Mohammed cartoons

[Tuomas]

oh yeah? What I think is, that this whole thread and all you people in it suck.

[SSH]

You're confusing the USA and "the west".

I was thinking about the Magna Carta, the valiant Scotts that resisted Roman and British oppression/domination, the French reveloutiobn, the first and second World War's,Ã,  etc.Ã,  Perhaps you are right about the Britian/EU having made less progress with respect to freedom than the US.Ã, 

That's not what I said. There is no right to freedom of speech in the UK. Especially now that we just passed a law banning glorification of terrorism. It's OK to glorify rape or murder, though. We also have blasphemy laws, and an established church.



Anyway, carry on with your pre-judgement (aka prejudice)

[Andail]

oh yeah? What I think is, that this whole thread and all you people in it suck.

Please think before you post

[Becky]

Freedom of speech should not equal the freedom to ignore common sense, respect and understanding for other people.

I don't condone either the publishing of the cartoons, nor the reaction of the extremist Muslims.

Just because you CAN say something, does not mean you SHOULD.

[fred]

Freedom of speech should not equal the freedom to ignore common sense, respect and understanding for other people.

If it were only possible to legislate about "common sense, respect and understanding of other people". But you can't, as long as people are allowed to define their own common sense. Any such law, in my opinion, would be idiosyncratic and probably outdated by the end of the week - but I'd be happy to hear your suggested phrasing of this law, on a level of "what words and doodles can be accepted in public debate".

In such a law, would anything that someone considers their "religion" be included? What about the church of the flying spaghetti monster? Should we respect their taboos, in case they make up some? Could the depiction of spaghetti become blasphemous?
http://www.venganza.org/

We can't make laws to prevent people from disagreeing. And when they do disagree, they should be allowed to make their statements normally - publish articles, write essays, make satirical drawings, preach their opinions in church, and protest in the streets in an orderly fashion. Actually, that's how our laws are made and sometimes modified - following a debate in parlament and sometimes in public, cartoons included.

If the muslim countries want their voices to be heard and our laws to be changed accordingly, they could start out by allowing a public debate in their own countries. In the least, these debates would assure that they come to the table with something better thought out than "agree-or-be-slain". Lifting censorship would also make it alot more obvious to the west, that islam is something that people want for themselves, rather than something that are forced upon them because the alternatives are illegal.

[Karimi]

In case someone hasn't read it, here's the official explanation from Jyllandsposten's editor:

http://www.jp.dk/udland/artikel:aid=3566642:fid=11328/

I think it's worth the read, it brings up alot of valid points.

We have a tradition of satire when dealing with the royal family and
other public figures, and that was reflected in the cartoons. The
cartoonists treated Islam the same way they treat Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism and other religions. And by treating Muslims in Denmark as equals they made a point: We are integrating you into the Danish tradition of satire because you are part of our society, not strangers. The cartoons are including, rather than excluding, Muslims.

.

Oh come on , thats bs.  We are making fun of you to show you're one of us ? Maybe it would be better if they showed respect to the muslims I find that to be a more respectable way to win their favour.

The thing is ,most people see this from a western perspective, the muslim perspective is that this is an assault on their faith and a man they have an amazing love for. To give you  an example of this, Hassan Nasr-Allah said in a speech a few weeks ago "We will defend our prophet's honour with our blood". Muslim culture is different from western culture , muslims believe in a society that has some censorship to protect its members , it believes in respecting others. Freedom of speech has been confused with anarchy I think, freedom of speech is the right to speak out against a cruel ruler, or to teach others something, its not to incite hatred and anger.

Muslims are different and should not be judged as you would judge americans because the culture is completely different.

I agree we took it too harshly and did some bad things. But on the cartoonist's part it was a bad move.

To put it in other terms :

Whose fault is it when the crazy kid at school hits you for making fun of him ? Is it his fault or yours for intentionally making fun of a crazy kid ?

(I don't mean to say muslims are crazy though, they aren't)

[Squinky]

Muslims are different and should not be judged as you would judge americans because the culture is completely different.

Agreed, as are the Danish people compared to them. The muslims need to realize this point excactly. Thank you.

[Traveler]

Oh come on , thats bs.  We are making fun of you to show you're one of us ? Maybe it would be better if they showed respect to the muslims I find that to be a more respectable way to win their favour.

I agree with you that the newspaper press release is BS. I don't think they actually published the images out of freedom of speech, they published it because of a lapse in quality judgement. However, it is their right to publish trash and it is your right to ignore it or to criticize them for it. If enough people criticize, the newspaper will lose customers and go out of business and then they won't publish more sh*t.

The way I see it, if the drawings were actually funny, there would be grounds to defend them. But they weren't, so muslims took them as offensive (which I can understand to some extent), and right now the newspaper keeps repeating "freedom of speech", like a dumb parrot.

The thing is ,most people see this from a western perspective, the muslim perspective is that this is an assault on their faith and a man they have an amazing love for. To give you  an example of this, Hassan Nasr-Allah said in a speech a few weeks ago "We will defend our prophet's honour with our blood".

See, here is where you're wrong. Defending the prophet's honor against a *drawing* is not a "different society", it's just plain stupidity. This person that you quote is an idiot, period. There is nothing to defend here, because nothing happened to whatever honor your prophet had. The only reason this idiot is screaming because he wants a fight and the drawings are a good excuse to start screaming.

And who would be the "enemy" he wants to defend something against? All the Danish people? Every westerner? The artist? The editor? When would muslims say that the prophet's honor has been defended?

Muslim culture is different from western culture , muslims believe in a society that has some censorship to protect its members, it believes in respecting others.

Muslims have all rights to accept censorship if they so desire. But they have absolutely no rights whatsoever, on any grounds, under any circumstances to apply such censorship to others. I may despise the drawings but on a theoretical ground, the newspaper had every right to publish it. As I stated, muslims have every right to boycott, stop reading western news, etc.

I also fail to see any respect towards the western society (and I don't remember seeing any for the past 20+ years.) There are individuals, who are respectful, educated and reasonable people (some of them are right here, on these forums), but they're not the ones who scream about blood. On a state level, I find muslim countries in general aggressive and trigger-happy. (I found the Bush government aggressive and trigger-happy, too.)

freedom of speech is the right to speak out against a cruel ruler, or to teach others something, its not to incite hatred and anger.

Hassan Nasr-Allah seems to think otherwise. He may not be an idiot, after all, but then muslims should scrutinize his motives. He may not act with other muslims' interests in mind.

I agree we took it too harshly and did some bad things.

I'm sorry to say, but this wouldn't be a first. 

As I said, this whole thing is a "scandal" because some people with interest in it make it so, and those people are all muslims. Let's not forget, that the drawings were published in November (or September ?? ) and the whole thing didn't come up until late January.

[fred]

Whose fault is it when the crazy kid at school hits you for making fun of him? Is it his fault or yours for intentionally making fun of a crazy kid ?

It's the crazy kid's fault. Hitting is illegal, and making fun isn't - and that's obviously the best way around. Because "making fun" can't be defined, which you seem to just ignore. Why not give it some serious thought?

Kids are immature. Adults have to teach them stuff (like - "don't hit, even when someone's making fun of you - it will only make you appear crazy").

Now, no matter whether you come from a muslim or a western country, I think its in everybody's interest that you learn "hitting is crazy" before you become old enough to get involved in politics, because "hitting" is a pretty serious things in the nuclear age of politics.

This guy and his "we will defend our prophet's honor with our blood", on a political level, is as close to crazy as they get. He is not taking the future of mankind seriously, nor the well-being of his followers. Or do you think so? Give me one reason why the proposed world war would be a good idea? I think he's trying to sound scary, because he himself is seriously scared that his reign is about to be over - and some amount of selfishness tells him that the rest of the world will have to go as well. That's the old "I'll break the pencil rather than share it with you"-reasoning from this guy's school-yard.

[HillBilly]

Oh come on , thats bs.  We are making fun of you to show you're one of us?

It's a part of our culture. We make fun of everything. If you're moving to Denmark, or any country like it, don't assume you're spared just because you're muslim. A religion is a part of a society like anything else, and people will comment on it.

muslims believe in a society that has some censorship to protect its members , it believes in respecting others.

Some cencorship? I doubt it. Let's take Iran, for example: They've banned all western music and movies from their country. If you're a homosexual, they'll make up some fake charges to get a reason to hang you. This happend to two young men a short while back. I wouldn't call that respect. And saying that people need to be "protected" from cartoons is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. People should be able to face reality, and deal with it in a mature manner. "Ban everything that we don't approve of" is not the solution.

Freedom of speech has been confused with anarchy I think, freedom of speech is the right to speak out against a cruel ruler, or to teach others something, its not to incite hatred and anger.

Freedom of Speech = You can say whatever you want, even if most people don't agree with it.

"Sticks and stone may break my bones, but words can never hurt me."

[ManicMatt]

It's the crazy kid's fault. Hitting is illegal, and making fun isn't - and that's obviously the best way around. Because "making fun" can't be defined, which you seem to just ignore. Why not give it some serious thought?

You know, when I was at school the physical forms of bullying was preferable to the verbal forms. Also, it's a sad state of affairs, that when all methods of non-violent actions didn't work for me, I had to resort to physically fighting back. This resulted in a third of the kids bullying me and my friends to stop. (Leaving just the mega tough bastards)

It really is a shame that I have came to the conclusion that violence seemed to be the only solution. Although to this day I will leave it as a final desperate attempt with anyone opposing me.

(Sorry that's a bit off topic, right?)

[fred]

It really is a shame that I have came to the conclusion that violence seemed to be the only solution. Although to this day I will leave it as a final desperate attempt with anyone opposing me.

That's a tough one, but hey, kids fight. Most of them stop at some age, or agree on some kind of sportsmanship. Tennis was supposedly invented because a generation of young men were duelling each other to death, usually to settle disputes over insults. Tennis was seen as a more civilized way of settling the disputes. Maybe that's what we need. A new kind of Tennis?

Some kids, when they are bullied, decide to become very good at something. The violence that can be directed outwards in a fight, can be directed inwards and used to discipline yourself at some activity. Mastering some activity may get you self-esteem and get you somewhere where you can finally laugh at those petty insults you suffered along the way. A fight works pretty much the same way - if you win it, that is. And nobody wins a world war.

[MrColossal]

And nobody wins a world war.

The cockroaches do...

[vict0r]

They dont win it, they just survive it.

You know, when I was at school the physical forms of bullying was preferable to the verbal forms. Also, it's a sad state of affairs, that when all methods of non-violent actions didn't work for me, I had to resort to physically fighting back. This resulted in a third of the kids bullying me and my friends to stop. (Leaving just the mega tough bastards)

I too were one hell of a fighter in primary school(and stone tosser). I once beat up two kids, and tossed a stone about 40 feet, hitting the mouth of a third kid. His braces loosened.(all of these kids were 2 years older than me, and were bullying my best friend)

[lo_res_man]

Words DO hurt though.They are the way we communicate from one mind to another mind. They are a most precious gift, and when someone verbally attacks you. it is painfull. I  do agree that some members of the muslim community are overreacting. One my of firm beliefs is that "People have the right to be wrong" that is, the right to hold a belief that the majority consider erroneous. The cartoonist has the right to draw tasteless cartoons. The muslim community has the right to protest PEACEFULLY.We may not all agree, but as they say, we should agree to disagree.If you find something you don't like, protest it in a law-abiding manner.
that is your right. but burning embassies aids NO ONE. When this is over, I hope we will all have learned something from this tragedy.

[ManicMatt]

Words DO hurt though.

I agree. I said this, see?

You know, when I was at school the physical forms of bullying was preferable to the verbal forms.

[fred]

Maybe physical bullying is preferred to verbal bullying in school, but to scale the example and say war is better than debate is just out of proportion, and perhaps that's where the thing goes a bit off topic, since I'm certain that that's not the point you're trying to make.

Isn't bullying a symptom of problems that we should try to solve rather than just keep pushing each other around? And how are we going to solve anything if we aren't allowed to speak our minds on the matter?

Couldn't your own bullying experience have been solved if someone (a parent or teacher) had interferred? It may have meant crying, showing weakness, having your perspective judged by someone else, reaching a compromise - the whole mess that is so painful to a kid's honor, but necessary in my opinion if we want a world that isn't ruled by ignorant (perhaps innocent) and brutal kids.

Chosing the fight may leave your honor intact, whether you lose or win, because you chose the hard way - but actually it takes a lot more guts to speak your mind, because in doing so you overcome your fear of (usually physical) retaliation, and show an amount of trust in your opponent . From my experience, most opponents come to appreciate such respect.

[RickJ]

Couldn't your own bullying experience have been solved if someone (a parent or teacher) had interferred? It may have meant crying, showing weakness, having your perspective judged by someone else, reaching a compromise - the whole mess that is so painful to a kid's honor, but necessary in my opinion if we want a world that isn't ruled by ignorant (perhaps innocent) and brutal kids.

Yeah, so like maybe you should appologize to the bully to make him stop, eh?

[ManicMatt]

Couldn't your own bullying experience have been solved if someone (a parent or teacher) had interferred? It may have meant crying, showing weakness, having your perspective judged by someone else, reaching a compromise - the whole mess that is so painful to a kid's honor, but necessary in my opinion if we want a world that isn't ruled by ignorant (perhaps innocent) and brutal kids.

That's just it, all those methods failed. My mum counted my bruises from when I was at junior school, and they were 24 bruises over my body. I remember this figure because at the time I lived at number 42, the opposite number. (You know what I mean)

Teachers intervene? Very funny.

I got bullied from junior school right through to half way through the last year of senior school. It wasn't until that last year I went fisticuffs on people. I was an innocent boy, a harmless child, unable to take care of himself. Until that fateful day when I'd got beaten up all day and was getting angry for the first time... and then this guy came over and started punching my friend and I attacked the guy, and defended my friend.

[fred]

Yeah, so like maybe you should appologize to the bully to make him stop, eh?

No way, but bullies have problems, and talking it over with someone adult may have identified and eventually solved them. Maybe this bully was getting beat up at home or someting.

Teachers intervene? Very funny.

No, seriously. I got a kid suspended from school once, and after that perhaps he started thinking about his own situation before bullying me any more. At least he stopped. I'm not trying to say you did the wrong thing, I stood up for myself and for my friends like you did a couple of times, but it's a kids' and action heroes' way of dealing with problems. My point is that with so many nukes lying around, politicians should have greater concerns than the average kid on when to start violent conflicts.