or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Soooo. Anyone heard some news from Denmark lately?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Soooo. Anyone heard some news from Denmark lately? - Page 5

post #161 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by BRussell
I think you'd agree that Christians take plenty of criticism in the US, despite being the (overwhelming) majority religion. And people who ridicule Christians are themselves criticized in return, and on it goes. But there's a difference here. There isn't a belief that it shouldn't occur, like there is with this Mohammed cartoon business. Well there may be among some people, and those are the people I disagree with.

Most importantly, when a commentator or cartoonist or whatever says that Christianity/Judaism/whatever is an inherently violent or hateful religion, you get lots of letters to the editor, lot of town hall meetings, and lots of disgruntled AM talk radio hosts. You do NOT get deadly rioting or torched embassies.
MacBook Pro 2.53GHz 15", Powerbook G4 15"
Reply
MacBook Pro 2.53GHz 15", Powerbook G4 15"
Reply
post #162 of 328
I will agree that, today, Muslims in general are more violent when expressing outrage at what they perceive to be blasphemy, but let's not pretend that Christians are docile lambs.



If we're counting suicide bombers as Muslims then Fred Phelps and the rest of the idiots of his caliber count as Christians.

The artist who made Piss Christ received death threats from angry Christians.

What does it profit us to pretend that there is not an angry and violent side to Christendom?
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #163 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat

If we're counting suicide bombers as Muslims then Fred Phelps and the rest of the idiots of his caliber count as Christians.

The artist who made Piss Christ received death threats from angry Christians.

What does it profit us to pretend that there is not an angry and violent side to Christendom?

I didn't mean to say that there are NO radical nutases in Christianity, Judaism, etc. But groups like Kachane Chai or World Church of the Creator do not have widespread support among Jewish and Christian populations. You didn't see entire Christian countries mobilizing to make war on the USA and kill the Piss Christ artist. And you certainly don't see educated, liberal, philosophical individuals defending and justifying the actions of the few nutcases who threatened the Piss Christ artist.

That's the real difference here. The scale and the breadth of the support for the people who would do violence or end freedom of speech over these cartoons.
MacBook Pro 2.53GHz 15", Powerbook G4 15"
Reply
MacBook Pro 2.53GHz 15", Powerbook G4 15"
Reply
post #164 of 328
I was mainly responding the idea that there is in Christianity a clear disapproval of this kind of violence, there is not.

The "real" difference is definitely what happens on the ground, but that is the result of what followers decide is most necessary. The religion is shaped by the people, not the other way around.

I'm not defending Islam, far from it, I just think it is important that we do not throw the baby out with the bathwater here (intellectually speaking).
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #165 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat

I'm not defending Islam, far from it,

And I'm not attacking Islam itself. Just people who would destroy freedom of speech--or even kill--because somebody said something not-so-nice about some dude who died over a millenium ago.
MacBook Pro 2.53GHz 15", Powerbook G4 15"
Reply
MacBook Pro 2.53GHz 15", Powerbook G4 15"
Reply
post #166 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
I was mainly responding the idea that there is in Christianity a clear disapproval of this kind of violence, there is not.

Oh Honestly, groverat! ........yes there is:
Quote:
27"But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. 29If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. 30Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. 31Do to others as you would have them do to you.
32"If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' love those who love them. 33And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' do that. 34And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' lend to 'sinners,' expecting to be repaid in full. 35But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. 36Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.

This point is [correct me if I'm wrong segovious!!] missing from Islam.

....and that, as Mr. Frost has pointed out.... "has made all the difference."

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #167 of 328
Hey folks! Don't forget to enter the Holocaust Cartoon contest!!

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #168 of 328
dmz:

Do Christians even think what you just posted is applicable to life?

It's all pick and choose, which is why I mean by saying there's no "clear disapproval". It's a buffet line. Say what you want about the various interpretations of this conflicted work ("eye for an eye" vs. "turn the other cheek"). Christians generally don't bother with making careful study of the Bible anyway and Christendom doesn't demand it at all. The only bar to clear to become a Christian is to say "I'm a Christian!"

If Christians don't take their Bible seriously at all, how is it a clear doctrine of what they do?
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #169 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
Do Christians even think what you just posted is applicable to life?

Some of us do. I don't pretend it is easy, but I do believe it "is applicable to life".

Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
It's all pick and choose, which is why I mean by saying there's no "clear disapproval". It's a buffet line.

Not really, no.

Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
If Christians don't take their Bible seriously at all, how is it a clear doctrine of what they do?

He's saying it is clear doctrine...not that everyone necessarily follows or obeys it.
post #170 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
dmz:

Do Christians even think what you just posted is applicable to life?

It's all pick and choose, which is why I mean by saying there's no "clear disapproval". It's a buffet line. Say what you want about the various interpretations of this conflicted work ("eye for an eye" vs. "turn the other cheek"). Christians generally don't bother with making careful study of the Bible anyway and Christendom doesn't demand it at all. The only bar to clear to become a Christian is to say "I'm a Christian!"

If Christians don't take their Bible seriously at all, how is it a clear doctrine of what they do?

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...... you at least have a partial working point there. There is a bit of the 'Jezzzzus as an abstraction' going on out there.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #171 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by Mitlov
You didn't see entire Christian countries mobilizing to make war on the USA and kill the Piss Christ artist.

But not too long ago, you would have. And to think there are some folks around here who want to undo the Enlightenment. Come to think of it, if only entire countries of Christians could be mobilized to war by being told that their religion was being trounced upon...

Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #172 of 328
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
Hey folks! Don't forget to enter the Holocaust Cartoon contest!!

That could be the golden chance. Perhaps I should organize a lot of danes to enter the contest AND get Jyllands Posten to publish the winners along with an article about freedom of speech even when you disagree with what is said and how even deniers of holocaust should have a voice.

That would take the steam out of THAT balloon.
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
post #173 of 328
Some points.

Re the Biblical verse given above: DMZ counters Groverat's argument with a verse from scripture.

He is essentially saying: 'what you say may be true but it is only true of some Christians and NOT of Christianity in essence. And here is a verse to prove it.....'.

Whilst I agree with DMZ it is very curious that this is all that Muslims have been saying about Islam. In fact it is exactly the same. And here is a verse too:

Quote:
O Mankind, We created you from a single pair of a male and a female and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know each other not that you may despise each other. Verily the most honored of you in the sight of God is he who is the most righteous of you.

Qur'an 49:13

But verses are for believers. Imo they cannot be used as evidence to be presented to people assessing a religion from outside. That is what actions are for.

Quote:
Originally posted by Mitlov
You didn't see entire Christian countries mobilizing to make war on the USA and kill the Piss Christ artist. And you certainly don't see educated, liberal, philosophical individuals defending and justifying the actions of the few nutcases who threatened the Piss Christ artist.

No Islamic country has 'mobilized' because there is no Islamic country. Certain governments have taken a stance but governments are merely sects writ large in many cases. they are peopled by humans (mostly) and as such have all human failings.

It is ridiculous to say that you see 'educated, liberal, philosophical' Muslims justifying extremism. This would be an oxymoron. You don't see it - anymore than you see US anti-war protesters supporting the war.

Perhaps you are trying to say there are no liberal intellectuals in Islam?

Anyway, what you do see is people pointing to the barbarians that are present in the Islamic fold (as they are in any religion) and saying either something like you said above or else 'why is no-one speaking out?' when in fact people are doing so all the time - I've been doing it myself for years.

Re the Iranian cartoons. Disagree with them. This is not the way - to sink to the level of the thing that you object to. More importantly - it doesn't work.

Of course it should if there really was free speech (which there isn't, or rather there is, but only for selected groups and only on approved topics) but as there isn't any, all this is going to prove is that "Iran is evil".

An exact same thing happened on the march in London a few days ago, - and Iran should really take heed of this - a protester thought he would show up the hypocrisy of the rationale for the cartoons which stated they were 'an experiment to see whether free speech was valued even when it caused extreme offence'.

He decided to do exactly the same: cause offence to test the limits of free speech, so he dressed as a suicide bomber and went to the march.

Was it viewed the same way? (picks himself up from the floor laughing hysterically). Err...no....

It was taken literally and used as (yet more) evidence that 'Islam equals extremism'.

So anyway, this guy called a press conference - I shouldn't think the press there reported anything though, have read nothing yet though the BBC did feed the conference live and I heard it - he was very intelligent and articulate and outrightly condemned all terrorism and extremism (he is a Muslim obviously).

He apologized to the families of the victims of the London bombs and said he knew how much it must have hurt but he just wanted to continue the debate in the same way as the cartoons but from another angle.

Thoughts on this?
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #174 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Some of us do. I don't pretend it is easy, but I do believe it "is applicable to life".

It's not even a matter of trying but it being difficult, be honest.

Christians, as a whole, don't even think many of the Sermon instructions are good ideas. The only way those make sense when applied to American Christians is if you just abstract the hell out of each of those ideas and make them unrecognizable.

Quote:
He's saying it is clear doctrine...not that everyone necessarily follows or obeys it.

Knowing that this book is completely up to interpretation, it's partly the job of the faithful to show what that book means. Does Christ mean to literally turn the other cheek if someone hits you?

It's pick and choose. Christians for extreme violence performed by a state but also followers of the Sermon on the Mount?

The religious are capable of holding two conflicting ideas and giving equal credence to each. There is an amazing separation of real life from faith life.

Give to your enemies without expectation of repayment?


dmz:

The point is this:
You can find nice, squishy love quotes from the Qu'ran but what's the point? It is not the job of non-followers to evaluate what's really going on with a religion, it's the job of the faithful to represent those beliefs.

If the followers aren't acting the part that's not anyone else's fault. Either Christianity doesn't clearly teach the values put out in the Sermon on the Mount or Christians just don't take their faith seriously.

The idea that a few verses in the Bible have, in your words, "made all the difference" goes far beyond naive. I am supposing that you just felt like pulling a quote out, because I don't think you would seriously argue that if only the Sermon on the Mount had been reprinted word-for-word in the Qu'ran then we wouldn't be having all this drama.

(FYI, Muslims believe in Jesus. There's a whole sura in the Qu'ran named after Jesus's mommy.)
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #175 of 328
I just found this: Danish paper rejected Jesus cartoons

It just gets better doesn't it? You couldn't make this stuff up....

Quote:
Jyllands-Posten, the Danish newspaper that first published the cartoons of the prophet Muhammad that have caused a storm of protest throughout the Islamic world, refused to run drawings lampooning Jesus Christ, it has emerged today.

The Danish daily turned down the cartoons of Christ three years ago, on the grounds that they could be offensive to readers and were not funny.

In April 2003, Danish illustrator Christoffer Zieler submitted a series of unsolicited cartoons dealing with the resurrection of Christ to Jyllands-Posten.

Zieler received an email back from the paper's Sunday editor, Jens Kaiser, which said: "I don't think Jyllands-Posten's readers will enjoy the drawings. As a matter of fact, I think that they will provoke an outcry. Therefore, I will not use them."

"In the Muhammad drawings case, we asked the illustrators to do it. I did not ask for these cartoons. That's the difference," he said.

"The illustrator thought his cartoons were funny. I did not think so. It would offend some readers, not much but some".

So, if you actually decide to cause the offence yourself and commission it, it is ok but not if someone send something offensive in to you.

And I guess being 'funny' is the criteria now and not free speech though what's funny about a cartoon of a guy with a bomb on his head I'm not so sure....
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #176 of 328
It's all well and good to just think they are not funny, but he actually gave a reason for refusing the Jesus cartoons:
"I don't think Jyllands-Posten's readers will enjoy the drawings. As a matter of fact, I think that they will provoke an outcry. Therefore, I will not use them."

I'm not sure the readers "enjoyed" the Muhammad cartoons and they were obviously designed to "provoke an outcry".

Intellectual consistency, Herr Editor, try it out!
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #177 of 328
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
I just found this: Danish paper rejected Jesus cartoons

It just gets better doesn't it? You couldn't make this stuff up....



So, if you actually decide to cause the offence yourself and commission it, it is ok but not if someone send something offensive in to you.

And I guess being 'funny' is the criteria now and not free speech though what's funny about a cartoon of a guy with a bomb on his head I'm not so sure....

I really really REALLY hate to defend the paper because there is little to defend, but...

Two different editors, two years apart, two different parts of the paper (sunday editor vs. the debate part), freelancer cartoonist trying his luck vs the paper having an agenda and asking cartoonist to help them.

Again it comes down to means vs. goals. You should ALWAYS try to avoid to offend peoples feelings, religious or not, but If your goal is important enough then sometimes you have to. There was no goal at all to pursuit with the freelance cartoonist. The paper felt there was one with the 12 drawings that was more important than a large groups feelings (and by that showing their incompetence). So this is not a case of inconsistency within their extreme frame of freedom of speech
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
post #178 of 328
Ok - no need to worry about the guy who dressed up as a suicide bomber and it's relevance to 'free speech'. He is safely behind bars.

Apparently he is the sort of Muslim who follows the example of Muhammad Atta. Caught with crack Cocaine - intent to supply. Not only that but he was on the run from prison!!!!

Guess that's why he called a press conference and drew attention to himself dressed as a suicide bomber on a public demo - under full gaze of the Boys in Blue.

Anyway, never mind. We can all sleep safely again - one less Coke-basing Jihadi to worry about.

What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #179 of 328
Thread Starter 
Seg: I have a hard time cutting through the sarcasm. What are you trying to say? And how does it in relate to my comment on whether the paper had double standards or not wrt publishing drawings?
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
post #180 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by Anders
Seg: I have a hard time cutting through the sarcasm. What are you trying to say? And how does it in relate to my comment on whether the paper had double standards or not wrt publishing drawings?

I wasn't replying to your points yet so it doesn't relate.

I posted previously about this guy who had the press conference and how it seemed part of the debate.

Then (before I get a chance to reply to your points) I hear a newsflash that he has been arrested - now all the talk of free speech and the debate in relation to his case (ie dressing up as a suicide bomber) has been nullified and there is no mention of them. not that there ever was a discussion of his points, but now there is saturation coverage on UK radio about how he was a coke fiend and on the run from the police.

But to your wider implication: yes - I have no doubt whatsoever (and never have had) that these cartoons are part of the 'clash of civilizations' paradigm and that the conflict (in fact almost all such conflicts) are being engineered by groups with agendas.

Note: I am not saying there are no extremists - I am differentiating them from 'professional' terrorists and am saying that the are being incited to ever more extreme acts. This doesn't excuse them. It does mean there is a bigger picture.

If you want me to outline who these groups may be I am happy to do that but for now I was just drawing attention to it.

Also, while we are on the subject, I am highly sceptical of some of the pictures from the march. A masked protester with a placard saying 'butcher enemies of Islam' is almost too cute I think and someone overplayed their hand (as they have with this whole op actually). It is pure tabloid speak.

Let me reiterate - I am not saying there are no extremists of exactly the type that most people perceive an extremist to be. I am saying that someone is stirring the hornet's nest and in doing that they are also laying out a lot of disinfo that needs to be exposed.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #181 of 328
Update: it seems that the phrase 'on the run' was a bit of mis-reporting.

He was on parole (still for the Crack) and has been taken back to prison because his suicide bomber stunt is being held to be a parole violation.

All the news is about how 'shocking' it is that he did this - ie, not at all debating the free speech issue that is deemed to be a fit subject when Muslims are 'shocked' - and how outraged the London bomb victims' families are.

Is this or is this not rank hypocrisy of the most breathtaking kind?

I would also contend that if this is not a parole violation (and I don't see how it is) then this is another person who has been jailed for exercising the 'wrong kind' of free speech.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #182 of 328
For people who have not seen these cartoons:
Images of the prophet
3 more very offensive cartoons have been added by Muslim Clerics to instill more hate.
post #183 of 328
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by jamac
3 more very offensive cartoons have been added by Muslim Clerics to instill more hate.

...Which had been sent to vocal muslims. It has not been shown that they claimed those drawings was from the newspaper.
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
post #184 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
And I guess being 'funny' is the criteria now and not free speech though what's funny about a cartoon of a guy with a bomb on his head I'm not so sure....

Free speech is about governmental restriction, not an editor's restriction. It does not mean that the newspaper has to publish anything. Does the newspaper's rejection of Jesus cartoons, combined with its acceptance of the Muhammad cartoons, suggest that there are some anti-Islam bigots on the newspaper's editorial board? Sure. Is it a violation of free speech? No. Because the government was not restricting the rights of a publisher who wanted to publish something.

When people say that the Danish government shouldn't have allowed this newspaper to publish the Muhammad cartoons, THAT is the free speech issue.
MacBook Pro 2.53GHz 15", Powerbook G4 15"
Reply
MacBook Pro 2.53GHz 15", Powerbook G4 15"
Reply
post #185 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by Anders
Again it comes down to means vs. goals. You should ALWAYS try to avoid to offend peoples feelings, religious or not, but If your goal is important enough then sometimes you have to. [/B]

I think you put it well. There seems to be an assumption among many people that, although there shouldn't be a law against bomb-head Mohammed cartoons, the paper should not have published it. I'm not so sure. Violent, radical Islamic groups exist, they kill lots of people, and they do so in the name of their religion. Islamic religious violence is something that, shall we say, is in the news a bit lately.

How many cartoons about Bush and the US bombing and killing have appeared in papers around the world? And they should, because that's what people are talking about and what's really happening. Is it offensive to some Americans? Sure. Are all Americans Arab-killers? No. But that shouldn't stop them from publishing a cartoon concerning world events. Well, shouldn't the same reasoning apply to cartoons of Mohammed?
post #186 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by BRussell
How many cartoons about Bush and the US bombing and killing have appeared in papers around the world? And they should, because that's what people are talking about and what's really happening. Is it offensive to some Americans? Sure. Are all Americans Arab-killers? No. But that shouldn't stop them from publishing a cartoon concerning world events. Well, shouldn't the same reasoning apply to cartoons of Mohammed?

This is where you fail to understand this whole issue. Bush is not Muhammad. He is not Jesus. He is, in terms of spiritual importance, a nobody. Mr. Inside-Outski. Drawing parallels between Bush and Muhammad would be OK if Bush ever became a Prophet, formed a new religion, had 1.5 billion followers and was revered to the point of being sacred and untouchable.

As it is, it's the same as comparing Jesus with, say, Hugo Chavez. Do some people draw cartoons of Chavez that are offensive to Venezuelans? Sure. Are all Venezuelans Castro-loving scumbags? No. But that shouldn't stop anyone from depicting Jesus as a terrorist with a bomb on his head.
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
post #187 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by Gene Clean
This is where you fail to understand this whole issue. Bush is not Muhammad. He is not Jesus. He is, in terms of spiritual importance, a nobody. Mr. Inside-Outski. Drawing parallels between Bush and Muhammad would be OK if Bush ever became a Prophet, formed a new religion, had 1.5 billion followers and was revered to the point of being sacred and untouchable.

As it is, it's the same as comparing Jesus with, say, Hugo Chavez. Do some people draw cartoons of Chavez that are offensive to Venezuelans? Sure. Are all Venezuelans Castro-loving scumbags? No. But that shouldn't stop anyone from depicting Jesus as a terrorist with a bomb on his head.

The real issue is simple: why were the cartoons published?

Was it freedom of speech? No.

Seems like the guy behind it all, Flemming Rose, is a bit selective in his 'Free Speech'.

He is quoted in the International Herald Tribune (Jan 1st) as saying:

Quote:
"that he would not publish a cartoon of Israel's Ariel Sharon strangling a Palestinian baby, since that could be construed as 'racist.'"

My personal opinion is that this is part of the ramp-up to a conflict with Iran. Expect more provocations (or Muslim savages over-reacting, as you will) in the coming month.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #188 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
My personal opinion is that this is part of the ramp-up to a conflict with Iran. Expect more provocations (or Muslim savages over-reacting, as you will) in the coming month.

If this ramps up to some kind of war, that war was caused by a weakness in the Muslum community. It should not be so easy to cause riots and violence - if this violence (or tendency to violence) has been simmering under the surface of the muslum community, then it might as well boil over now.

If they have these violent tendencies, then war is inevitable - it is better that it happens now rather than in the future when the balance of power is different.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #189 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
If they have these violent tendencies, then war is inevitable - it is better that it happens now rather than in the future when the balance of power is different.

So now simply being perceived as violent is sufficient justification for more illegal invasions?

We're not even talking about territorial aggression here.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #190 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
My personal opinion is that this is part of the ramp-up to a conflict with Iran.

Well, Iran is certainly doing their part as well.
post #191 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
So now simply being perceived as violent is sufficient justification for more illegal invasions?

We're not even talking about territorial aggression here.

If they burn the Danish embassy, you are wrong - that is territorial aggression.

I'm not suggesting that we use this as an excuse to invade - but just like the assassination of Arch Duke Ferdinand, this could escalate. If it escalates, it is a problem caused by the muslum world.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #192 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius

My personal opinion is that this is part of the ramp-up to a conflict with Iran. Expect more provocations (or Muslim savages over-reacting, as you will) in the coming month. [/B]

Busheny loves it when a plan comes together!

You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
post #193 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by iPoster
Busheny loves it when a plan comes together!


If you think that Bush could have predicted or organised this, then you have a much higher opinion of his competance than I do.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #194 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
If you think that Bush could have predicted or organised this, then you have a much higher opinion of his competance than I do.

Wow! You just pointed out an irony that has escaped me until now. Many anti-Bushers desperately want him to be "dumber than dirt" while simultaneously clever enough to have orchestrated any number of interlocking and complex conspiracies against nations large (our own) and small (Iraq, etc.)
post #195 of 328
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
The real issue is simple: why were the cartoons published?

Was it freedom of speech? No.

Seems like the guy behind it all, Flemming Rose, is a bit selective in his 'Free Speech'.

He is quoted in the International Herald Tribune (Jan 1st) as saying:



My personal opinion is that this is part of the ramp-up to a conflict with Iran. Expect more provocations (or Muslim savages over-reacting, as you will) in the coming month.

You are on deep deep water here, Seg.

1) If anything Shi´as would be the last one to react to these drawings. And we have extremely few strong Shi´a muslims here (most Iranians here are refugees from the revolution in Iran and they tend to be as much muslims as most danes are christians). There would be tons of better ways to provoke Iran than setting the entire muslim world on fire.

2) These drawings were published FIVE month ago and the paper did not do anything active to make this conflict international. You are seeing ghosts here, Seg.

3) The handling of the situation from the paper shows they were really NOT ready to handle an internationalisation of the conflict. This was for pure national reasons.

4) The Bush administration was at first very reluctant to side with Jyllands Posten or the danish government at first. Not until our embassy in Syria was burned (and the situation therefore suddenly played right into the Bush administration agenda) did they react. And every time, before and after the Syria incident, the original issue, the drawings, has been labelled as unacceptable by your admin.

5) The full quote is:

Quote:
But Rose acknowledges that even his liberalism has its limits. He said he would not publish a cartoon of Israel's Ariel Sharon strangling a Palestinian baby, since that could be construed as "racist." He would, however, publish a cartoon poking fun at Moses or one of Jesus drinking a pint of beer.

"Muslims should be allowed to burn the Danish flag in a public square if that's within the boundaries of the law," he said. "Though I think this would be a strange signal to the Danish people who have hosted them."

Again, as I have said so many times, its a means vs. goal consideration, where he is making a judgement whether the goal justify the means. He is ready to ridicule religious figures, not certain people and their actions. While I would have the opposite priorities of the paper you can´t say it is inconsistent.

What happened is this: Jyllands Posten is a conservative paper with a national-conservative leaning. The right to freedom of speech is, rightly, one issue that is regarded as setting "The west" apart from most parts of the ME and other countries with a dominant muslim population. Over time this freedom of speech has become a holy grail for the culture the paper wants to protect and it jumps head in into a case where it try to fight dogmatics with their own unacknowledged dogmatic. Not an international conspiracy, no black helicopters, no direct line from the neo-cons HQ to Viby, Jutland.
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
post #196 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Wow! You just pointed out an irony that has escaped me until now. Many anti-Bushers desperately want him to be "dumber than dirt" while simultaneously clever enough to have orchestrated any number of interlocking and complex conspiracies against nations large (our own) and small (Iraq, etc.)


Cheney conceptualizes

Rove develops.

Bush presents
post #197 of 328
Quote:
Originally posted by Mac on a Mac
Cheney conceptualizes

Rove develops.

Bush presents

Ohhhh...well that 'splains it all then.

post #198 of 328
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Mac on a Mac
Cheney conceptualizes

Rove develops.

Bush presents

And Flemming Rose is secretly told to set it all into motion?

Goddammit. Not everything is national US politics.
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
post #199 of 328
Thread Starter 
A good thing

It would be prudent for our prime to show very gratitude towards this.
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
post #200 of 328
Quote:
If it escalates, it is a problem caused by the muslum world.

Without a threat on the US or allies, this will be yet another unprovoked war.

I think the fact that people are thinking "this will lead to war" exposes a disturbing vein within the popular consciousness right now.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Soooo. Anyone heard some news from Denmark lately?