Religious cartoon causes outrage in the muslim world

[Assassin]

Despite the fact that im sure 90% of ppl here are probably incapable of having a serious discussion, the Abortion topic has given me some hope.

Anyways, this (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4670370.stm) is the story im referring to. For those too lazy to read it, basically the danish newspaper printed some cartoons back in september depicting the prophet muhammed in situations that muslims didn't find too funny. Although the newspaper is not affiliated with the government (atleast from what i know), the danish prime minister defended the cartoons saying it was freedom of press.

To make matters worse, 4 other european newspapers have printed the same cartoons to 'show support' for the danish newspaper.


Read the bbc story yourself, and give us your opinion on the issue. Please be advised that racisim or anyother form of flamming will not be tolerated.


Discuss away.

[el_boss]

The actual cartoons weren't what sparked the conflict. It was when the danish government refused to meet with some muslim diplomats that wanted to discuss this subject, that the shit really hit the fan. It seems like most news-sources are leaving out this essantial piece of fact.

The cartoons themselves are rather harmless in my opinion. I have them, and I can post them here if you want to see them. I just want to make sure that I don't get banned for posting them before I do.

[Terracosmo]

Originally posted by: Assassin
Despite the fact that im sure 90% of ppl here are probably incapable of having a serious discussion, the Abortion topic has given me some hope.

C'mon dude, it ain't THAT bad. You're making this sound like Narutofan i/expressions/face-icon-small-tongue.gif

As for the topic, yeah, I've heard a lot about this in the media recently.
My spontaneous response is "It's not weird that the world is so full of war, when morons can't even take a fucking joke".

[Kraco]

The whole thing is ridiculous. But even more ridiculous is the fact the Danes are losing millions because various countries are now boycotting their dairy and other products. But I suppose Jyllands-Posten isn't losing anything, nor the Danish prime minister, so everything's good...

[DB_Hunter]

The posts so far have missed the point. It's not what YOU guys think is acceptable or not, its what is offensive to Muslims. I find extremely patronising for people to say 'its a just a joke' or 'come on what are you lot crying about' etc etc etc... every person or group of people have their sensitivites and only they should determine the depth of their feelings towards them. Anyone who thinks otherwise should stop thinking like a colonialist and telling others over what issues they should get upset over or not.

The fact of the matter is is that these cartoons, forget the fact that they would upset Muslims for depicting such a sacred figure, actually set out to insult Islam. Which person would be naive enough to think that these cartoons are going to provoke reflection and contemplation in the mind of a Muslim?

I think its shows utter contempt and disrespect for Muslims for other countries in Europe to reprint the cartoons... at least the Danes could claim ignorance for arguments sake. What is particularly disgusting is a country like Germany claiming to defend the freedom of speech by printing these offensive cartoons whilst at the same time having blatantly hypocritical views towards the Holocaust... so its freedom of speech when you make outrageous cartoons about Islam but you are gonna get 10 years hard time if you decide to question the holocaust? Where the hell is free speech then? Would Germans like it if people dictated to them not to take the issue of the holocaust seriously? But hey, they can take what the like seriously, its their business.

As for boycott of Danish goods, so what? You expect a people to be insulted and take it lying down? The Western world can go about imposing sanctions on whoever it damn well pleases so why can't others do the same? Sure, we can discuss the merits of an economic boycott as an effective tool to discharge one's displeasure, but that's another thing.

[Ero-Fan]

Ah, now this is why I feel religion is bad, and organized religion can make it worse. Why the hell can't they take a joke? Seriously, me and my friends make racial jokes all the time (especially concerning our own races). Why people take this so far over a fucking drawing?! Have they ever seen The Boondocks? You don't hear african-americans getting all worked up over that. Lighten up.. Damn religious nuts..
Edit: @ Above: I'm an Italian-german mix, if I got offended every time someone called me a deigo or nazi or guito (I can't spell, I know) I'd never have a moments peace. God, I'm already bored with this topic. Hey, El_Boss, pm me those cartoons, I need a good laugh..

[Carnage]

1.) this is the way the world is. People suck.

2.) El_boss, please pm me the pictures, I want to laugh

3.) {It was done not to defend freedom of the press, but to spite the Muslims," Mohammad Aman Hobohm said.}

even if it was to spite the muslims, it wasnt like a letter saying " I DECLARE WAR ON THE MUSLIMS!" Its still freedom of speech. Fucking extremists.

@DB_Hunter: Alot of my family is Muslim, I'm even considered muslim. I don't take any offense from these kinds of jokes.

[XanBcoo]

Originally posted by: Ero-Fan
Ah, now this is why I feel religion is bad, and organized religion can make it worse. Why the hell can't they take a joke? Seriously, me and my friends make racial jokes all the time (especially concerning our own races). Why people take this so far over a fucking drawing?! Have they ever seen The Boondocks? You don't hear african-americans getting all worked up over that. Lighten up.. Damn religious nuts.
Any group of people is capable of being sensitive to some issues, religion has nothing to do with it. Hell, I hear more "dat's racist!" than anything else where I live. However I do think this issue is being way overblown.

pm me the cartoons too, el_boss.


Originally posted by: God#2
Alot of my family is Muslim, I'm even considered muslim. I don't take any offense from these kinds of jokes.
Which is how it should be. But then again, you're not in the position of representing a large amount of people. I don't think Boubakeur could easily laugh this off. So I guess I kinda see how things got so tense, but I still think it's an overreaction.

[Jadugar]

I agree with DB_Hunter that you ppl have missed the point. Saying that its just a joke, it isnt. It might be a joke to someone but it aint a joke to someone else. There is a very fine line. I bet the people who are saying its just a joke they wouldnt like it if they were on the other side and the joke was on them. Fun is always at someone expense. Nobody like being ridiculed.

If you are lighting a dynamite. It wil explode. It wont turn into a flower. People are fine with joke but everything has a limit. EVERTTHING. When you hit that barrier then be prepare to face the consequences. If you know something is going to upset someone then why say it. There are plenty of jokes about religion but to criticise someone to its core is not a joke, its humilation and nobody likes that. NOBODY.

If those cartoons were some sort of freedom of speech then people who are protesting against them why their opinions arent called so called "freedom of speech". Even freedom of speech has its limits.

I live in English. The leader of the modern world and an example of multicultural society. Although the cartoons are published all over the EU but they have not been published here yet. Why, because there is a wide community of Muslims and British pple know that they will get upset by it. Why would you upset your neighbours.

I dont see Muslims making any cartoons about any other religions then why would they take it lying down when someone play a dirty trick on them.

If you want to live in a modern world where there is no war and peace then you need to learn how to respect others believes and their faiths.

Personally I dont discuss politics and religion becuase I know they are controversal and I have very strong believes and nothing will change them. You might debate on a particular problem but why cant we stay away from things which you will cause trouble.

You want to make cartoons, fine make something useful, something about peace, war, hatred, racism. Becuase that my friend is hard to do. Any moron can make those offensive cartoons.

//peace out

@ Terra : I am glad this discussion is not taking place in NarutoForumi/expressions/face-icon-small-tongue.gif

[Carnage]

If those cartoons were some sort of freedom of speech then people who are protesting against them why their opinions arent called so called "freedom of speech".

You are right. But I think I saw a picture of a burning car and I don't think thats a part of "freedom of speech".

[Ero-Fan]

Yeah, if I have to put up with idiots burning my flag and the KKK marching in the streets, then they can put up with a little comic strip. I'd shoot them if I could, but freedom of speech is a two way street. Deal with it like the rest of us do. Ignore shit you don't like.

[masamuneehs]

Well, goodness gracious me, I actually agree with Jadugar and DBHunter!

If I took my religion seriously like many Muslims do I would also be pissed about the depiction of their most revered spirtual icon. Making fun of someone to prove a greater point is one thing, doing the same just to get a kick out of it is bordering on sadism. Its like rubbing salt in a person's open wound simply because you have salt to spare. There is no good taste in that, merely insensitive cruelty. Overreaction? Who are we to judge? Any Muslims here? Any? Speak up, please.

I'm Christian and I've seen Christ take plenty of jokes and I'm pretty fine with it, simply because:
I respect a person's right to freedom of speech/expression OVER my own religious beliefs/followings. (herein, I believe, lies the crux of this dilemma, that is in the differences between mine and others)

HOWEVER, those who do not follow a doctrine of such 'secularly influenced' religion might understandably be quite angered by acts such as this. I cannot blame them, nor any (nonviolent) actions they take as a response to this. That is also their expression of speech/faith/freedom, and they are owed that just as the next man is.

@God#2: Who is to say that such a blashpemous attack at a reverred religious figure does not border on extremist agitation?
@Jadugar: Yes, I haven't seen too many Muslim cartoons on other religions, however the cartoons found on aljazeera.com are quite harsh on certain countries.
@Xan: Religion can have Everything to do with it. References (Crusades, Jihad, israel/Palestine, Sri Lanka, colonization of Americas). It has beenused as a great prop in the past, why not now?
@Ero-fan: Religion is not a bad thing. Perhaps it is actually one of the best things in the world. However, humans bring their human flaws and human evils into religion just as much as they do into everything else, turning such great enterprises into great enterprises of INTERESTS. That is the source of religion as a bastion of conflict; merely a perversion of the faith into a grounds for staking/battling for agendas. It is a conflict of interest that spils blood, nothing else (insanity excluded).

[Jadugar]

@ God#2 : Idiots are a universal race. They dont have any religion. Aftermath of this situation has nothing to do with religion. Thats just people. Burning cars will not solve anything. No religion preeches voilence but the world we live in is not an ideal one. *Sigh*

[DB_Hunter]

Originally posted by: masamuneehs

HOWEVER, those who do not follow a doctrine of such 'secularly influenced' religion might understandably be quite angered by acts such as this. I cannot blame them, nor any (nonviolent) actions they take as a response to this. That is also their expression of speech/faith/freedom, and they are owed that just as the next man is.



It is a conflict of interest that spils blood, nothing else (insanity excluded).

Agreed on both points. And as for Muslims speaking up, I have mentioned before on the forums I am Muslim... so count me as spoken up now.

[Ero-Fan]

Originally posted by: masamuneehs
@Ero-fan: Religion is not a bad thing. Perhaps it is actually one of the best things in the world. However, humans bring their human flaws and human evils into religion just as much as they do into everything else, turning such great enterprises into great enterprises of INTERESTS. That is the source of religion as a bastion of conflict; merely a perversion of the faith into a grounds for staking/battling for agendas. It is a conflict of interest that spils blood, nothing else (insanity excluded).

When human kind stops using it as an excuse to kill, make war, trample over other people's rights, then I'll agree with you. As it stands, it causes more harm than good. Ahh, and all this time I thought people that agreed with each other have conflicts, not those that disagree. i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif
I have no problem with religion in general, just what its used for/as. And until religions stop saying everyone else who doesn't follow their way is wrong, your going to have conflicts of interest between differing groups.
Edit: Oh, its also human nature to kill. I remember having a fun conversation in one class where a teacher asked us what product would always be of use to humans. Invariably, the answer came back as weapons. Second best was food/water. Ha!

[Jadugar]

@ masamuneehs : You agreed with me. I didnt see that one coming.

@ Ero-Fan :

Dont blame it on religion. 99% of the human population believe in God. As long as there are evil people in this world they will use religion to do their dirty work.


blah blah balh............

I am depressed with all this. Anynody knows any good jokes( preferably not religious orientated).

[Ero-Fan]

Originally posted by: Jadugar
@ Ero-Fan :

Dont blame it on religion. 99% of the human population believe in God. As long as there are evil people in this world they will use religion to do their dirty work.


blah blah balh............

I am depressed with all this. Anynody knows any good jokes( preferably not religious orientated).

I do, but most are racist, sexist, and I used most of my gay jokes yesterday.
Well, there were 3 blondes stuck on an island and they found a magic lamp.......
Edit: I'm tired, I'll think on this subject more when I get to work, and I'll ask my lesbian boss if she gets offended by my sexist comments all day (I already know the answer, she doesn't, its the other prudish bitches that do). I'm sure I can find a muslim to ask as well what they think of this..

[Terracosmo]

There are many things in life I, and everyone else of course, take very seriously. It's when your "honor" gets in the way of seeing things in different lights that conflict occur. I am not saying that the muslims (or whoever else might be offended by this) should necessarily laugh along and say "good one, mate!". I am saying that there is a choice. When someone insults something I love for getting a cheap laugh out of it, I will not find it funny. But nor will I get pissed. Unless of course the whole point was to insult me. Then I'd kill the person slowly.

The point of this comic was not to insult anyone, but to get a cheap laugh. Some find it funny, others don't. If people could just leave it at that instead of bitching about everything, this wouldn't have to happen. I'd see it differently if the comic was actually -made- to insult, but as it is it's just comedy. And having seen the comic in question, rather harmless one at that.

In the end it boils down to different personalities. Unfortunately.

If you ask me, I think the whole problem is that education and teachings concerning religion is always preached so seriously. There is never room for distance or different views, it's just serious, serious, serious. All the damn time. As I said earlier, the reason to conflict is that people are entirely unable to joke around.

Sure, one can say "But hey, Terra, what do you know? You ain't religious! And you sure ain't muslim!". So fucking what? One doesn't need to actually be the "receiver" here to understand that it's all ridiculous and blown out of proportion. Nobody can deny that.

[XanBcoo]

Originally posted by: masamuneehs
@Xan: Religion can have Everything to do with it. References (Crusades, Jihad, israel/Palestine, Sri Lanka, colonization of Americas). It has been used as a great prop in the past, why not now?

Oh, I'm not denying that religion is a MAJOR factor in many controversial issues. In fact, in this case it is precisely the issue. I was just replying to this point in particular:


Originally posted by: Ero-Fan
You don't hear african-americans getting all worked up over that. Lighten up.. Damn religious nuts.
I suppose I meant to say that it's not just religious differences that cause things like this. As you said, it's conflicts of interest that spill blood, which are not at all limited to religion. I repeat that I think this thing is being overblown, but I also think those insulted are completely justified. It's a bit of an unfortunate circumstance.

[Jadugar]

Well I said no religious jokes but here they are. I do apologise in advance.


**************************WARNING***************** **************

************************Offensive Religious Jokes*****************



<Jokes removed>

Sorry guys, but im gonna have to ask that you stick to the discussion and keep the jokes to PM's. Although these particular jokes aren't offensive in anyway, letting this continue will eventually result in someone posting something that crosses the line.

Gotwoot Moderator.

[Assassin]

intresting, intresting.

I'd just like to point out something that everyone seems to be missing. As el_boss has already stated, it wasn't the cartoons that caused all the outrage. After the cartoons were published, 15 arab nations wrote a letter to the danish prime minister asking to meet with him in order to discuss a solution to this problem.

It was only when he blatantly refused this invitation that tehse nations got mad and the conflict escalated to this point. So to all of those people saying "its just a joke, dont be a pussy", its not the joke thats making muslims so mad, its the fact that there was an offer for a peaceful solution, and it was refused outright. And as a result, muslims are once again the bad guys making death threats and burnign flags.



Originally posted by: God#2
even if it was to spite the muslims, it wasnt like a letter saying " I DECLARE WAR ON THE MUSLIMS!" Its still freedom of speech. Fucking extremists.


I dont quite understand what you're trying to say here. You cant chalk everything up to freedom of speech. Even freedom must have limitations, otherwise its nothing more then anarchy. Even though the danish newspaper has the right to freedom of speech and expression, they also have a responsibility to thier readers. And as far as being extremists, i dont see how expressing thier outrage and boycotting danish products are in anyway extremism or fundamentalism.


Now, im a muslim, and my personal view on this is that the editor of the danish newspaper should have known better. I think Saudia arabia and Libya pulling out thier ambassadors and closing thier embassies was a good move. It was a strong nonviolent way to show thier disapproval.

However, i dont agree with the boycott of the swedish/danish company. Although it does send a strong message, in the end its hurting the wrong people. The workers who lose thier jobs due to this are just gettign caught in the crossfire, and its not fair that they suffer for the mistakes of thier prime minister. Regardless, that is the case in any boycott, and everyone has thier own opinion on the subject.

As for the flag burning and death threats, thats just plain idiocy. Im rather ashamed to see muslims resort to such acts while claiming to defend islam. Anyone who has bothered studying islam, or the life of the prophet muhammed would know that islam teaches you to simply walk away in such situations, and that the prophet himself went through much abuse in his life, and never once did he choose to retaliate.

All in all, the paper did offer an apology, but the prime minster still doesnt seem to understand why this is such a big issue as he still defends the freedom of press.

[KitKat]

To those of you who advocate that people should learn to lighten up and take a joke, I want to make an important distinction here. There is a huge difference between religion and faith. There are a lot of people who classify themselves as belonging to a religion. It's kinda like belonging to a club. They do it for different reasons, but they're not too hung up on the details and they don't think that their membership of their own little religious club should really affect other people. I'd say a lot of people in North America and Europe are like this. Then we have the people who can be classified as not just being in a religion, but having faith. To these people, religion is not just something that you do, it's the fundamental truths of the world. It dictates their actions, it affects every aspect of their lives. When you insult someone's religion, no big deal. When you insult someone's faith, you insult the very core of who they are. I don't know if any of you believe in anything so strongly to be able to understand this. But basically, this is why we are seeing this extreme reaction. These people probably wouldn't get this upset about an insult to their nationality or culture, but they will not stand by and let Allah and their holy prophet be insulted.

As for freedom of speech, as has been pointed out before, this is a very blurred line. Is sexual harrassment freedom of speech? Generally, in our society we've come to the conclusion that freedom of speech applies only so far as it is not harming another person. To see that this event has sparked such serious and debilitating consequences for the parties involved, and on a nation-wide scale no less, sets off some warning flags in my mind that these cartoons crossed the boundary from being expressions of opinion to being instruments of harm.

[Jadugar]

I will give you a practical example of "freedom of speech of gotwoot" forum.

I just posted two line jokes in my last post. They werent even remotly offensive but they were removed. Why? because one of the gotwoot moderators thought that if he let this continue someone elsemight post something that crosses the line. So why am I being punished for it. If someone else decides to post something that is offensive then that is their crime not mine.

You want a discussion then read my earlier post in this thread. I am perfectly capable of a discussion without taking it far. I dont have the control over all the jerks on gotwoot. If someone decides to post something he can do so without my permission. Implying that something I did will lead someone is nonsense.

Give me back my freedom of speech. I want an apology. I bet its one of the moderators who thinks that those cartoons were just a joke.

I do believe gotwoot moderators have seperate accounts which they can use to log in and post. So come out.

I see a ban comimg.

[Gotwoot Moderator]

Jadugar, I think you are still under the misconception that Gotwoot is a democracy. This is a private forum, and the admins and mods are responsible for what we will allow here and what we will not. Our goal is to keep this a place where people can come and have fun discussing various topics. We have to have certain rules in place to keep order. We do take the concerns of our members very seriously, but in the end everyone must respect the decisions that are made whether you agree with them or not. If you read the rules, most of them are restrictions on what you may or may not say. There is no freedom of speech here. If you are not happy with the decisions are made, you always have the freedom to leave.

[DO]

Originally posted by: Jadugar
I will give you a practical example of "freedom of speech of gotwoot" forum.

I just posted two line jokes in my last post. They werent even remotly offensive but they were removed. Why? because one of the gotwoot moderators thought that if he let this continue someone elsemight post something that crosses the line. So why am I being punished for it. If someone else decides to post something that is offensive then that is their crime not mine.

You want a discussion then read my earlier post in this thread. I am perfectly capable of a discussion without taking it far. I dont have the control over all the jerks on gotwoot. If someone decides to post something he can do so without my permission. Implying that something I did will lead someone is nonsense.

Give me back my freedom of speech. I want an apology. I bet its one of the moderators who thinks that those cartoons were just a joke.

I do believe gotwoot moderators have seperate accounts which they can use to log in and post. So come out.

I see a ban comimg.


lol stfu you fucking faggot stop complaining and start sucking my dick.

[Jadugar]

Originally posted by: Gotwoot Moderator
Jadugar, I think you are still under the misconception that Gotwoot is a democracy. This is a private forum, and the admins and mods are responsible for what we will allow here and what we will not. Our goal is to keep this a place where people can come and have fun discussing various topics. We have to have certain rules in place to keep order. We do take the concerns of our members very seriously, but in the end everyone must respect the decisions that are made whether you agree with them or not. If you read the rules, most of them are restrictions on what you may or may not say. There is no freedom of speech here. If you are not happy with the decisions are made, you always have the freedom to leave.

Ok understood, then what about DragonOutlaw's post.
You dont have a democracy but you do have some rules, right. I want to see them being enforced.

I have no problem shutting him up but lets see if you do something do about it.





Originally posted by: DragonOutlaw
lol stfu you fucking faggot stop complaining and start sucking my dick.

You are asking me to suck your dick and you call me a faggot i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gif

Dude if you are having problems with finding someone then try this (http://www.datingagency.com/join/default.asp?theme=gaydatingagency).

[Turkish-S]

Originally posted by: KitKat
There are a lot of people who classify themselves as belonging to a religion. It's kinda like belonging to a club. They do it for different reasons, but they're not too hung up on the details and they don't think that their membership of their own little religious club should really affect other people. I'd say a lot of people in North America and Europe are like this.

this is why the muslim world made a big deal of it. (i'm gonna try to make myself clear plz don't laugh/bash me if i can't.) i think that 90 % of your grandma's and grandpa's are religious. 40/50 % of your parrents are religious. but for the young population in the west it's 5/10 %.. This is what the muslim world wants to prevent...


damn i have to go to school now i will edit my post later on the day.

[Gotwoot Moderator]

Originally posted by: Jadugar

Ok understood, then what about DragonOutlaw's post.
You dont have a democracy but you do have some rules, right. I want to see them being enforced.

I have no problem shutting him up but lets see if you do something do about it.


10. No racism: This rule isn't difficult to follow.

You still dont get it do you? You broke the rules by posting those jokes. Granted they were not a huge insult or anything, but that doesn't change the fact that they fall under the category of discrimination. If we let you do it, then what right do we have to stop others when THEY post racist/religious jokes. You are not being punished for what others do, you are being punished for something you did.

Despite what you may think, we do not believe that your actions will lead others to do the same. You are not that influential, so get over yourself.

[masamuneehs]

Great... I go and say I agree with Jadugar and he starts acting like a complete... ah, well, guess it ain't my place to flame others, but I do believe alot of the stuff he posted was both uncalled for and against the rules here... Since we're in an online forum and there are very few incentives to be constructive members here I actually understand the need for the moderator structure.

"Where incentive to preserve order and maintain peaceful relations cannot be provided, fear will be the best way to keep the people in line." Hobbes wrote something along those lines, and he was damn right...

Protestors Storm Danish Embasss=y (http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/article342950.ece)

That occurred in Indonesia, just to show the scope of how big this ordeal is. Honestly, from what little I've heard on this incident, it was carried out very peacefully, and I fully support it if that is the case.

One person's big mouth might have the right to flap on and on, but don't be surprised when someone else's fist is used to silence it. And in this case there are millions and millions who will seek to silence this one mouth, and don't be surprised if its done in more violent ways than this protest...

[Kraco]

Originally posted by: DB_Hunter
As for boycott of Danish goods, so what? You expect a people to be insulted and take it lying down? The Western world can go about imposing sanctions on whoever it damn well pleases so why can't others do the same? Sure, we can discuss the merits of an economic boycott as an effective tool to discharge one's displeasure, but that's another thing.

I think you understood my post 180 degrees backwards. What I meant is that the Danish prime miniter is an idiot (no offence to any Danes here). All he had to do was, even after at first refusing to see the envoy, to make a strong apology and perhaps try to see anew the ambassadors. But instead, he just defends his stance that's nothing more than his own pride. I sure hope that dolt loses in the next election... Well, to speak the truth I don't really care since my home country isn't affected at all.

Basically the Danish Prime minister had to choose whether to help Jyllands-Posten, which didn't lose or win anything, or whether to help export companies, which are losing millions and millions. I suppose he got his campaign funding from the newspaper, since he chose Jyllands-Posten. Freedom of expression is all nice, but succesful business that employs people is nice as well. Too bad the Danish prime minister forgot that.

[Terracosmo]

You people say that what got the ball rolling was that the danish prime minister refused to meet up with the offended parties.
Well my original point was that they were taking it too seriously by even wanting to meet the prime minister to begin with.

I mean god, what a funny discussion that would be.

"Yeah we have 15 nations on the line who want to have a big meeting regarding a one-shot comic". Bah.

Edit: I still agree that the prime minister is a fucking idiot for not solving the situation at this point however, even though I can probably relate to the feelings of "what the hell is the problem?" that he must be feeling. Being prime minister means huge responsibility, and it amuses me how he can't even step up and make an apology for this even though he might not understand why.

[Ero-Fan]

Originally posted by: KitKat
As for freedom of speech, as has been pointed out before, this is a very blurred line. Is sexual harrassment freedom of speech? Generally, in our society we've come to the conclusion that freedom of speech applies only so far as it is not harming another person. To see that this event has sparked such serious and debilitating consequences for the parties involved, and on a nation-wide scale no less, sets off some warning flags in my mind that these cartoons crossed the boundary from being expressions of opinion to being instruments of harm.

This comic strip is very different from sexual harrassment in one very important way. When you sexually harrass someone, they pretty much have to hear you saying it. When it comes to printed material, no one is forcing you to read the article or buy the newspaper. If this were on a billboard, that would be a different story; you'd then have a good reason to be upset. You don't like what they print? Then don't buy or read it. Besides, this is freedom of the press, not freedom of speech. There are a lot less restrictions on printed material then what can be said in, say, an office environment or even in public.
Edit: Oh, yeah, and my co-worker said he saw the comic, and he didn't care. His religion comes first, and quite frankly, he doesn't care what other people think of him and his faith.

[el_boss]

Originally posted by: Terracosmo
You people say that what got the ball rolling was that the danish prime minister refused to meet up with the offended parties.
Well my original point was that they were taking it too seriously by even wanting to meet the prime minister to begin with.
Well it isn't really up to the danish prime-minister to decide how offended the muslim community should have gotten. And maybe they didn't take it so serious to begin with, but the fact that he refused to discuss the subject shows that he must have fealt "guilty" on some level and didn't want to confront those people. Very similiar to how a child would have handeled the situation. In my eyes it was a very disrespectful act.

The worst thing about this event is the way the media has handeled it and how the general public percieve it. Yet again muslims have been painted as extremist warmongers that just want jihad all over the place.

[Ero-Fan]

Originally posted by: el_boss
The worst thing about this event is the way the media has handeled it and how the general public percieve it. Yet again muslims have been painted as extremist warmongers that just want jihad all over the place.

If a person has any kind of intelligence at all, they would know its just a small minority among muslims that are the extremist warmongers. Unfortunatly, they also are the most visible due to their actions.

[Kraco]

Originally posted by: Ero-Fan


Originally posted by: el_boss
The worst thing about this event is the way the media has handeled it and how the general public percieve it. Yet again muslims have been painted as extremist warmongers that just want jihad all over the place.

If a person has any kind of intelligence at all, they would know its just a small minority among muslims that are the extremist warmongers. Unfortunatly, they also are the most visible due to their actions.

Exactly. Just like only a small minority among Danes are the extremist idiots. Unfortunately, one of the idiots also is the most visible due to being their prime minister.

[DO]

Originally posted by: DragonOutlaw
lol stfu you fucking faggot stop complaining and start sucking my dick.

You are asking me to suck your dick and you call me a faggot

Dude if you are having problems with finding someone then try this (http://www.datingagency.com/join/default.asp?theme=gaydatingagency).[/quote]


lol you noob whore
your moms a total fatass

[el_boss]

@DragonOutlaw: I don't know if you are moderator, I'm guessing that you are since you never get warned whatever you do. Still, I find it odd that you're getting away with acting like this.

[Jadugar]

Originally posted by: Gotwoot Moderator
Despite what you may think, we do not believe that your actions will lead others to do the same. You are not that influential, so get over yourself.

When did I amply that I am so influential that others will follow my lead.

What are you talking about me not understading the rules. I said : OK, I understood. But you completely dodged my other question. I wanted you to do something about the remraks made by DragonOutlaw.
I think they fall in the category of

<u>2. No excessive or unprovoked flaming.</u> Its not very hard to follow as you put it.

Remarks made by some prick right under your nose.



Originally posted by: DragonOutlaw
lol stfu you fucking faggot stop complaining and start sucking my dick.



Originally posted by: DragonOutlaw
lol you noob whore
your moms a total fatass

What are you going to do about it. You removed my joke which even you admitted werent that offensive but what about forcing those precious rules of yours againt DragonOutlaw?



@ masamuneehs : I dont think that you even read what I posted. Those were two jokes. One liners. Even the mod admitted that they werent offensive. So what was the big deal. I feel like that cartoonist.

You might want to live in fear. Maybe you are use to it but not me.

[Carnage]

@assasin: What I meant was, it wasn't a threat. Thats the limit of freedom of speech. It was just a joke.

Wow, I can't believe nothing happens to Dragon Outlaw for serious flaming. When I do it everyone knows I'm just kidding. Usually. If nothing happens to him just because he is a mod, then no wonder Y and Mut left.

[Gotwoot Moderator]

Maybe some of the mods would let him get away with it, but I won't. The mods can't be browsing the forums 24 hours a day, and different mods have different styles and ways of dealing with things which is why you won't see complete consistency. But the bottom line is: Yes, the rules apply to everyone. DragonOutlaw gets a vacation for a few days.

[Ero-Fan]

Just to get back on topic..


Originally posted by: Terracosmo
Edit: I still agree that the prime minister is a fucking idiot for not solving the situation at this point however, even though I can probably relate to the feelings of "what the hell is the problem?" that he must be feeling. Being prime minister means huge responsibility, and it amuses me how he can't even step up and make an apology for this even though he might not understand why.

Someone explain to me how it is the leader of a nation's responsibility to appologize every time some member of their country writes something offensive. If one person from a nation goes on a mini killing spree (I know, its extreme compared to a funny comic, thats my point) is the president/prime minister/whatever supposed to appologize as if its their nation's fault? Where does it end? Doesn't he have better things to do then worry about a bunch of overreacting diplomats' feelings? And if you're country/religion/organization is stupid enough to blame an entire nation for the writing of a comic strip(by one, maybe a few writers), which doesn't even kill anyone, then you deserve to be ignored. And don't tell me they're not blaming the country, since they asked the head of that country for an apology. Can't blame a country in more ways than that.

[Assassin]

you're rite, its not his responsibility to apologize. His responsibility is to look after this people, and keep good relations with others. So although he doesnt have to apologize, he DOES have a responsibility to meet with other embasadors and hear thier concerns. That is exactly what his job entails. When the heads of 15 nations come knocking at your door, you dont say "sorry im busy" and turn them away. You hear them out regardless of how you feel about the situation. Thats what diplomacy is all about.

@terra: The reason you think that they were taking to too seriously to begin with is because you dont fully undertand thier reasons. Not that i blame you, not many non-muslims can be expected to understand why this is a problem in the first place. The thing is, muslims take thier religion very seriously (bet you did see that comming), and displaying god or any prophet in any form is a VERY bad thing. Add that to what the cartoons actually showed, and the current situation of teh world, especially the mideast, and you have a recipe for disaster.

Think of it this way. In terms of christianity, it would be as if i went back to the time of the crusades, dressed up as jesus, went to the vatican and started stripping in front of the pope. How do you think the christians would react?

It all goes back to what kitkat said about religion and faith being very different.

[The Heretic Azazel]

Another example of people with too much time on their hands throwing a bitch-fit over something no one forced them to read instead of prioritizing real fucking problems..

Idiots. This reminds me very much of Malaysia's current ban on black metal.

[Carnage]

What ^ said. They didn't have to read it. But, then again.......Interestlingly enough the editor or whoever published the comics not knowing that this would happen is an idiot.

[Jadugar]

Originally posted by: Gotwoot Moderator
Maybe some of the mods would let him get away with it, but I won't. The mods can't be browsing the forums 24 hours a day, and different mods have different styles and ways of dealing with things which is why you won't see complete consistency. But the bottom line is: Yes, the rules apply to everyone. DragonOutlaw gets a vacation for a few days.

My heart just filled up with admiration for Gotwoot Moderators. Long live the Don.



Atleast I can go back to the discussion now.



Originally posted by: Terracosmo
You people say that what got the ball rolling was that the danish prime minister refused to meet up with the offended parties.
Well my original point was that they were taking it too seriously by even wanting to meet the prime minister to begin with.

Taking it too seriously. We are talking about 15 nations here, I would say thats a big deal. If thats not a big deal then what is? In your words define "big deal". I am curious about what would it take to make you think its a big deal? How many people live in those 15 countries?

Maybe the leaders of those nations are more concerned about their people unlike the Danish Prime Minister.

[Splash!]

my my, i am actually surprised that some people are actually using their reason when talking about this issue. I would not come to expect this from many other forums. Guess gotwoot does have standards



Well my original point was that they were taking it too seriously by even wanting to meet the prime minister to begin with.

@Terra Anyone who takes their religion seriously WILL take the matter seriously. Thats simply how it is!
Also the leaders of the muslim nations do have their own people to answer to. I would like to know what was the BIG DEAL in peacefully discussing the matter?
And yes i do agree with you the the Danish PM is an idiot

[Terracosmo]

Ero-Fan said:
Someone explain to me how it is the leader of a nation's responsibility to appologize every time some member of their country writes something offensive. If one person from a nation goes on a mini killing spree (I know, its extreme compared to a funny comic, thats my point) is the president/prime minister/whatever supposed to appologize as if its their nation's fault? Where does it end? Doesn't he have better things to do then worry about a bunch of overreacting diplomats' feelings? And if you're country/religion/organization is stupid enough to blame an entire nation for the writing of a comic strip(by one, maybe a few writers), which doesn't even kill anyone, then you deserve to be ignored. And don't tell me they're not blaming the country, since they asked the head of that country for an apology. Can't blame a country in more ways than that.

If it can help the situation, then yes, it is the leader of the nation's responsibility. Since he is the one who has the power to change the situation, obviously. Even if it isn't necessary his "fault", or hell, even the nation as a whole's "fault", he still holds the key to set things straight. That's what being a leader is all about.



Assassin said:
Think of it this way. In terms of christianity, it would be as if i went back to the time of the crusades, dressed up as jesus, went to the vatican and started stripping in front of the pope. How do you think the christians would react?

I don't know about them, but I'd laugh. And as you say, yes, they take it extremely-beyond-limits seriously. They shouldn't. As for the faith thing, that doesn't shed any light on things for me. If faith is to be considered "the very foundation of one's life" and all that, then we all have a kind of faith based on interests and beliefs. One should always be able to distance oneself from what others think of that. I don't think that religious people by nature are stingier (or are they?), so they should very well learn to be able to deal with it like all others have to.



Azazel said:
Another example of people with too much time on their hands throwing a bitch-fit over something no one forced them to read instead of prioritizing real fucking problems..

Yep, Azazel wins. My sentiments exactly.

[The Heretic Azazel]

What i want to know is, if their faith is so strong, why does EVERY LITTLE THING seem to threaten it?

[Splash!]

its not a matter of their faith being so strong because something like this really wont affect their faith if thats what you think. It will on the other hand create unnecessary hatred towards others and that is what the leaders of the muslim nations were trying to avoid. People all have their soft spots in different matters. Maybe not the same matters as everyone else. There is already enough hatred to go around between different religions and peoples. I think thats the matter that the leaders when most concerned about when they approached the danish prime minister. Words are deadly weapons after all.

[DB_Hunter]

Originally posted by: The Heretic Azazel
What i want to know is, if their faith is so strong, why does EVERY LITTLE THING seem to threaten it?

The cartoons are not threatening, they are offensive.

[The Heretic Azazel]

Weren't they offensive to their faith?

Would someone mind pming me the pictures? I'm not judging what should be offensive and what shouldn't, I just want to see what the fuss is about. It just seems to me there would be an entirely different and more subtle way of taking care of the matter.

[Assassin]

Ya, there was a subtle way, and the danish prime minster refused it.

[Xollence]

http://news.yahoo.com/fc/world/religion

This is getting out of hand. I agree with Azazel, they should just get over it and move on.

---

Doesn't their religion teach against using violence? I think the way they're protesting is even more offensive to their faith than the stupid cartoons.

[Terracosmo]

Indeed. But hey, "it's all in the name of god" i/expressions/rolleye.gif

[Assassin]

and the situation goes from bad to worse. This is just the excuse those idiots need to start blowing things up again. god how i hate these idiots.

[Kraco]

Maybe Norwegians and Danes should torch the Syrian embassies. I bet they would never see that coming!

I wonder if the Danish Prime minister still insist he can't or won't do anything about it, other than lecture those countries about the freedom of the press (I bet that helps a lot!).

[ChiaCheese]

I'm all for freedom of speech but the newspaper and the Prime Minister really should've practiced a little responsibility. Publishing inflamatory pictures in a widely released newspaper is just asking for trouble and there is no way they couldn't have known this. I am totally opposed to people that protest and try to bring up legal actions over GTA:SA because it's a mature game made for and marketed to a mature audience. But if the Los Angeles Times one day decided to print a page of porn that will obviously upset the religious right, families and the sensitive types i would say they have a right to be upset and the Times should take responsibility for their actions. The differance being is the Times has set itself as a publication that's for all types and ages and people wouldn't expect to be offended so putting porn in there wouldn't be much differant than putting it on a billboard. I guess a better example, what with the superbowl today, would be the Janet Jackson haltime incident. People weren't watching the halftime show expecting to see Janet's saggy boob but there it was. I'm totally against censorship but I also believe that people have to take responsibility for their actions and make responsible decisions.

[Splash!]

i simply dont see what else the person who published the cartoons was trying to do other than provoke the sentiments of the people . I mean if he was just focusing on humour, there are plenty of topics to go about that will make other people laugh much more. I dont care what you say, ridiculing any religion through a cartoon is just wrong, i dont care how you look at it. What purpose is there to be served other than insulting the targets of the cartoon anyways. A good laugh?? i dont think so. the 'Freedom of Speech' argument has already been used to justify things like these many times already. It just doesnt cut it and is a rather blatant excuse to accept any responsibility.

[KitKat]

ChiaCheese, I don't know if your analogy really represents the situation very well. I think it's a lot more personal than just happening to see something you classify as offensive. Maybe a better analogy would be this: Imagine you have a wife, a woman who you love more than anything else in the world, that you would sacrifice anything for, and she loves you just as deeply. Now imagine that a national newspaper prints comics depicting your wife totally naked, whoring it up and banging a number of other guys. You know that thousands of people across the country, and even internationally, are looking at these comics. How many of you would have the restraint to contact the head of the newspaper asking for a meeting to discuss your concerns, rather than driving over there and beating the living crap out of the guy who drew the comics? If it's a random person, you probably wouldn't care (you'd probably even encourage such comics) but once it involves someone close to you, it's not funny anymore.

[Splash!]

Originally posted by: KitKat
ChiaCheese, I don't know if your analogy really represents the situation very well. I think it's a lot more personal than just happening to see something you classify as offensive. Maybe a better analogy would be this: Imagine you have a wife, a woman who you love more than anything else in the world, that you would sacrifice anything for, and she loves you just as deeply. Now imagine that a national newspaper prints comics depicting your wife totally naked, whoring it up and banging a number of other guys. You know that thousands of people across the country, and even internationally, are looking at these comics. How many of you would have the restraint to contact the head of the newspaper asking for a meeting to discuss your concerns, rather than driving over there and beating the living crap out of the guy who drew the comics? If it's a random person, you probably wouldn't care (you'd probably even encourage such comics) but once it involves someone close to you, it's not funny anymore.

Ahh, you summed it up very well!

[DO]

Originally posted by: el_boss
@DragonOutlaw: I don't know if you are moderator, I'm guessing that you are since you never get warned whatever you do. Still, I find it odd that you're getting away with acting like this.



lol

Its because most of all the mods are white and since im white I get away with it.


@Jadugar
I don't get banned we just didn't want you to keep complaining like a little bitch.

[Kraco]

Every forum needs a bad example, a permanent troublemaker. A statistical portion of mods are people who absolutely need something to moderate. If things are going too smoothly, they will start to pick at ever smaller and smaller things. And so when there's a really gross person like DragonOutlaw, who walks two miles beyond the limits of good conduct, it kind of resets the limits to where they should be in the minds of the overzealous mods. Even if the person's actions didn't get moderated.

[DO]

Originally posted by: Kraco
Every forum needs a bad example, a permanent troublemaker. A statistical portion of mods are people who absolutely need something to moderate. If things are going too smoothly, they will start to pick at ever smaller and smaller things. And so when there's a really gross person like DragonOutlaw, who walks two miles beyond the limits of good conduct, it kind of resets the limits to where they should be in the minds of the overzealous mods. Even if the person's actions didn't get moderated.


Don't get mad because you don't have status. your just a nobody i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif

You get out of a temp ban and go right back to flaming? Your vacation has just been extended.

GotWoot Moderator

[el_boss]

Originally posted by: DragonOutlaw
lol

Its because most of all the mods are white and since im white I get away with it.
So what you're saying now is that the white mods treat other white people better. Basically you're saying that most of the mods are racist. That's a pretty strong statement.

Though there is room for misinterpretation, since in its current state this argument is fundamentally ill-formed and makes little sense. You fail to show a connection between white mods and the fact that you being white lets you "get away with it".

This is what you say now:
1) Most mods are white
2) I am white
------------------------
3) I get away with whatever I do

You see, the conclusion doesn't follow naturally from the premises, which is why your argument is ill-formed.

That which is lacking from the argument as it is now is a premise that draws the aforementioned connection. I am assuming that you are trying to say something like "white mods let white people get away with whatever they do" or "white mods let white people do what they want". If this wasn't what you were trying to say, the entire argument would become obsolete.

This is the proper form:
1) Most mods are white
2) White mods let white people get away with whatever they do
3) I am white
-------------------------
4) I get away with whatever I do

See how much better it got?

Next comes the evaluation of your argument. Since I really can't prove any of your statements nor deny them. My only choice is to take your word for it and acknowledge the fact that most of the mods are racist.

[DO]

You can discuss all this *SHOCKING* info on the IRC channel

irc.gotwoot.net
#gotwoot

[masamuneehs]

heh, DO might stir up trouble, but he does a shit ton more for Gotwoot than alot of people. I suppose he's entitled to raising hell. After all, the man somehow manages to maintain a negative post count.

And let us not forget, this incredible thread (http://forums.gotwoot.net/messageview.cfm?catid=11&amp;threadid=17350&amp;highlight_ key=y&amp;keyword1=own%20you)

nah seriously, just about everything to do with IRC is to his credit. (which someone banned me from, btw...)

but, um, what thread was this? Yes, that's right:

Back on topic-
this really did a good job of summing up lots of the viewpoints
BBC Interviews with Beirut Citizens on Embassy Torching (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4683894.stm)

Danes, Swedes, evacuate citizens from Syria (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,18053354%255E23109,00.html)

Norway Post - Condemns attacks on Embassy in Damascus (http://www.norwaypost.no/cgi-bin/norwaypost/imaker?id=21689)

And some Muslims wonder why their strong faith draws criticism and fear from others... When people start defending their religion and morals through threatening and attacking others they've overstepped their boundaries. Such reactions are obviously only going to bring about even worse repurcussions and criticism from the rest of the world. Peaceful protest? Fine. Boycott? Harsh, but effective. Burning an embassy? Flashy, but I don't think its doing much good in proving their point.

Stop going off topic guys. As DragonOutlaw has stated, take it to IRC.

Gotwoot Moderator.

[FrogKing]

^Nice reaction. Draw a cartoon...displace hundreds of families from their homes, ouch.
@Jad: Could you pm me the cartoons? I, too, would like to see what all the fuss is about.
Like the abortion topic:
Breaking out the 10' poll &lt;---------- (for now)

[Mae]

I dislike people insulting others for no good reason, but I dislike political correctness even more, so I'm with the newspapers in this one.

Oh, and there IS a big difference between political discussions in a newspaper or other public sphere and a private conversation between individuals on a moderated forum. So DragonOutlaw, we get your point about intentionally insulting speech, it doesn't really apply here in the same way it does for the newpaper because the context is different, enough already.

[Jadugar]

Originally posted by: Xollence
Doesn't their religion teach against using violence? I think the way they're protesting is even more offensive to their faith than the stupid cartoons.

Nobody's religion preeches to mess with other religions. Its the people who create these kind of situations. The mis-interpretation of their faith/religion causes trouble.




@ Terracosmo :

I sure would like to get my hand on those <u>"get over it"</u> pills that you have. You need you share their formula/recipe with us or produce them on a mass scale so every body can benefit from it. You can make a shit load of money from them.i/expressions/face-icon-small-tongue.gif



@ KitKat :

I couldnt give a better exmaple than the one you mentioned.





Originally posted by: The Heretic Azazel
What i want to know is, if their faith is so strong, why does EVERY LITTLE THING seem to threaten it?

I bet you havent seen the cartoons or you have a very little undersatnding of what is going on.
One of the cartoons implys that their Prophet is source of all terrorism. Which is saying all muslims are terrorist.

I woudnt call that little.



Originally posted by: Some 10 year old with a massive comlex and who only knows a few words like suck my dick and I own you. Not not mention his famous phrase : Come to IRC

@Jadugar
I don't get banned we just didn't want you to keep complaining like a little bitch.

I figured that out the first time round when you started flamimg me and the other moderator(Upholder of Gotwoot laws) completely ignored your first post and the seond one. He blamed it on the <u>style</u> of other moderators.

Just because you have a small........ and your constant need of attention deosnt mean that I am complaining. You just need to pick on someone every once in a while just to prove your existance.





Originally posted by: masamuneehs
And some Muslims wonder why their strong faith draws criticism and fear from others... When people start defending their religion and morals through threatening and attacking others they've overstepped their boundaries. Such reactions are obviously only going to bring about even worse repurcussions and criticism from the rest of the world. Peaceful protest? Fine. Boycott? Harsh, but effective. Burning an embassy? Flashy, but I don't think its doing much good in proving their point.


If someone is doing something bad it doesnt mean their religion is bad or that their religion allows it. It simply means that that person is drawing wrong conclusions of its faith and mis-representing it. His actions are his alone not his religions.The others should understand that basic difference.



I need a fucking drink after this post.

Jadugar, what don't you understand about "don't go off topic". If you really want to argue so much, use PM's or go to irc and discuss it there.

I'll see you in a few days.

Gotwoot Moderator

[Terracosmo]

@Jadugar:

I'd gladly share them, but unfortunately I have to eat all of them myself to be able to endure my painful personal life!

[Kraco]

I think there are lots of people over there who have no better things to do than march in the streets burning flags and storming embassies. It's like people in western countries go to bars with friends to spend some time, or to an ice-hockey match. They like waving their AK-47s in the air and shout with their buddies. If they didn't like that, then every other news broadcast from that area wouldn't contain hundreds of people doing that. I mean, you rarely see massive and violent weekly demonstrations in western countries. They would be big news here.

Just another cultural difference.

[el_boss]

It seems like people keep forgetting one piece (lol "one piece") of fact. In islam it isn't allowed to depict the prophet in any way. So just making an image of him to begin with would have been bad, but putting him in the situations that they did was obviously too much. And Mae I really can't see how this has anything to do with political correctness. Political correctness is when you are afraid to say "black" in front of a black person. This more on scale of a newspaper having articles about why their country would be better of if all [insert minority here] were dead. I'm not saying it's as bad, but you get what I mean, right?

@Kraco: But oddly enough USA has the highest amount of people killed by guns. And probably the highest guns per capita as well.

[Kraco]

Originally posted by: el_boss
@Kraco: But oddly enough USA has the highest amount of people killed by guns. And probably the highest guns per capita as well.

But still hundreds of those people don't regularly march in the middle of cities shooting in the air and waving those guns.

I just meant that possibly those demonstrations look like a bigger deal to us than to those being involved. I bet most of those people have been in many, many demonstrations earlier, during their life. They are like pro demonstrators.

One other thing is that it wasn't an Islamic agency that published the picture. More like a Christian, most likely, being located in Denmark. In Christianity nothing prevents you from depicting anybody you want. I don't know why those Muslisms would think others should follow their rules. However, had I been responsible, I wouldn't have published those pictures. Not because I would have thought it ethically wrong but because I'd have known it would backlash and cause economic and other damage.

[Splash!]

i really don't get what jadugar did that was so off topic apart from his little comment to DragonOutlaw, anyways:



One other thing is that it wasn't an Islamic agency that published the picture. More like a Christian, most likely, being located in Denmark. In Christianity nothing prevents you from depicting anybody you want. I don't know why those Muslisms would think others should follow their rules

@ Kraco: Do you hear yourself??Why shouldn't their rules be followed if there is something that pertains to their religion.
Let's get this clear, making fun of a religious matter was wrong, representing the prophet as a terrorist was wrong, the violence that followed this event was ENTIRELY wrong!!!!!
One simple apology could have stopped all of this! Why couldn't that simple apology be made. Seems like some people are more stuck on the idea of "Get Over It" and "Freedom of Speech" than actually understanding the reprecussions of certain things. What was the problem in making a simple apology?Noone would have been upset and everything would have been, granted the Danish government would have to swallow its their pride a little.

[DB_Hunter]

Just to leave the discussion of whether the cartoons should have been published or not, I think that the future of this story is very muddled. People everywhere seem to be saying that this protest is now taking a life of its own. It may well be possible for this cartoon incident to spark of something bigger, albeit unrelated in the Muslim world.

I think it is very interesting that Denmark and Norway are blaming Syrian government for the burning of their diplomatic missions there. Without trying to sound biased I going to ignore the allegations of the United States, since they always seem to have a beef with Syria or some other Muslim country for their own personal interests.

I think the Danes and Norwegians have raised a valid point Syria is a police state and is used to excerising complete control over its people, even if fear is the tool used in doing so. They then say that it is a deliberate action on the part of Syria to allow the burning of the embassies.

What Denmark and Norway need to do is understand their own assertion more deeply. Yes, Syria is a police state run by an idiotic, cowardly tyrant who controls his country with fear. However, due to this the people in the country are living miserable lives. Since this cartoon row has come along, the people of Syria have become very heated. Note that the idea of demonstrantions against anything is unheard of in the Middle East if it is not in the favour of whatever regieme we are talking about. So for the people to demonstrate, they must have a major problem to start with. The people know this, and the Syrian leadership knows this.

So what has happened is is that the Muslims in Syria, consumed by anger, have done the actions they have done i.e. the burning of the building. This anger was so great that if the oppresive Syrian government tried to stop it they would have been blown away themselves in the process. One must remember that the governments in the Middle East and the wider Muslim world are despised by the native population, and consequently due to the many decades of not serving the people these oppresive rulers now find themselves in a very delicate and dangerous situation.

Look at the reaction of the Syrian government, it apologised there and then to both Denmark and Norway. The reason why it didn't stop the burning is because it could not, for it would have put itself in danger.

As for how this row is going to defuse, I must admit I can't see a way out of this yet. Either the protestors run of steam, which people are saying is not likely, infact momentum is growing, or the newspapers apologise, which doesn't look likely right now either. From a purely political and academic point of view, things look as though they are going to get very interesting. From a practical point of view, things may get much more ugly before we see light at the end of the tunnel.

[Kraco]

Originally posted by: splash
@ Kraco: Do you hear yourself??Why shouldn't their rules be followed if there is something that pertains to their religion.
Let's get this clear, making fun of a religious matter was wrong, representing the prophet as a terrorist was wrong, the violence that followed this event was ENTIRELY wrong!!!!!

It doesn't matter if it's right or wrong or what those people think or believe. What matters is what they do. The people in high positions shouldn't be children. A child needs concrete rules of what is right or wrong, because he/she can't make the decision himself/herself. The editor of a big newspaper shouldn't have this problem. Nor a Prime minister of a fricking democratic country. It's irrelevant what they think inside their heads as long as they do the correct things.

I just typed down first what I thought, then what I would have done, if it had been up to me. There was a distinct difference between those two, yet you only quoted the first part of my text, that is, the part describing what I thought. However, if I hadn't written that, you would have had no knowledge of my true opinions. If Jyllands-Posten hadn't published those cartoons because they are risky , it wouldn't have changed the fact the editor would have liked to publish them, but didn't want to risk it. Yet you would have never known that, and thought it's a respectable paper.

Interestingly enough the problem here is that some people can't be duplicitous, and instead do exactly what they want to do, like children. The editor of Jyllands-Posten (and many other newspapers since then), the idiot Prime minister of Denmark. Who cares if they thought all muslims are terrorists if they never opened they mouths?

[Xollence]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...mi_ea/prophet_drawings (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060206/ap_on_re_mi_ea/prophet_drawings)

At this point I don't think it matters whether the newspaper was wrong or not. We all know they should've used better judgement, but I think it's more important on how to stop these asses from destroying anymore European buildings and targeting people. I think the leadership should've at least tried to calm things down in the beginning but I'm against them being pressured into apologizing to these fanatics. What is it exactly that these ignorant people want? I doubt they just want an apology from the Danish government.

[Kraco]

Damn it's escalating. It's not like the key people among the demonstrators wanted really anything. As that news article suggested, there are pro demonstrators and firebrands among the masses who just want riots and torching of building. It doesn't matter what they are fighting for as long as they have something to fight for.

I doubt the Jyllands-Posten's editor can be accused of breaking any laws, but he should be labeled officially stupid by the Queen of Denmark. Since this all started because they published the cartoon and has cost so much to the Danes, the evidence would be overpowering enough.

[ChiaCheese]

Originally posted by: KitKat
ChiaCheese, I don't know if your analogy really represents the situation very well. I think it's a lot more personal than just happening to see something you classify as offensive. Maybe a better analogy would be this: Imagine you have a wife, a woman who you love more than anything else in the world, that you would sacrifice anything for, and she loves you just as deeply. Now imagine that a national newspaper prints comics depicting your wife totally naked, whoring it up and banging a number of other guys. You know that thousands of people across the country, and even internationally, are looking at these comics. How many of you would have the restraint to contact the head of the newspaper asking for a meeting to discuss your concerns, rather than driving over there and beating the living crap out of the guy who drew the comics? If it's a random person, you probably wouldn't care (you'd probably even encourage such comics) but once it involves someone close to you, it's not funny anymore.

i understand that and i was trying to make the same point, but with real life examples. but ya, your example is much clearer.

[KitKat]

This situation is definitely getting way out of hand. I was reading on the news yesterday about more burnings of buildings and people being driven out of countries. This has moved into the realm of violence for the sake of violence. It's the mob mentality where people stop being individuals and thinking rationally and move to being part of a giant force that is easily manipulated and bent on destruction. I have no idea what needs to be done to remedy this situation, but something better be done soon, or else it's just going to get a whole lot worse.

[Xollence]

I don't think the riots are only because of the cartoons. I think it's from all the tension between Europe/USA and the Muslim world. Like the Iran and its nuclear program, Afganistan, Iraq, Iran's PM's remarks about Israel, etc. Things are only gonna get worse.

[Ero-Fan]

Gotta love the protestors in London. This was on cnn's website that was posted this morning. I think this stuff occured Friday.



http://img498.imageshack.us/img498/2882/newbitmapimage8mm.png
LONDON, England -- London police were under pressure to arrest Muslim protesters who carried signs threatening death and terrorist attacks at a demonstration over cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed.
...
Conservative opposition spokesman David Davis said slogans such as "Massacre those who insult Islam" and "Europe you will pay, your 9/11 will come" amounted to incitement to murder and that police should take a "no tolerance" approach to them.

Brilliant people, I swear. Now, see, they threatened people. Isn't that much worse than insulting others? Must just be me. Also



In Dhusamareb, capital of the central Galgudud region, hundreds of protesters condemned the Western media, reserving their fiercest criticism for the Danish newspaper that originally published the caricatures.

"Apologies are not enough," said regional governor Yusuf Eyow. "There should be some measures taken against that particular newspaper."

Awesome leadership. And I thought Europe and the US had leadership problems..
Ahh, yes, I forgot. Guess we should shoot people for a comic strip.
There's more, of course, but this was about as far as I got before more aggrevation set in.
Disclaimer: I know its not all muslims that do this, but as I've said before, the loudest always get the attention. And I feel I have to say this, since everyone seems so sensitive anymore. End Disclaimer
Always nice to see this reaction after the Newspaper heads had apologized for the cartoon strip, even though it was first published in September, no one really complained, and it was republished in other newspapers in January.

[Xollence]

Those protestors that are giving out death threats should be treated as terrorists.

[Ero-Fan]

Originally posted by: Xollence
Those protestors that are giving out death threats should be treated as terrorists.

Seriously, these people defending their protests are too much:



Meanwhile, a Muslim man who dressed as suicide bomber at Friday's protest was reported as defending his actions.

Omar Khayam, 22, of Bedford, told the Daily Express newspaper that he wanted to highlight "double standards."

"I can't make any apologies for it. I didn't go there to cause anyone any harm. I went along just to attend a protest. Yet I have almost been branded a suicide bomber overnight," Khayam said.

"Did I say, 'Kill Jews'? No. Did I have racist signs on me? No. So why this reaction?

Gee, you dress like a suicide bomber, a person who kills innocent people. Why would we be upset with that? Goddamn stupid people piss me off.
Edit: More fun photos taken in Europe:
http://img322.imageshack.us/img322/5354/storyflagsap3ps.jpg
This one was in front of the Austrian embasy. Those flags are Austrian and French. At least, thats what the caption said was being burned.
http://img322.imageshack.us/img322/558/vertlondon2ap5dz.jpg
Again, in London.
Wow. Amazing, isn't it?
This makes me wish that the police would 'accidently' discharge their weapons, multiple times, at these people. Too bad the peaceful protests (there were some I read about too, but no pics) get overshadowed by these assholes, eh? They set a decent example, unlike these pictured idiots.
Edit 2: WARNING!!!!! Click the following link if your don't get offended by commentaries on religion. Its the commentary posted from Saturday, Feb. 4, that I am referring to.
Not for the easily offended (http://publicoccurrenc.blogspot.com/)
Edit 3: Cleaned up warning for Splash's benefit.

[Darknodin]

this is quickly getting out of hand... and its obviously some higher up people recuperating this.

[Splash!]

@Ero-Fan
I really don't think you should be posting opinion based commentaries like that. Its pretty much the same thing as posting those cartoons, which isnt permitted in the first place.

[Ero-Fan]

Originally posted by: splash
@Ero-Fan
I really don't think you should be posting opinion based commentaries like that. Its pretty much the same thing as posting those cartoons, which isnt permitted in the first place.

First off, I didn't post it, I linked it. Second off, its just opinion. Third off, I gave ample warning that it might be offensive. And fourth, where is it in the rules that states I can't link a site that just has an opinion posted on it? I've seen more offensive opinions posted by people in this forum that were allowed than the one I linked.

I re-read the rules in the rules section again, and still have found nothing against the link I posted.

[Splash!]

in any case i dont really see what that commentary had to do with anything. Its someone's opinion on the religion. It has nothing to do with the riots themselves and it doesn't really prove your point.

[Ero-Fan]

Originally posted by: splash
in any case i dont really see what that commentary had to do with anything. Its someone's opinion on the religion. It has nothing to do with the riots themselves and it doesn't really prove your point.

Ahh, your right. I forgot, that the stoning of buildings, the public apologies, and the cartoon weren't what these riots were all about. What could I have been thinking? Sigh...Oh, wait. That's what his opinion on Islam as a religion was about. And he was talking about those events in his opinion.
I'm not here to convince people that my point of view is the only right one, just give it in details. And if I didn't prove my point, oh well.

[The Heretic Azazel]

It's okay Ero-Fan.. We're not Muslim so CLEARLY we don't understand i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif

[Splash!]

no, rather you THINK you understand it all too well!

Anyways, hopefully the stupid protestors will realize that what they are doing is completely idiotic. The boycotting of products was an acceptable way of making a point but this is just too much. Hurting people isn't going to accomplish anything, they should learn to voice their opinion out more strongly on such matters than resorting to violence [The dumber and easier way for some people to express themselves]

[Ero-Fan]

Originally posted by: splash
no, rather you THINK you understand it all too well!

Anyways, hopefully the stupid protestors will realize that what they are doing is completely idiotic. The boycotting of products was an acceptable way of making a point but this is just too much. Hurting people isn't going to accomplish anything, they should learn to voice their opinion out more strongly on such matters than resorting to violence [The dumber and easier way for some people to express themselves]

Unfortunatly, they won't learn jack shit, and neither will the children they drag in to join them in those protests (references pics I posted above, the one with the kid). They seem to be getting what they want, which is an apology and they will probably get the illustrator and editor fired at that newspaper. See? They won resorting to violence, so that should work for us next time too. Its like a little kid throwing a tantrum, then getting what he/she wants just to shut them up. It sets a bad precedent.

[Kraco]

The real problem in this whole farce are not the ragtag rabbles in the demonstrations. More troublesome are the masterminds hiding in the shadows, gaining resources to be used against the free world in a larger scale. They pray every evening for things like this to happen, because every angered muslim is a potential source of income for them. We can afford barbarians burning buildings in their own cities, but we can't afford the extra support it may grant Al Qaeda and similar clandestine organizations. That is the real reason why the relations between West and Middle East shouldn't be made to suffer setbacks like this.

[Splash!]

sometimes i look at what these protestors are doing and it makes no sense to me whatsoever? Most of them don't even have a clue to what they are doing. It looks as if they might actually be being paid so do some of this stuff just to create a ruckus. I mean, come on masses aren't that absurdly dumb. Somebody has got to be pulling the strings

[Ero-Fan]

Originally posted by: splash
sometimes i look at what these protestors are doing and it makes no sense to me whatsoever? Most of them don't even have a clue to what they are doing. It looks as if they might actually be being paid so do some of this stuff just to create a ruckus. I mean, come on masses aren't that absurdly dumb. Somebody has got to be pulling the strings

Yeah, someone probably is pulling the strings. That's exactly why they are dumb. Its mob mentality, and anyone with a little charisma or some knowledge of general psychology can manipulate a crowd. Hell, they probably (most of them) went to protest peacefully at first, but someone threw a rock or a punch or whatever, knowing that would start shit, and all hell broke loose. Most people are followers, not leaders. And besides, peer pressure becomes magnified hundreds of times when your in a crowd and everyone else is doing something.

[Dug88]

So you guys are saying that if there was something you believed in strongly enough you wouldn't protest it. Although I agree that resorting to violence isn't the answer there are ways to have peaceful protests without people getting hurt.

[Ero-Fan]

Originally posted by: Dug88
So you guys are saying that if there was something you believed in strongly enough you wouldn't protest it. Although I agree that resorting to violence isn't the answer there are ways to have peaceful protests without people getting hurt.

No one is saying that. Read my posts above. I said there were peaceful protests going on, but they never get mentioned. Personally, I would never protest over something a few people did and try to hold a whole country accountable for it, but I have no problem with peaceful protests. And I'm almost positive no one else here does either. Its why they are protesting and how some are protesting that we are questioning.

[Dug88]

Yeah ok I guess. And yeah I know what you mean about the peaceful protests never getting mentioned. Think about it though what better way to control a population than to show them images of "the enemy" violently protesting against you makes it easier for them to start wars when the population is afraid of violence coming to their homes.

[Ero-Fan]

Originally posted by: Dug88
Yeah ok I guess. And yeah I know what you mean about the peaceful protests never getting mentioned. Think about it though what better way to control a population than to show them images of "the enemy" violently protesting against you makes it easier for them to start wars when the population is afraid of violence coming to their homes.

Start what war? Every country is falling all over each other trying to apologize. Its so pathetic. Even countries that didn't post it are being real careful about what they say.
And the protestors have the signs, we didn't make them. They did.

[Dug88]

No I'm saying thats why the violent ones make the news and you never hear about the peaceful ones because if theres peaceful protests and then theres no reason to be afraid and they're all trying to apologize because they're afraid of making another country mad and starting a war.

[Splash!]

The way the media represents it makes it seem that the whole Muslim world is using violence to make their point. I don't think that depiction can be justified, after all these specific examples come out of syria and palestine, which are troubled regions at the epicentre of most of this west vs Islam tension. I am pretty sure that the majority of the muslims offended are probably using peaceful means to make their point. One also has to recognize that the media plays an important part in creating part and whole fallacetic perceptions

[Dug88]

Originally posted by: splash
The way the media represents it makes it seem that the whole Muslim world is using violence to make their point. I don't think that depiction can be justified, after all these specific examples come out of syria and palestine, which are troubled regions at the epicentre of most of this west vs Islam tension. I am pretty sure that the majority of the muslims offended are probably using peaceful means to make their point. One also has to recognize that the media plays an important part in creating part and whole fallacetic perceptions

Yeah exactly and when the media is controlled by those who are either in power or by those who have connections to those in power the media will show only what the governments want to make it look like there is a threat and that the people need to be protected from it. It's not just muslims take the cold war for example how many Americans today are still afraid of communists? People need to make sure they understand all the facts before deciding what to do and not just take in what the news tells them.

[Deadfire]

Originally posted by: Dug88


Originally posted by: splash
The way the media represents it makes it seem that the whole Muslim world is using violence to make their point. I don't think that depiction can be justified, after all these specific examples come out of syria and palestine, which are troubled regions at the epicentre of most of this west vs Islam tension. I am pretty sure that the majority of the muslims offended are probably using peaceful means to make their point. One also has to recognize that the media plays an important part in creating part and whole fallacetic perceptions

Yeah exactly and when the media is controlled by those who are either in power or by those who have connections to those in power the media will show only what the governments want to make it look like there is a threat and that the people need to be protected from it. It's not just muslims take the cold war for example how many Americans today are still afraid of communists? People need to make sure they understand all the facts before deciding what to do and not just take in what the news tells them.

It's hard for people to do that unless raised that way. A person is usally must know what is happening in the world and because the media (in any form) give him/her the right for that knowledge. Some know that the media isn't telling everything, as well they know it's one-sided but that what the media has and always been like. Everything has more then 2 sides to it but the media for the sake of the people watching them pick one side and stick to it. Your of a group that knows there are more sides to it because the one side they protray is not one you see things though. Media is only as strong as those that use it. the side they protray is always the face of the socity they represent. So let thuse people think what they want to think because the media is only telling them what they want to hear.

[Dug88]

Originally posted by: Deadfire


Originally posted by: Dug88


Originally posted by: splash
The way the media represents it makes it seem that the whole Muslim world is using violence to make their point. I don't think that depiction can be justified, after all these specific examples come out of syria and palestine, which are troubled regions at the epicentre of most of this west vs Islam tension. I am pretty sure that the majority of the muslims offended are probably using peaceful means to make their point. One also has to recognize that the media plays an important part in creating part and whole fallacetic perceptions

Yeah exactly and when the media is controlled by those who are either in power or by those who have connections to those in power the media will show only what the governments want to make it look like there is a threat and that the people need to be protected from it. It's not just muslims take the cold war for example how many Americans today are still afraid of communists? People need to make sure they understand all the facts before deciding what to do and not just take in what the news tells them.

It's hard for people to do that unless raised that way. A person is usally must know what is happening in the world and because the media (in any form) give him/her the right for that knowledge. Some know that the media isn't telling everything, as well they know it's one-sided but that what the media has and always been like. Everything has more then 2 sides to it but the media for the sake of the people watching them pick one side and stick to it. Your of a group that knows there are more sides to it because the one side they protray is not one you see things though. Media is only as strong as those that use it. the side they protray is always the face of the socity they represent. So let thuse people think what they want to think because the media is only telling them what they want to hear.

Thats all well and good when it's just a small group of people but when you have the majority of a country believing something like that it becomes more serious because if the majority of a nation is uneducated to what is actually happening in the world then they will let not question when their leaders do something based on what they are telling them is true. Basically what I'm trying to say is that when the government controls the media and all you have is what they are telling you the government can get away with whatever they want because no one will question them because they believe it is right.

[Deadfire]

Because people as uneducated on world affairs are happier that way. Our goverment is formed because of Social Contract. It is one of the most influential theories of government in the past two hundred years, on which modern democracy and most forms of socialism are founded. The social contract theory holds that governments are created by the people in order to provide for collective needs (such as safety from crime, poverty, illiteracy) that cannot be properly satisfied using purely individual means. Governments thus exist for the purpose of serving the needs and wishes of the people, and their relationship with the people is clearly stipulated in a "social contract" (a constitution and a set of laws) which both the government and the people must abide by. If a majority is unhappy, it may change the social contract. If a minority is unhappy, it may persuade the majority to change the contract, or it may opt out of it by emigration or secession. Mass media plays a crucial role in forming and reflecting public opinion. (that same public opinion that made the goverment) It communicates the world to individuals, and it reproduces modern society's self-image. It has to be pointed out that because some of the mass media produce material which often is good, impartial, and serious, they are accorded a high degree of respect and authority. But in practice the ethic of the press and television is closely related to that of the homogeneous establishment, providing a vital support for the existing order. But independence is not  mere cover, it is central to the way power and ideology are mediated in societies like ours. The public are bribed with good radio, television and newspapers into an acceptance of the biased, the misleading, and the status quo. The media are not, according to this approach, crude agents of propaganda. They organise public understanding. However, the overall interpretations they provide in the long run are those which are most preferred by, and least challenging to, those with economic power.

[Dug88]

oops wasn't finished.

[Deadfire]

Originally posted by: Dug88
So basically you want a society where nothing is questioned and where society is ignorant of the decisions made by "those with economic power" while they decide how the life of the average person is ran the decisions being made are only for them to know about in full and so we end up in a world much like that where we are told what to believe and when.

That is what the average person decided to have, because that is what his society decided for him because of his actions or the actions he wanted to make. So yes a world of ignorance is bliss to him

[Carnage]

I think the whole world should just watch anime. Then people would be alot cooler.i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif

Hhhhhhmmmm........I don't really like dumbfuck protesters (I am talking about the people in ero-fan's pics) who are SO offended by a comic which doesn't even threaten them. They could just ignore it. BUT THEN AGAIN! The publishers of the comic were dumb enough not to know this would happen. Unless the guys who put out the comic showed it on PURPOSE to rally up all the muslims because he is really a secerete spy from like Al-Qaueda. It'd be funny if that were true.

[Dug88]

So basically what you want is world where people are ignorant to the decisions made by "those with economic power"
and all their decisions about the lives of average people can be made while only telling us what they want. A society where everyone is told what to believe and when. While those select few control the world and everything that happens people are left with the "news" they are fed and their lives are controlled by these people. Yes I believe that it is a form of propaganda because we are not given whole truths we are only told enough so that when the government makes a decision we will go along with it. In that regards then there is no difference between democracy and the cruelest dictator either way they have absolute power it's just the means of control that are different.

[Dug88]

sorry double post

[Carnage]

Originally posted by: Dug88
So basically what you want is world where people are ignorant to the decisions made by "those with economic power"
and all their decisions about the lives of average people can be made while only telling us what they want. A society where everyone is told what to believe and when. While those select few control the world and everything that happens people are left with the "news" they are fed and their lives are controlled by these people. Yes I believe that it is a form of propaganda because we are not given whole truths we are only told enough so that when the government makes a decision we will go along with it. In that regards then there is no difference between democracy and the cruelest dictator either way they have absolute power it's just the means of control that are different.

Wait, thats almost exactly the way it is now.?!?!?!? Im confused.

[Deadfire]

Originally posted by: Dug88In that regards then there is no difference between democracy and the cruelest dictator either way they have absolute power it's just the means of control that are different.

A goverment is a goverment, there are different forms of it, but like you said they have different means of control.

[Dug88]

Originally posted by: Deadfire


Originally posted by: Dug88In that regards then there is no difference between democracy and the cruelest dictator either way they have absolute power it's just the means of control that are different.

A goverment is a goverment there are different forms but like you said they have different means of control.

Which is why there needs to be government that rather than controlling society they work with it to create a place where people can all make informed decisions about their country. That should start with educating people now so they can understand what is wrong in the world because if things keep going as they are even the most ignorant person will not be saved.

[Deadfire]

Originally posted by: Dug88

Which is why there needs to be government that rather than controlling society they work with it to create a place where people can all make informed decisions about their country. That should start with educating people now so they can understand what is wrong in the world because if things keep going as they are even the most ignorant person will not be saved.

You are thinking of Liberalism which is an ideology, or current of political thought, which holds liberty as the primary political value. Liberalism seeks a society characterized by freedom of thought for individuals, limitations on the power of government and religion, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a free market economy that supports private enterprise, and a system of government that is transparent. This form of government favors liberal democracy with open and fair elections, where all citizens have equal rights by law, and an equal opportunity to succeed. Liberalism rejected many foundational assumptions which dominated most earlier theories of government, such as the Divine Right of Kings, hereditary status, and established religion. Fundamental human rights that all liberals support include the right to life, liberty, and property. In many countries, modern liberalism differs from classical liberalism by asserting that government provision of some minimal level of material well-being takes priority over individual rights.

The impact of liberalism on the modern world is profound. The ideas of individual liberties, personal dignity, free expression, religious tolerance, private property, universal human rights, transparency of government, limitations on government power, popular sovereignty, national self-determination, privacy, enlightened and rational policy, the rule of law, fundamental equality, a free market economy, and free trade were all radical notions some 250 years ago. Liberal democracy, in its typical form of multiparty political pluralism, has spread to much of the world. Today all are accepted as the goals of policy in most nations, even if there is a wide gap between statements and reality. They are not only the goals of liberals, but also of social democrats, conservatives, and Christian Democrats. So it is a system that is just like the others as it has to have control.

Before an explanation of this subject proceeds, it is important to add this disclaimer: There is always a disconnect between philosophical ideals and political realities. Also, opponents of any belief are apt to describe that belief in different terms from those used by adherents.

[Dug88]

Originally posted by: Deadfire


Originally posted by: Dug88

Which is why there needs to be government that rather than controlling society they work with it to create a place where people can all make informed decisions about their country. That should start with educating people now so they can understand what is wrong in the world because if things keep going as they are even the most ignorant person will not be saved.

You are thinking of Liberalism which is an ideology, or current of political thought, which holds liberty as the primary political value. Liberalism seeks a society characterized by freedom of thought for individuals, limitations on the power of government and religion, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a free market economy that supports private enterprise, and a system of government that is transparent. This form of government favors liberal democracy with open and fair elections, where all citizens have equal rights by law, and an equal opportunity to succeed. Liberalism rejected many foundational assumptions which dominated most earlier theories of government, such as the Divine Right of Kings, hereditary status, and established religion. Fundamental human rights that all liberals support include the right to life, liberty, and property. In many countries, modern liberalism differs from classical liberalism by asserting that government provision of some minimal level of material well-being takes priority over individual rights.

The impact of liberalism on the modern world is profound. The ideas of individual liberties, personal dignity, free expression, religious tolerance, private property, universal human rights, transparency of government, limitations on government power, popular sovereignty, national self-determination, privacy, enlightened and rational policy, the rule of law, fundamental equality, a free market economy, and free trade were all radical notions some 250 years ago. Liberal democracy, in its typical form of multiparty political pluralism, has spread to much of the world. Today all are accepted as the goals of policy in most nations, even if there is a wide gap between statements and reality. They are not only the goals of liberals, but also of social democrats, conservatives, and Christian Democrats. So it is a system that is just like the others as it has to have control.

Before an explanation of this subject proceeds, it is important to add this disclaimer: There is always a disconnect between philosophical ideals and political realities. Also, opponents of any belief are apt to describe that belief in different terms from those used by adherents.

Hell lets just say fuck it and overthrow all governments and have a global anarchyi/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif
But seriously ya liberalism would be good but when when you come down to reality nothing like that whether it be communism, socialism and the like will work in reality it's human nature to have people always trying to be better than others in the end I guess what we have is better than some but people really should try because otherwise there won't be anything left for long.

[Deadfire]

It took awhile and I had to bust open my big words. but you understand now, which is good. It is Human nature that makes this world what it is.

[Dug88]

No I knew that from the beginning I just like being a shit disturberi/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif

[Ero-Fan]

Time to kick this thread back onto the top and back on topic:
News (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/02/07/iran.cartoon.ap/index.html)
Found this article in my daily news boredom sessions this morning.
For those to lazy to click and read, basically Iran has decided to hold a contest to see which of its papers can produce a cartoon strip about the Holocaust, to see how the west reacts. This ought to be fun. Anyone else feel we should just laugh at them and keep producing more and more insulting cartoons? Well, I have more opinions, but I'll keep them for until you guys and gals all react to this.

[el_boss]

lol that's a pretty funny idea, but it's probably not that smart to fight fire with fire. Though I think "the west" will pretend it doesn't bother them just to show that they are better than the muslims.

[Ero-Fan]

Originally posted by: el_boss
lol that's a pretty funny idea, but it's probably not that smart to fight fire with fire. Though I think "the west" will pretend it doesn't bother them just to show that they are better than the muslims.

Yeah, unless they show really violent images of Jews being masacared in conscentration camps. And I think we should show one of their leaders (religious or political, doesn't matter) dying in a most hideous manner if they do that. But I doubt you'll see us(the west) protest anything. Maybe Israel will use it as an excuse to attack. They probably hate this guy anyways. Exerpt from the article:



Both the paper and the cartoon center are owned by the Tehran Municipality, which is dominated by allies of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who is well known for his opposition to Israel.

Last year Ahmadinejad provoked outcries when he said on separate occasions that Israel should be "wiped out" and the Holocaust was a "myth."

Sigh, this could get out of hand if I prove right about Israel. Not that I see why they would, just its possible.

[el_boss]

Originally posted by: Ero-Fan
Maybe Israel will use it as an excuse to attack. They probably hate this guy anyways.
Do you really think that israel has the capability to attack a country as large as iran? Well of course there is the chance that the US will back them. If they do attack they will just show that the muslim's rage was justified.

[KitKat]

Here's a pretty comprehensive timeline of all the events so far, compiled by CBC: Timeline. (http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/islam/muhammad_cartoons_timeline.html)
Maybe someone mentioned it already, but I didn't know that Danish muslims travelled through the middle east at the outset of this with copies of the cartoons to raise protest. "The newspaper wants to prove that they can publish anything they want without fear of violent retaliation from radical muslims. I have a great idea. Let's go to the most violent and extreme muslims we know of and prove the newspaper wrong!" (KitKat's imaginings of what they were thinking.)
With such dedicated and hardworking Danish citizens making it their goal to provoke a response, they shouldn't be surprised when they got more than they bargained for. Or maybe this is what they wanted? I have no idea what they were trying to acheive, but out of everyone I think they were the most irresponsible. I can understand people who are living in troubled countries, already angry and frustrated, lashing out in ways that they know. Violence is not new for a lot of people in these countries. It's part of their lives. However, for citizens of Denmark, they should be held to a different standard. As far as I'm concerned, their actions were criminal. The only logical outcome of what they did was violent retaliation, and Denmark should hold them accountable for that.

[Ero-Fan]

So, we should hold different people to different standards, is that the gist of what you're saying? And violence is the only logical outcome to an insult? Wow. Just, wow.
Edit: I wish I could use where I was born or what religion I am as an excuse to commit murder, hold violent protests, and generally wreak havoc because I don't know any better.

[KitKat]

No, I'm saying that violence is the logical outcome of taking offensive cartoons showing the prophet mohammed into muslim countries that are already notorious for violence, and currently have not so great relationships with the rest of the world. And I'm saying that people should be held to the laws of their countries, which are obviously different. Personally, I don't think it's possible to hold everyone in the world to the same standard. There are too many difficulties with that, and it would get extremely complicated very fast. Obviously, there are some standards that the UN has deemed universal, but in my view people in developed countries have much higher levels of priviledge and education, and should have more responsibility and accountability for their actions.

[Ero-Fan]

Originally posted by: KitKat
No, I'm saying that violence is the logical outcome of taking offensive cartoons showing the prophet mohammed into muslim countries that are already notorious for violence, and currently have not so great relationships with the rest of the world. And I'm saying that people should be held to the laws of their countries, which are obviously different. Personally, I don't think it's possible to hold everyone in the world to the same standard. There are too many difficulties with that, and it would get extremely complicated very fast. Obviously, there are some standards that the UN has deemed universal, but in my view people in developed countries have much higher levels of priviledge and education, and should have more responsibility and accountability for their actions.

So, how is that an excuse for violence? And its not like those Danish cartoonist took the cartoon to those countries, it was other muslims living in Europe that took those cartoons there. And despite all that, they attacked a foreign embassy, which is considered that country's property. Its also considered to fall under the owning country's laws. So, shall we hold them to the same standards now? Also, what about the protests in European countries that turned violent and had threats made? Are we supposed to excuse it then? And I am sure destruction of foreign property and violence are breaking UN regs.

[KitKat]

You misunderstand me i/expressions/face-icon-small-sad.gif

I apologize for making broad sweeping statements. I didn't mean to imply that I condone the violence. What I said is that I can understand it, because of how human nature is, and how people are affected by their environments. I'm not excusing them for their actions. I just don't think it's possible to hold them accountable in the same way that Denmark can hold its citizens accountable. They are a stable peaceful country, with all due processes of law in place to take care of these things. And if you look at my post above you'll see that I was talking about the Danish muslims as being irresponsible.

[Kraco]

Get off your high horse, Ero-Fan. Your statements are bordering naivety already. If the people of those countries have lived all their lives in the middle of wars, oppression by dictators and secret police, hunger, diseases, zealous, fundamentalist teaching that could be called brainwashing already, do you seriously expect they should or would still behave exactly like us who only see wars on the TV? For many of them the religion is pretty much everything they have in life.

Things aren't that simple in the real word. No matter if it is acceptable or not, but it was highly expectable nevertheless. And thus natural.

[Ero-Fan]

Originally posted by: KitKat
You misunderstand me

I apologize for making broad sweeping statements. I didn't mean to imply that I condone the violence. What I said is that I can understand it, because of how human nature is, and how people are affected by their environments. I'm not excusing them for their actions. I just don't think it's possible to hold them accountable in the same way that Denmark can hold its citizens accountable. They are a stable peaceful country, with all due processes of law in place to take care of these things. And if you look at my post above you'll see that I was talking about the Danish muslims as being irresponsible.

Edit: My bad for that mistake.
Ahh. Misunderstandings are so fun. Well, those muslims from Denmark might be to blame, but quite frankly I don't see as how they broke any laws. Unless, of course, the countries they took the cartoon to have laws against bringing in foreign reading material. Yes, I agree they are at fault, but nothing they did was illegal. Instigating a fight through words doesn't put you at fault, but you should know better. And I'm not sure if they were Danish muslims or just from the Middle East and taking it back to their home country. Then again, we see how European muslims have reacted, so I wouldn't be too surpirsed.
Again, I'm not saying all European or Middle Eastern Muslims are violent or evil, just the stupid ones.

Edit2: My high horse, eh? Sorry, but you know what? The peaceful protests that I mentioned before were from Middle Eastern countries. So its not like they all don't know how to behave. And using past abuse as an excuse is just that, an excuse. Real life example: Just because someone was physically abused by their father doesn't make it right to abuse a kid if they have one. But by your explanation, I guess its ok.

[Deadfire]

Originally posted by: Deadfire

Before an explanation of this subject proceeds, it is important to add this disclaimer: There is always a disconnect between philosophical ideals and political realities. Also, opponents of any belief are apt to describe that belief in different terms from those used by adherents.

This sums this topic up...

I'm still on the idea thats it's not all the muslims that react like what has happen, It's more of the extremists that are, almost just like some of the groups we have in North America that give other groups bad names because they take it to far and go to far with it

[Ero-Fan]

I've always said its not all of them, only the loudest. I even mention peaceful protests a couple of times, which is fine. I still question the reason for these peaceful protests, but I don't question their methods. Its the violent, threatening protests where I question their methods.

[Kraco]

Originally posted by: Ero-Fan
And using past abuse as an excuse is just that, an excuse. Real life example: Just because someone was physically abused by their father doesn't make it right to abuse a kid if they have one. But by your explanation, I guess its ok.

Oh, is that so? And exactly where in my post did I say it's OK? You can go and check statistics: Abused people are more likely to abuse their own children. I'm sure you are not denying that, are you? What I said is that's it's statistically to be expected. And if you want to close your eyes and say it's not so, it can't be so, it mustn't be so, then you are back on your high horse.

People who have a long history of violence in every form are more likely to see violence as a fitting means for every little problem. It would be naive to deny that. You have to accept that, or you can't even do anything about it.

[Ero-Fan]

Originally posted by: Kraco


Originally posted by: Ero-Fan
And using past abuse as an excuse is just that, an excuse. Real life example: Just because someone was physically abused by their father doesn't make it right to abuse a kid if they have one. But by your explanation, I guess its ok.

Oh, is that so? And exactly where in my post did I say it's OK? You can go and check statistics: Abused people are more likely to abuse their own children. I'm sure you are not denying that, are you? What I said is that's it's statistically to be expected. And if you want to close your eyes and say it's not so, it can't be so, it mustn't be so, then you are back on your high horse.

People who have a long history of violence in every form are more likely to see violence as a fitting means for every little problem. It would be naive to deny that. You have to accept that, or you can't even do anything about it.

I have never said in any of my posts that I didn't expect it. I always said that they should be held accountable. So explain again how saying people should be held accountable for their actions is me being on my 'high horse'?
Edit: Oh, and trust me, I know statistics. Doesn't make it 'natural' as you put it, either. Expected? yes. natural? no.

[Kraco]

Oh, well. Perhaps I should have read your posts a bit more carefully. It looks like our dispute doesn't even quite meet head-to-head, making it less than valid. We seem to agree it was expectable, so no use to continue the debate, really. I don't of course undertand the violent demonstrations in such a way that they would be acceptable. But I don't really see how anything could be done to prevent them for a long time.

[Ero-Fan]

Originally posted by: Kraco
Oh, well. Perhaps I should have read your posts a bit more carefully. It looks like our dispute doesn't even quite meet head-to-head, making it less than valid. We seem to agree it was expectable, so no use to continue the debate, really. I don't of course undertand the violent demonstrations in such a way that they would be acceptable. But I don't really see how anything could be done to prevent them for a long time.

Yeah, sigh. This is my second misunderstanding with someone in less then 30 minutes. That has got to be a record here! Anyway, I'm not sure there is a way, short of having another crusade in which Islam gets its ass handed to it instead of Catholocism. It seemed to diminish the power of the church quite well. I wouldn't want to see that happen, especially in today's age. Maybe a religious leader charismatic enough could help, but I don't recall if the Islamic faith allows for a leader like a pope to take control. Someone who knows the Koran better than I do maybe could answer that for us.(hint, hint) Oh, well.
Edit: I seem to be very good at getting people to hate me rather quickly. Must be a skill of mine. Seems to happen irl too.

[Xollence]

Originally posted by: el_boss


Originally posted by: Ero-Fan
Maybe Israel will use it as an excuse to attack. They probably hate this guy anyways.
Do you really think that israel has the capability to attack a country as large as iran? Well of course there is the chance that the US will back them. If they do attack they will just show that the muslim's rage was justified.

I think they can. Just look at the October War in 1973, where they took on Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and Jordan without the US. I don't think size of the population or army really matters, I mean it was a 10 to 1 ratio in this war.

[DB_Hunter]

Originally posted by: Ero-Fan


Originally posted by: Kraco
Oh, well. Perhaps I should have read your posts a bit more carefully. It looks like our dispute doesn't even quite meet head-to-head, making it less than valid. We seem to agree it was expectable, so no use to continue the debate, really. I don't of course undertand the violent demonstrations in such a way that they would be acceptable. But I don't really see how anything could be done to prevent them for a long time.

Yeah, sigh. This is my second misunderstanding with someone in less then 30 minutes. That has got to be a record here! Anyway, I'm not sure there is a way, short of having another crusade in which Islam gets its ass handed to it instead of Catholocism. It seemed to diminish the power of the church quite well. I wouldn't want to see that happen, especially in today's age. Maybe a religious leader charismatic enough could help, but I don't recall if the Islamic faith allows for a leader like a pope to take control. Someone who knows the Koran better than I do maybe could answer that for us.(hint, hint) Oh, well.
Edit: I seem to be very good at getting people to hate me rather quickly. Must be a skill of mine. Seems to happen irl too.

There is supposed to be one leader for the Muslims, called the Khalifa (anglicised as Caliph). Trouble is since the destruction of the Khilafah (Caliphate) in 1924 there have been many rulers/leaders of the Muslims, all that are not recognised as true rulers of the Muslims in the eyes of Islam by the way. Problem is people like Don Rumsfeld and the rest of the Pentagon seem intent on making all non-Muslims believe that the Caliphate is a terrorist entity because groups like Al Qaeda talk about it as well.

You are touching upon quite a complex subject, which if you delve into will exaplain to you much of the history of the Middle East and the rest of the Muslim world. The Caliphate existed for about 1300 years, and the last 200 years of its history will show you why things are the way they are in the Muslim world today. The Muslim world from being pretty much one State into about 50-60 states, carved up in its final years by the likes of the British Empire, The Russian Empire, the Austro-Hungarian empire and many others. I could really go on and on about this but I think I have answered you question.

[Xollence]

Most people don't realize that most Muslims aren't even in the Middle East, they're in Indonesia and India. I don't think it was 50-60 states, but yeah there was a book that was comparing the splitting of countries in the Middle East to the fall of the Roman Empire. It took Europe a couple of centuries to recover and to create stable nation states, so we shouldn't expect the Middle East to be peaceful and stable any time soon.

I went to a lecture for my senior seminar about Shaykh Nazim and Muslim leadership. If you're interested in Muslim leadership you should read about him and Shaykh Khalid.

[DB_Hunter]

Originally posted by: Xollence
I went to a lecture for my senior seminar about Shaykh Nazim and Muslim leadership. If you're interested in Muslim leadership you should read about him and Shaykh Khalid.

I have to say I have never heard of these two characters... they have such generic names too. Could you provide a link?

[Xollence]

Shaykh Khalid had millions of Muslim followers and was a Muslim saint. You can find them both on Google.

----

Oh and if you didn't notice that's not they're full names. Maybe that's why they sound generic.

[Ero-Fan]

Ahh, that does answer my question. Thanks, guys. I'll have to look that up sometime.
Edit: By look up, I mean both Shaykh Khalid mentioned and the Khalifa mentioned above. Not that I like religion, but expanding my knowledge of it and other things can never hurt. Besides, I'm bored at work.

[DB_Hunter]

Originally posted by: Xollence
Shaykh Khalid had millions of Muslim followers and was a Muslim saint. You can find them both on Google.

----

Oh and if you didn't notice that's not they're full names. Maybe that's why they sound generic.

Google returns Shaykh Khalid Yasin as the first hits. Is this the one? If so the guy is still alive.



Originally posted by: Ero-Fan
Ahh, that does answer my question. Thanks, guys. I'll have to look that up sometime.
Edit: By look up, I mean both Shaykh Khalid mentioned and the Khalifa mentioned above. Not that I like religion, but expanding my knowledge of it and other things can never hurt. Besides, I'm bored at work.

Khalifa is the guy in charge... if you want more info do a search on the term Khilafah or Caliphate. This won't be theological stuff so you don't have to worry about that.

[Ero-Fan]

Originally posted by: DB_Hunter


Originally posted by: Xollence
Shaykh Khalid had millions of Muslim followers and was a Muslim saint. You can find them both on Google.

----

Oh and if you didn't notice that's not they're full names. Maybe that's why they sound generic.

Google returns Shaykh Khalid Yasin as the first hits. Is this the one? If so the guy is still alive.



Originally posted by: Ero-Fan
Ahh, that does answer my question. Thanks, guys. I'll have to look that up sometime.
Edit: By look up, I mean both Shaykh Khalid mentioned and the Khalifa mentioned above. Not that I like religion, but expanding my knowledge of it and other things can never hurt. Besides, I'm bored at work.

Khalifa is the guy in charge... if you want more info do a search on the term Khilafah or Caliphate. This won't be theological stuff so you don't have to worry about that.

I don't mind reading theological stuff. But anyways, I found an interesting summary on Khalifa selection, removal, etc. on the man to be the Khalifa. USC Khalifa stuff (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/politics/khalifa.html) Not sure how accurate it is, and I'm still reading it.
Edit: Quite frankly, I'm re-reading it now. There are some terms (Arabic?) that I don't recognize.
Edit2: Also, it looks like it has a breakdown of information on the Qur'an.

[DB_Hunter]

Seems pretty good. Search for maps of the Caliphate through history. There were four main Caliphates (one after the other): Khilafah Rashida, Ummayad Khilafah, Abbasid Khilafah and the Uthmani (Ottoman) Khilafah.

Edit: If you want I can try to help you with the arabic terms. PM me if you want me to help out.

[Ero-Fan]

Originally posted by: DB_Hunter
Seems pretty good. Search for maps of the Caliphate through history. There were four main Caliphates (one after the other): Khilafah Rashida, Ummayad Khilafah, Abbasid Khilafah and the Uthmani (Ottoman) Khilafah.

Edit: If you want I can try to help you with the arabic terms. PM me if you want me to help out.

I think I'm getting the gist of most of it. If I have any trouble, I may take you up on that offer. Thanks.

[Xollence]

Khalid is dead, Nazim is still alive. I forget Khalid's full name, but no it wasn't Yasin. I'll find out for you tomorrow.

Iran's planning on doing its own cartoons on the Jewish holocaust. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200..._mi_ea/iran_cartoons_2 (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060207/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_cartoons_2)

[Ero-Fan]

Originally posted by: Xollence
Khalid is dead, Nazim is still alive. I forget Khalid's full name, but no it wasn't Yasin. I'll find out for you tomorrow.

Iran's planning on doing its own cartoons on the Jewish holocaust. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200..._mi_ea/iran_cartoons_2 (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060207/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_cartoons_2)

Yeah, I had cnn's article on it earlier in one of my previous posts. Kinda started the ball rolling on the misunderstandings between me and KitKat, then me and Kraco. Was fun times...

[Splash!]

you have to understand that most of these caliphs are not even common to all muslims apart from the first set, the khalifa rashidiya. Its just like with Christianity, there are a lot of different schisms and sects of Islam. And these seperations usually came into place as a result of any agreement on the legitimacy of certain caliphs. They only universally excepted caliphs to all Muslims would be the first four, which are all part of khalifa rashidiya, and were close companions of the Prophet Muhammad

[Ero-Fan]

Originally posted by: splash
you have to understand that most of these caliphs are not even common to all muslims apart from the first set, the khalifa rashidiya. Its just like with Christianity, there are a lot of different schisms and sects of Islam. And these seperations usually came into place as a result of any agreement on the legitimacy of certain caliphs. They only universally excepted caliphs to all Muslims would be the first four, which are all part of khalifa rashidiya, and were close companions of the Prophet Muhammad

Yeah, I kinda got that from my readings so far. I also know that most of the sects don't preach violence, just a minority of them do, but every religion has that kind of sect to it somewhere in its present or past forms. I mostly stopped reading about the Khalifa and started reading the translations of the Qur'an. Like all holy books, it takes me forever, but eventually, I'll get it done. Or find an abridged version. Hopefully it has something fun to read like Revelations in the Bible. Nothing like the end of the world to make me feel all better and happy.
Edit: Time to share more good news:
4 more dead from protests over cartoons (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/02/07/cartoon.protests/index.html)
Sigh. It just keeps getting worse. Always count on the news to make a bad day worse.

[aznimperialx]

just read something on it in the newspaper. Its fucking getting out of hand. fucking denmark...

anyways someone Pm me the cartoon. I wanna see how offence it is

[ES]

Same here. I would like to see how "offensive" it is. One thing I do frown upon on is their intolerance. If they were to relase something like that and is basically offensive to anyone of different belief and then tried to censor them, they would cry foul and scream censorship as well as taking their freedom of speech. Though if it were them who are offended, they would bear hostility towards the one who created it even to the point of causing harm to the creator as well as others who support or simply anyone who agrees to the person.

I just find it ironic yet sad.

[Ero-Fan]

And..........
Because we can't go a day without more news on this, the French have decided to add fuel to the fire : Wednesday News (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/02/08/cartoon.france.reut/index.html)
Seems the French have decided to piss off the Muslims more than the rest of us.
Just a little teaser of the news article:



The front page of the magazine carried a new cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed burying his face in his hands and saying: "It's hard to be loved by fools."


Well, they also have caricatures of Jewish and Catholic stuff, so I guess they're just being fair.
Ahh, and 2 more protesters have died today.
Edit: Anyone find a total death count? I want to know how many people have died over a cartoon. :hangs his head and shakes it in disgust:

[Turkish-S]

damn this is really getting out of hand........ stupid french. just when the "burning cars" thing ended they want to start another war ageanst there own people.................

damn i hope that a war will start and that 99% of the human population dies and that the remaining 1% will live in peace....

[Carnage]

And hopefully that 1% is the smart group out of the crop. We don't want to leave the fate of the human race to a bunch of idiots?

[darkmetal505]

they are just looking for a reason to hate the western world, but I see there viewpoint. However, shit happens, deal with it.

[BioAlien]

can someone tell me where i can find those "outrageous carton", or pm them to me plz, i want to see what carton they are talking about, because for like 3 day they only talk about thats carton, and they never even show it 1 time

[Ero-Fan]

Not sure where to find the cartoon, but assuming the french actually have a website for that paper, maybe you could find it there? If you do, link the site, but make sure you put a warning on the link, since its somewhat of a sensitive subject.
Edit: Wahoo! Finally, some decent news about a peaceful protest. About damn time. The semi-right way to protest (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/02/09/cartoon.protests/index.html)
Edit 2: Of course, there were still shouts of "Death to America, Death to Israel". Sigh, even a non-violent protest seems to ask for violence later.

[BioAlien]

hey i found the picture! on a french website ^.^
but can i realy post them here? i don't want to get banned so...
but here anyway, the website where i found them (just scroll down a little)


WARNING: Content may be offensive (http://www.vip-blog.com/vip/articles/1268846.html)



i hope that guy get killed i/expressions/face-icon-small-mad.gif
http://varifrank.com/images/islamicjessjackson.jpg

[BioAlien]

oops sry double post... i quoted insted of edit... sry

[Darknodin]

isn't this a crime (insighting hate)? (i guess not)

[BioAlien]

yesterday (saturday) there was a manif of muslim people here (where i live) and they were calm. (they were like 1000).. they didn't break anything, if only those moron on the other side of the sea could take exemple on them... they even want a special law so that we can't make fun of religion symbol
here the website of the news channel where i live :
http://lcn.canoe.com/lcn/infos...2/20060211-165149.html (http://lcn.canoe.com/lcn/infos/faitsdivers/archives/2006/02/20060211-165149.html)
its in french so.. learn french or translate it if you want to read it
cheap translation:
http://translate.google.com/tr...prev=%2Flanguage_tools (http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Flcn.canoe.com%2Flcn%2Finf os%2Ffaitsdivers%2Farchives%2F2006%2F02%2F20060211-165149.html&amp;langpair=fr%7Cen&amp;hl=fr&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;oe=UTF-8&amp;prev=%2Flanguage_tools)