The Danish Cartoon - pretext to war?? !!??

CiaranC

but this is hardly as clearly established, as you seem to suggest.

Several news sources have pointed out that this is indeed orchestrated by extremist clerics who have spent months touring the ME with these photos, along with a few others thrown in, in order to whip up protest. The pictures were published months ago in Denmark.

the_syco

ISAW wrote:

Vangelis wrote:

And i Norway we see that many of these Muslims aren't capable of adjusting to Norwegian norms for behaviour.

Nor are many Americans or gypsies. So what? If they are breaking the law you have ways of dealing with that.

Sounds like how we can't prosecute travellers, tbh. If dealt with, with the reason being that they are "different", they can't really be charged, tbh. But the Muslims don't seem to see any point in integrating into society, thus another cap between the locals and the incomers. Seems like the pictures are being used by certain factions within the Muslim community to widen that gap.

Sand

They weren't criticising the right to freedom of expression, free speech or freedom of speech(all are the same thing!). They were offended by one particular caricature, not by anyone's right to express their views.

Threatening to murder someone because they say something you disagree with is an attack on free speech.

Fine. Exercise your right. And die.

Or dont exercise your rights. Youll still die.

And there are more important things than defending one's right to speak up. Discretion and respect for instance. We are not all the same.

Personally, I did support the Muslim view. But not now any longer now that they've burnt down Norwegiand an Danish embassies. Have you guys seen how they behave on TV? Primitive monkeys, that's what they are.

You talk about discretion and respect on the one hand, and then call people angered by the supposed lack of discretion and respect "primitive monkeys"?

Oh... and they are not JUST "silly threats". They WILL ACT and they have begun ALLREADY.

And the same people who might carry out attacks were out and about the day before planning terrorist attacks. Nothings changed. With the growing muslim population in Europe, along with the Saudi funding of fundamentalists in Europe there was and is always going to be a point whereby the expectations of these fundamentalists are going to have to understand the limits and norms of the civillisation they are living in. The Danish government have so far acted completely correctly in stressing that they cannot apologise on behalf of a paper they do not own.

And its becoming clear that a lot of the "facts" of the case have been invented by the Danish Muslim group to whip up anger. If it is possible to correct these lies, then more than likely the anger will dissipate without the need to compromise values.

There is a great gap between the Westerm civilisation and that of the Islamic civilization. Muslims of the extreme sort are spreading in my country. And i Norway we see that many of these Muslims aren't capable of adjusting to Norwegian norms for behaviour. I'm beginning to see the rage they pour over my nation for what "we" have done. They blame the whole country for ONE newspaper's "transgression".

MANY Muslims want Norwegians to conform to THEIR way of living.

No, *some* Muslims do. They dominate discourse through the threat of violence and discrediting moderates as not being as Muslim as they are. It is not possible to go along walking on egg shells without them being confronted at some point. As seen in the London protests, a lot of the placards involved issues that went far beyond the cartoons. The cartoons are just a bandwagon to jump on. The problems are there already.

Last night I was so disturbed that I cried. Seeing angry Muslims who beat their fists in the air like apes is very scary, no matter how imbecilic it looked. And seeing them burn embassies. Together they are strong.

I was horrified. I've never felt such a fear ever.

No theyre not strong. They burnt an embassy, and some flags. Flag burning is a cultural tradition. Most of them probably couldnt find Norway on a map, and either way you rank pretty low on their list of enemies - Israel and the US are the undisputed champions in that regard. Your main problem is any homegrown extremists, who were the same problem Norway had before this kicked off anyway. All thats changed is the perception of the risk.

Maybe. What about this?:

Wow ISAW, sounds like they acted like some sort of medieval army sacking enemy cities like that....oh wait, they were a medieval army.

rsynnott

Vangelis wrote:

Fine. Exercise your right. And die.

This is exactly the problem. If we start giving in on things like this, we may as well abandon our society here and now. Integrity is important.

Vangelis wrote:

And there are more important things than defending one's right to speak up. Discretion and respect for instance. We are not all the same.

Question; do the world's religions automatically deserve respect, or must they earn it? If the latter, have either Islam or Christianity really earned it in recent years?

Vangelis wrote:

Oh... and they are not JUST "silly threats". They WILL ACT and they have begun ALLREADY.

What, you mean the embassy thing? Amazing, but not really a disaster in objective terms. They won't go near Denmark.

Vangelis wrote:

There is a great gap between the Westerm civilisation and that of the Islamic civilization. Muslims of the extreme sort are spreading in my country. And i Norway we see that many of these Muslims aren't capable of adjusting to Norwegian norms for behaviour. I'm beginning to see the rage they pour over my nation for what "we" have done. They blame the whole country for ONE newspaper's "transgression".

Just remember that most Muslims, like most of everyone else, are perfectly reasonable people. The greatest danger of this whole thing is that it could start irrational paranoia and hatred in the countries involved.

RE: Islam being more civilised than the Christian west in the past, I don't think anyone's seriously disputing it. The Christian west was HORRENDOUS, while parts of the Islamic world were somewhat more permissive than today... Not the case anymore tho.

the_syco wrote:

Sounds like how we can't prosecute travellers, tbh. If dealt with, with the reason being that they are "different", they can't really be charged, tbh. But the Muslims don't seem to see any point in integrating into society, thus another cap between the locals and the incomers. Seems like the pictures are being used by certain factions within the Muslim community to widen that gap.

The Muslims? Ah, yes, they're one cohesive group, eh? Actually, most Muslims I know here seem to be integrating moderately well; I doubt it's so very different elsewhere.

mike65

Some leading Muslims in Britian are seeking the prosecution of those who incited murder on the march yesterday, I can't help but feel the Met will be slow to follow that line right now.

I imagine Sir Ian Blair and co will hope things quieten down then if someone is dumb enough to try to relight the fire later, do them.

Mike.

Mercury_Tilt

This post has been deleted.

Michael G

Could I post something here

• defending sex with children
• proposing that black people are intrinsically inferior to whites and should not be allowed to govern themselves
• suggesting that homosexual activity between adults should once again be made a criminal offence?

No? I don't believe any of those things, but some people do, and it wouldn't take me more than half an hour to throw together a few arguments and a few dodgy statistics that would at least give you a run for your money as you tried to refute them.

But I don't believe my posts would be left on the board and I would expect the Guards to be investigating me within 24 hours under some anti-discrimination law or other.

So there is no absolute right to freedom of expression. Why, then, do some cartoonists (and from what I have seen of the cartoons they are neither clever nor funny) have the right to hurt the feelings of Muslims? Not just slobbering suicide-bombing savages from the arse-end of the desert, but every decent, humane Muslim who believes that Mohammed is the Prophet of God.

mike65

But I don't believe my posts would be left on the board and I would expect the Guards to be investigating me within 24 hours under some anti-discrimination law or other.

The newspapers that published the cartoons broke no laws. The artists who draw them broke no laws.

You can regard the actions of both parties foolish but not criminal.

Mike.

rsynnott

Satire is, generally, allowed, even if it's not very good.

Mikel

So there is no absolute right to freedom of expression. Why, then, do some cartoonists.....have the right to hurt the feelings of Muslims?

You think there is a law against hurting peoples feelings? You think that under the law that i should be able to prosecute somebody because they hurt my feelings?

Could I post something here

* defending sex with children
* proposing that black people are intrinsically inferior to whites and should not be allowed to govern themselves
* suggesting that homosexual activity between adults should once again be made a criminal offence?

Why not? At least one poster on a thread like this has suggested that Arabs are not suitable for democracy. And a lot of fundamentalist Muslims preach that homosexuality is wrong and should be punished etc. Incitement to hatred is apparently only a crime when it's by someone white.
Free speech is not just for well thought out intelligent reasonable opinions. It also covers idiotic, stupid, foolish opinions too

pete

Mikel wrote:

And a lot of fundamentalist Muslims preach that homosexuality is wrong and should be punished etc.

Not like those enlightened catholics.

Mikel

They don't advocate stoning them. Or women who have been raped, or who are "unclean". Anyone is entitled to be bigoted in their own time.

fly_agaric

No. 1 in that list has been done by Vangelis on these boards (a reposting of something written by someone else).

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054860011

dathi1

Not like those enlightened catholics.

Death Fatwahs?

Vangelis

Hobbes wrote:

No they used the laws to try and get an apology for an offensive cartoon and were told to suck it up. Then brought it to the government and were ignored. Then to add insult to injury despite being told the cartoon was offensive felt the need to post it in other papers.

Has absolutly nothing to do with wanting to change Norwegians way of life.

Which laws? There are no laws against blasphemy in Norway.

Vangelis

ISAW wrote:

The east had civilisation FIRST! How do you know extremism is spreading at such a great rate? What evidence hove you got? Or do you just believe the fear filled messages in the media? REmember the "white powder" in the mail and the anthrax threat? People were paralized by fear. How many died? Three? four? But the media built up a big head of steam didnt they?

SO WHAT if the east had civilisation first??????!!! That's not what we're talking about. I observe the society around me. That's how my impressions are created.

Was that not in denmark?

No.

Do you really believe that in Muslim countries everyone keeps several flags of western democracies? So how come there are all of a sudden loads of DANISH flags being burned?

Norwegian flags are burned too.

Where did they come from? Obviously people are being manipulated and handed flags from some group who procured them. This was designed to attract media attention and is not a "sporadic" gesture. It was PLANNED! Don't be foolish and think all muslims think like that just as they shouldn't think all westerners are like Bush.

But I clearly see how MANY Muslims are hostile to the west. And I don't see to many Muslims who stand up to protect Denmark or Norway yet.

This is the type of paralysis that got the neo - conservatives into power. If there is no enemy they will manufacture one. Don't be afraid - BE AWARE!

So your theory is that Islamic extremism is a manufactured enemy? I don't think so!

Sand

No? I don't believe any of those things, but some people do, and it wouldn't take me more than half an hour to throw together a few arguments and a few dodgy statistics that would at least give you a run for your money as you tried to refute them.

People do post that sort of tripe - as already noted Vangelis already linked and brought up for debate on the humanities board an article defending sex with children. She got the head taken of her by people who saw red and thought it was her article (she didnt highlight very well that it wasnt her article for starters) but no one AFAIR threatened to murder her, burn Norwegian embassies or forced her into hiding.

Threads may be closed by moderators, but boards.ie is not a democracy. Its a dictatorship - possibly benevolent - so trying to compare it with democratic standards isnt workable.

So there is no absolute right to freedom of expression. Why, then, do some cartoonists (and from what I have seen of the cartoons they are neither clever nor funny) have the right to hurt the feelings of Muslims? Not just slobbering suicide-bombing savages from the arse-end of the desert, but every decent, humane Muslim who believes that Mohammed is the Prophet of God.

Freedom of speech is curtailed in terms of libel, incitement to hatred or incitement to violence. Not in terms of hurt feelings. If our right to exspression was bound by others feelings, wed have very little freedom indeed.

Vangelis

rsynnott wrote:

This is exactly the problem. If we start giving in on things like this, we may as well abandon our society here and now. Integrity is important.

I agree with that.

Question; do the world's religions automatically deserve respect, or must they earn it? If the latter, have either Islam or Christianity really earned it in recent years?

This is a subjective question. Deserve respect? I don't see the relevance in that question. Someone else will have to give their answer. Has democracy earned respect? Has liberal trade earned its respect, now that it is destroying our environment?

What, you mean the embassy thing? Amazing, but not really a disaster in objective terms. They won't go near Denmark.

You don't KNOW that, and you know that.

Just remember that most Muslims, like most of everyone else, are perfectly reasonable people. The greatest danger of this whole thing is that it could start irrational paranoia and hatred in the countries involved.

You bet. I can't see much hysteria around now, but I suppose that I'm not the only one in 4,5 million who is worried.

Sand, it's funny you should bring up my paedophilia-thread. I'm glad my house wasn't burned down, but... comparing a thread with an article defending paeodhilia and a newspaper publishing a caricature of Muhammed... Hmmm... I don't see that as a good comparison. *pats Sand on head*

dathi1

So your theory is that Islamic extremism is a manufactured enemy? I don't think so!

Well let’s say that a manufactured Zionist statelet didn’t exactly help the situation from day one. (Day one being sometime in 1948)
If these Cartoons had appeared in lets say Iceland...no one would be any the wiser. Another by-product of home grown non adaptable immigration.

Romero

Ah Feck them all, from what I've seen on the news of these small minded ignorant people attacking the embassys and then the idiots in the UK holding up signs threatening death to all the countries involved!!!! I say round them all up and kick them out!!!!And the EU should stop all aid and trade with them! Its time we Europeans stood up for freedom of speech!

Romero

P.S. I must get that cartoon printed on a T-Shirt

the_syco

Someone said that its not allowed to paint picture's of the prophet. Thats bullsh|t. Here's some: http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/

Some at the bottom may offend Msulims. Another intresting point, is that, as no-one knows what the prophet looks like (in alot of the pictures, there is no face), he could be anyone. This picture shows how an honest mistake could get you killed.


=-=

Also, as for the story that some people showed the 12 pics to people in the ME, well, you may not have seen the "other" 3, which were "left out": http://bibelen.blogspot.com/2006/01/imams-showed-pedophile-mohamed.html

=-=

For the PC police, check this out. The picture on the right is seen as more racist, no doubt. Also, the picture on the right is against Islam law :http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/20060204.gif

/edit
When I say prophet above, I meant Mohammed. I'm saying this, as I think Jesus was also seen as a prophet, too.

rsynnott

the_syco wrote:

Someone said that its not allowed to paint picture's of the prophet. Thats bullsh|t. Here's some: http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/

Bear in mind that the few of those that are Islamic and depict his face are mostly Persian or Turkish from the middle ages. Neither nation was, as far as I know, particularly conformant to strict Islam.

zuma

Romero wrote:

Ah Feck them all, from what I've seen on the news of these small minded ignorant people attacking the embassys and then the idiots in the UK holding up signs threatening death to all the countries involved!!!! I say round them all up and kick them out!!!!And the EU should stop all aid and trade with them! Its time we Europeans stood up for freedom of speech!

Romero

P.S. I must get that cartoon printed on a T-Shirt

And take a holiday in Saudi Arabia(the last of your life:eek: ) if your got the balls.....hahahaha!!!!

Where exactly can one(?) view these cartoons on the web anyway, come on I wanna see:cool: .

Dave!

jesus christ -- just saw the riots on the news last night! burning the embassy, burning flags, people in hospital -- they're absolute psychopaths, really. Over a f*cking cartoon.

Snap out of it ffs.

Hobbes

DaveMcG wrote:

jesus christ -- just saw the riots on the news last night! burning the embassy, burning flags, people in hospital -- they're absolute psychopaths, really. Over a f*cking cartoon.

Snap out of it ffs.

Jeez they should just mega merge all the threads together.

I have said this on another thread but I will say it again here. (may of even been this thread :v:)

The writer of the article tried to get a picture done of Mohammad for a childrens book. He found it was almost impossible due to strict Islamic laws on this. Because of this he wrote an article asking cartoonists to draw what they thought of Mohammad was.

The pictures in question were printed in the paper in September 2005. During that time the Muslim community asked for an apology from the papers for printing what they defined as offensive. (which is allowed). The papers refused, they then brought the case to the government who also didn't get involved. The media then inflamed the issue of already knowing that the pictures caused offense to print them in more papers.

We are now at the point of riots not because of the cartoons but because they come to represent what the West thinks of the Islamic faith. For example one of the cartoons depicts suicide bombers being welcome into heaven which is not true under Islamic teachings (only under fundimentalist teachings).

If anything this sort of cartoon crap helps the fundimentalists more.

The_syco wrote:

For the PC police, check this out. The picture on the right is seen as more racist, no doubt.

Of course the left one would be. Now if you replaced the right one with one of the ones pictured in the newspapers would you say they both offensive?

Yep and that bloody brave editor has been sacked and has already had death threats. That guy is a hero in my eyes.

Actually the editor in question was not sacked at all. The call for calm was from one of the diplomats and it was only reprinted in that paper. The amount of hearsay being spouted around is unreal.

The Corinthian

Lemming wrote:

Corrie, a Danish Muslim group did a tour of the ME to bring attention to these cartoons. Exactly what isn't a concerted effort on their part about that?

Fair enough. Hadn't been informed of that. My bad.

As for the Canadian law proposals, they were presented before this current tempest in a tea-cup, which I am referring to with regards the seemingly majority western opinion that I'm getting of "calm the f*ck down"

Sand's comments on 'Liberals' was about this policy trend in various Western nations, which is precisely backed by the aforementioned, well-meaning, 'Liberals'.

Wibbs

Hobbes wrote:

Actually the editor in question was not sacked at all. The call for calm was from one of the diplomats and it was only reprinted in that paper. The amount of hearsay being spouted around is unreal.

Sorry, I saw the report on the Beeb website. Seems to be gone now. Any one else got clarification?

dathi1

Here's a fairly good analysis on the situation:
http://www.juancole.com/
So relax

fly_agaric

Wibbs wrote:

Sorry, I saw the report on the Beeb website. Seems to be gone now. Any one else got clarification?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4672642.stm

An editor of one of the reprinting papers was fired.

Hobbes wrote:

The media then inflamed the issue of already knowing that the pictures caused offense to print them in more papers.

So, they reprinted it to cause riots? Or to stand up and be counted in the face of threats and bullying? Or maybe even to show some of their readers what all the stink was over?

Hobbes wrote:

We are now at the point of riots not because of the cartoons but because they come to represent what the West thinks of the Islamic faith.

By that logic the whole saga demonstrates what muslims, and muslim states' governments think of us very well!
Message is loud and clear!
(*warning to Wicknight - both Hobbes' comment and my reply are generalisations).

At last, someone with a sense of humour about it all...

http://www.boreme.com/boreme/funny-2006/behead-p1.php