence that blasphemy is perfectly legal and it happens every day against christians, jews and others, what is so different about muslims?

[derubermensch]

How did I expose a "violent contradiction"? Show me.

How did we say we wouldn't smoke in their faces exactly? They should know since they decide to live here that we have freedom of press and they should understand what that means. Nowhere does it say "alright, we're not going to fuck with your religion". We have supreme court precedence that blasphemy is perfectly legal and it happens every day against christians, jews and others, what is so different about muslims?

Multicultural Toleration = ostensibly, respect and a minimum of appreciation for the beliefs of other cultures

Freedom of speech= unihibited expression

Both of these are tenets of Western liberalism, both don't jive...at all. A supreme court ruling is irrelelvant to the point I'm making. We can mask and hide all manner of prejudices and no one can say a thing about it. I don't give two shits "everyone is blasephemed equally." its good to know prejudice and discrimination show no bounds, but that doesn't make them right.

[Nuke]

Im not alone when I want every religious person to stop breathing, am I?
Wow what a great comment. So all the religious people helping the needy mean nothing to you? What about the religious inventors and charities that have helped people does that also must mean nothing to you?

[derubermensch]

Wow what a great comment. So all the religious people helping the needy mean nothing to you? What about the religious inventors and charities that have helped people does that also must mean nothing to you?

No, he just doesn't know what he's talking about

[Mad Processor]

Multicultural Toleration = ostensibly, respect and a minimum of appreciation for the beliefs of other cultures

Freedom of speech= unihibited expression

Both of these are tenets of Western liberalism, both don't jive...at all. A supreme court ruling is irrelelvant to the point I'm making. We can mask and hide all manner of prejudices and no one can say a thing about it. I don't give two shits "everyone is blasephemed equally." its good to know prejudice and discrimination show no bounds, but that doesn't make them right.

You're saying we should treat muslims differently? Many comedians like to portray catholic priests as pedophile maniacs, blasphemy? Off course, but perfectly legal.

If a supreme court ruling is irrelevant, I'm not getting your point, because what I get from it is "don't do that, it'll piss them off" which basically means we can mess with everyone except muslims, or try to avoid controversial topics all together. Part of the reason these pictures were made was to spark a debate on the freedom of speech within Islam. You think it was so incredibly wrong to show them? Guess what, certain muslim papers have also reprinted them. Those who are protesting are for the most part extremists and people who abuse the situation.

You also seem to confuse me with the people doing this. I defend their right to do it, not what they did. I found it unnecessary for what they were trying to start a debate on.

[derubermensch]

You're saying we should treat muslims differently? Many comedians like to portray catholic priests as pedophile maniacs, blasphemy? Off course, but perfectly legal.

If a supreme court ruling is irrelevant, I'm not getting your point, because what I get from it is "don't do that, it'll piss them off" which basically means we can mess with everyone except muslims, or try to avoid controversial topics all together. Part of the reason these pictures were made was to spark a debate on the freedom of speech within Islam. You think it was so incredibly wrong to show them? Guess what, certain muslim papers have also reprinted them. Those who are protesting are for the most part extremists and people who abuse the situation.

You also seem to confuse me with the people doing this. I defend their right to do it, not what they did. I found it unnecessary for what they were trying to start a debate on.

Firstly, The point of those cartoons was NOT to draw a fucking debate over free speech, you're conflating effects for causes. They are explicitly political and are aimed at attacking the religion of Islam and the terrorism which has grown out of the reaction to Western intervention in the arab world. YOu've also already indicated in this thread that normal muslims even in the U.S are insulted by this, so you can't try and isolate the reactions to this solely to extremists, as if the 'normal' muslims were following secularism like they should.

Secondly, my point is that the contradictory nature of Western liberalism only hides the prejudice that underlies the whole damn thing. It doesn't matter if you go left or right, you're engaging in prejudice. Your 'defense' of free speech in effect is the right to discriminate. Look at my second analogy closely, not only are you smoking in the african tribes' face when you told them you'd respect their beliefs while in the living room, the alternative is to tell them to get out of the living room if they don't like it. THere is no third way, western liberalism is contradictory to the point of its application justfying prejudice (I wish there was a stronger though netural term I could use) either way it goes.

Let me repeat, this does not mean I am calling you personally a racist, but rather that the system in which you lend your participation makes you one in effect since it justifies it no matter the route. The only possible way to begin rectifying this situation is to throw out western liberalism as a whole, it does not do anything for us in engaging authentically other different human beings.

Thus, returning to my initial point, in a clash of culture, you simply cannot apply one side's POV and call it a day. That does not solve a goddamn thing cause you always end up justifying an exclusion one way or the other. Now you may not be interested in creating a world of non-exclusion (I don't say inclusion, that's the status quo), but I am, and I don't believe a system which purports to be inclusive but relies on a hidden exclusion (which also conflates race with it) is the path to that better world.

[Mad Processor]

Firstly, The point of those cartoons was NOT to draw a fucking debate over free speech, you're conflating effects for causes. They are explicitly political and are aimed at attacking the religion of Islam and the terrorism which has grown out of the reaction to Western intervention in the arab world. YOu've also already indicated in this thread that normal muslims even in the U.S are insulted by this, so you can't try and isolate the reactions to this solely to extremists, as if the 'normal' muslims were following secularism like they should.

Firstly, the danish newspapers original intent was indeed on free speech. Similar images have been online for ages, they made some and printed some in a long article on terrorism and lack of free speech. They weren't just there, as an article in itself.

Second, most muslims are insulted. There is a long way from being insulted to burning down an embassy.

Secondly, my point is that the contradictory nature of Western liberalism only hides the prejudice that underlies the whole damn thing. It doesn't matter if you go left or right, you're engaging in prejudice. Your 'defense' of free speech in effect is the right to discriminate. Look at my second analogy closely, not only are you smoking in the african tribes' face when you told them you'd respect their beliefs while in the living room, the alternative is to tell them to get out of the living room if they don't like it. THere is no third way, western liberalism is contradictory to the point of its application justfying prejudice (I wish there was a stronger though netural term I could use) either way it goes.

You're right, but the thing is, with western liberalism is that while I say that I will respect their culture and religion, I cannot guarantee that my neighbor will. Freedom of speech can be a curtain we hide behind to distance ourselves from extremist groups, but where do we draw the line? If we START to censor speech, where do we begin and where do we stop? Should we not be allowed to critisize politicians? I agree that western liberalism allows for extremists views (though, unlike you seem to imply, it does not allow discrimination (or I just misunderstood what you meant by discrimination)). To further the analogy, I may tell them that I won't smoke in my living room, but my roommate does and if they don't like that they can get out.. Sad? But true.

Let me repeat, this does not mean I am calling you personally a racist, but rather that the system in which you lend your participation makes you one in effect since it justifies it no matter the route. The only possible way to begin rectifying this situation is to throw out western liberalism as a whole, it does not do anything for us in engaging authentically other different human beings.

But the US system is exactly the same. I continously see Americans saying how proud they are of their freedom of speech. They even like to look towards Germany where the use of Nazi symbols is illegal as a way to show that freedom of speech is not practiced that much in Europe.

It allows for racism. It allows for white supremacy groups, like in the states, there's no denying that..

Thus, returning to my initial point, in a clash of culture, you simply cannot apply one side's POV and call it a day. That does not solve a goddamn thing cause you always end up justifying an exclusion one way or the other. Now you may not be interested in creating a world of non-exclusion (I don't say inclusion, that's the status quo), but I am, and I don't believe a system which purports to be inclusive but relies on a hidden exclusion (which also conflates race with it) is the path to that better world.

Culture clashes are hard. However, if you go to Saudi Arabia, it is expected that you follow the Saudi law, which is very, very strict. It is the same here, if a Saudi muslim comes to Norway, it is expected that this person follows the laws of this country and accepts them the way they are. If integration means losing constitutional rights (we have freedom of press in the constitution) I'm not going to support it. I don't believe in a world where everyone lives everywhere simply because of the cultural differences. The difference between Saud Arabia, one of the worlds most religious countries, and Norway, one of the most atheist countries in the world, is astounding. I do not want Norway to move towards a Saudi culture.

[derubermensch]

Firstly, the danish newspapers original intent was indeed on free speech. Similar images have been online for ages, they made some and printed some in a long article on terrorism and lack of free speech. They weren't just there, as an article in itself.

Second, most muslims are insulted. There is a long way from being insulted to burning down an embassy.

No matter the extent of the reactions, we can agree that damage is done


You're right, but the thing is, with western liberalism is that while I say that I will respect their culture and religion, I cannot guarantee that my neighbor will. Freedom of speech can be a curtain we hide behind to distance ourselves from extremist groups, but where do we draw the line? If we START to censor speech, where do we begin and where do we stop? Should we not be allowed to critisize politicians? I agree that western liberalism allows for extremists views (though, unlike you seem to imply, it does not allow discrimination (or I just misunderstood what you meant by discrimination)). To further the analogy, I may tell them that I won't smoke in my living room, but my roommate does and if they don't like that they can get out.. Sad? But true.

But the US system is exactly the same. I continously see Americans saying how proud they are of their freedom of speech. They even like to look towards Germany where the use of Nazi symbols is illegal as a way to show that freedom of speech is not practiced that much in Europe.

It allows for racism. It allows for white supremacy groups, like in the states, there's no denying that..

Culture clashes are hard. However, if you go to Saudi Arabia, it is expected that you follow the Saudi law, which is very, very strict. It is the same here, if a Saudi muslim comes to Norway, it is expected that this person follows the laws of this country and accepts them the way they are. If integration means losing constitutional rights (we have freedom of press in the constitution) I'm not going to support it. I don't believe in a world where everyone lives everywhere simply because of the cultural differences. The difference between Saud Arabia, one of the worlds most religious countries, and Norway, one of the most atheist countries in the world, is astounding. I do not want Norway to move towards a Saudi culture.

I'm to group all this cause it seems to speak to the same point, if I miss something specific be sure to call me out on that.

My point is a little more radical than you seem to understand it. I'm not calling for censorship, thats reactionary and is only a response derivative of liberalism anyway. You seem to understand that liberalism allows for racisms, such that the end result is that we're always left with exclusion. That doesn't just mean that racism is allowed to proliferate under the guise of freedom of speech, but that multicultural tolerance itself does too. We have to reject the entire apparatus of liberalism, EVERYTHING THAT GOES WITH IT, and start anew with trying to understand what the basic positon of human beings vis-a-vis other human being is in the world because cleary our current system has failed us in this respect. On a second pass, it seems that you are cognizant of this, but the difference between our positions now is that you seem to have this attitude of "well thats just how it is, tough luck", whereas I'm saying "No, it doesn't have to be this way, we need to start focusing our efforts on reconceptualizing what it means to be a human being among other human beings, and the interactions that entail which clearly are in need of some sort of regulation lest we kill each other."

[Mad Processor]

No matter the extent of the reactions, we can agree that damage is done




I'm to group all this cause it seems to speak to the same point, if I miss something specific be sure to call me out on that.

My point is a little more radical than you seem to understand it. I'm not calling for censorship, thats reactionary and is only a response derivative of liberalism anyway. You seem to understand that liberalism allows for racisms, such that the end result is that we're always left with exclusion. That doesn't just mean that racism is allowed to proliferate under the guise of freedom of speech, but that multicultural tolerance itself does too. We have to reject the entire apparatus of liberalism, EVERYTHING THAT GOES WITH IT, and start anew with trying to understand what the basic positon of human beings vis-a-vis other human being is in the world because cleary our current system has failed us in this respect. On a second pass, it seems that you are cognizant of this, but the difference between our positions now is that you seem to have this attitude of "well thats just how it is, tough luck", whereas I'm saying "No, it doesn't have to be this way, we need to start focusing our efforts on reconceptualizing what it means to be a human being among other human beings, and the interactions that entail which clearly are in need of some sort of regulation lest we kill each other."

Ah, that was a good explanation.

I see your point and I guess my position is just different than yours. Your position is indeed somewhat different than mine, but we're on the same page on several issues as we both recognize the status quo allows for this.

I can probably be considered part of the problem, seeing that I am for every nation's right to decide what they want to do within their borders, and as such, I do expect immigrants here to obey by our rules and lean towards our culture and not our culture to lean in their direction.

Your proposal is very interesting though, something I will indeed ponder on.

[DaPunisher]

Im not alone when I want every religious person to stop breathing, am I?


not all, just the ones with political power.

[Marshal G.K. Zhukov]

Im not alone when I want every religious person to stop breathing, am I?

You want fucking animists in Haiti to all die? They'll fucking make you a goddamn zombie, you BITCH!

Religous extremism is just as gay as militant agnosticism and atheism. Though at least religion has the added benefit of making the world more colorful, you know? Culture you fucks!

Don't fuck with Islam though. There is no God but God and Mohammed is his prophet! Jihad on yo nuts, bow down! ALLLLLAYAAAAYALYTEAHHHHHYLAEEAAAAAAAHHHYAA!!!

[JaKsHitRaCk]

Religion is the worst thing human build ever.
Because of this, we killed many ppl, losing century of sciences and modernity.

More of this unlike Christian point of view, Mulsim religions is based like jew on a vengance theory.If you take my land, i can fight you; if you punch me, i can punch you, what is not writted in Christian new testament.

I think Muslim should reform their text and stop using it like in middle age.

[derubermensch]

Ok, everyone go to the stem cell thread and see what I have to say about religion and y'alls shittalking

[Dewey's Diva]

If anyone is interested, the whole page from the Danish newspaper is up in Wikipedia...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_cartoons

[SnjoNegri]

This is the dumbest debate ever.
Muslims hate europeans that is a fast.
Theyre just looking for an excuse to go crazy.

[Alfuh]

fact*

That confused me

[derubermensch]

This is the dumbest debate ever.
Muslims hate europeans that is a fast.
Theyre just looking for an excuse to go crazy.

Yes. All the cute looking arabic girls at my university hate europe:rolleyes:

[momo]

He (they?) knew and the Norwegian paper printed it after the Danish (Jyllands posten btw) printed it.

A pretty pathetic note: The editor in chief for the Norwegian magazine has defended himself with freedom of speech, yet he himself has said that he would never print a picture disrespecting Jesus, and he was very strongly opposing a theater play that featured god as a smoking, cursing bastard. Guess to some people it doesn't work both ways.
Hey man,
Do u mind giving posting a link of a source of where u got that info or whatever.
Appreciate it

[Mad Processor]

Hey man,
Do u mind giving posting a link of a source of where u got that info or whatever.
Appreciate it

Norwegian television/Radio. The news went through the background story of the "Magazinet" editor. I'll see if I can find an English newspaper, but I'm not sure they've gone that deeply into it.

[SnjoNegri]

Yes. All the cute looking arabic girls at my university hate europe:rolleyes:
Women are different.

Men get nationalistic very easily and violent easily.
Women just bitch at eachother, regardless of race.

[derubermensch]

Women are different.

Men get nationalistic very easily and violent easily.
Women just bitch at eachother, regardless of race.

Amazing. You'v essentialized a whole religion and women too in one thread. What's next?

[TILSON]

Wow. Just Wow. How stupid could those scandinavians be? They know full well what it meant to draw a picture, one intended for comedic effect at that, of the prophet Mohammed and they do it anyway. And then they wonder why people are freaking the fuck out? I can't put into words how stupid those newspapers are.

Rachel: Making an image of Christ doesn't have anywhere near the same ramifications as making an image of Mohammed. No where in the bible does it say "Don't make an image of Jesus." I'm sure you might respond with something to the effect of "Well people make images of God and it says you can't do that in the bible", which leads me to my point since the background for the statement is the dominance of secularism in the West...

All: You can't go applying your Western standards of liberality and what not to people who don't buy into the same bullshit as you. A defense of Free fucking speech is moot at the point at which there is a cultural clash at play. You don't smoke in an African tribe's sacred cave with your friends and then when they piss on you about it, you say I have the freedom to goddamn assembly. It is moronic to think so.


What is this crap? They published those cartoons in their news paper in their own fucking country. Where it is most certainly not against the law. I don't see Denmark in a rage because a bunch of towel heads were burning their flag. And you know why? Because they were doing it in their country where it is completely legal. This is not a case of the west pushing its beliefs on the Muslim world it is a case of the bass akwards Muslim world trying to push its beliefs on the rest of the world.

[jiddu]

so..

did my rant get deleted?

EDIT: oh no it didn't its in some other thread

[derubermensch]

What is this crap? They published those cartoons in their news paper in their own fucking country. Where it is most certainly not against the law. I don't see Denmark in a rage because a bunch of towel heads were burning their flag. And you know why? Because they were doing it in their country where it is completely legal. This is not a case of the west pushing its beliefs on the Muslim world it is a case of the bass akwards Muslim world trying to push its beliefs on the rest of the world.

Ok. Now read what I said in the thread please. Pay special attention to Mad Proc and I's polemic.

[Nuke]

They now are angry at the U.S.A. for those cartoons.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060209/ap_on_re_mi_ea/prophet_drawings

Afghanistan - Police killed four people Wednesday as Afghans enraged over drawings of the Prophet Muhammad marched on a U.S. military base in a volatile southern province, directing their anger not against Europe but America.

The U.S. base was targeted because the United States "is the leader of Europe and the leading infidel in the world," said Sher Mohammed, a 40-year-old farmer who suffered a gunshot wound while taking part in the demonstration in the city of Qalat.

[Mad Processor]

Bwahahhaha, turns out, an Egyptian paper printed the cartoons as well, back in OCTOBER! There wasn't even a small peaceful demonstration.

The curent situation has gone way beyond the cartoons and there are many speculating that at least Syria and Iran are having state lead demonstration and attacks, abusing the situation. Several imams also need to take a lot of the blame for stirring up shit prior to the protests.