But Pimpanzee, isn't the way western media has used some reactions on the cartoons truly awful? While the imams of Beirut have taken to the streets trying to prevent any violent reactions, all that people remember published are the types of images like secretingredient posted above? I don't see the very point of this publication - a demonstration of freedom of speech, yes - but why in such a distasteful and brutal manner, completely insensitive to an already complex situation? You might say that anything can be said in a free press, and therefore it must, but I'm afraid neither tabloids nor bad cartoons are the best role-models that people living under state-controlled media should look to.
nevermore, you are a genious. thanks for helping me to understand terms like geopolitics and orgasmic process in holy places.
levelmore. what is so offending to you? your hate for muslims is well documented in your previous posts. i remember..
Orhan,.............The word "Muslim" is a compound of two middle eastern root words
"musallam + iman" = muslim
musallam ( unbreakable/unshakeable )+ iman ( faith/belief) = a muslim.
one whose faith is unbreakable and unshakeable against any force.
( may it be cartoons or by anything else .)
the danish paper had every right to print whatever it would like. the other papers who stupidly printed the cartoons for provocations sake also have every right to print whatever they want. they should all take responsible for their mistakes, and for the most part they have done that. Those responsible for the distastefull cartoon have been sacked or appologized.
If there is to be any kind of improvement of western/islamic relations this ridiculously irrational reactionary m.o has to end. Americans, Brits, Europeans in general need to stop associating Islam with extremism, and Muslims need to stop associating westerners with our hypocritical governments.
Most muslims disagree with their extermist counterparts, and most westerners disagree with our governments.
If there is any chance for humanity to survive , its to avoid putting fear in the minds of others and so, also yourself . Fear leads to agression .
Agression leads to destruction .
We seem to be able to think , but we cannot be sure .
Looking at the "bright" past and present achievements of humanity .
But the creation of beautiful arts and the(possible) positive force behind that could make the urge for destruction less.
All curtures are linked by this.
If we see the great achievements in all the cultures , for example in architecture . we all can enjoy and appreciate it .
Culture can be hope .
The communication on this forum is a small example.
And irony is here appreciated , which for me is very pleasent and important.
Ohran- The fact you claim the Taliban had a chance but blew it means your a bigger dick than I originally thought. Please dont bring your religious Bullshi*t to my favorite website.
i have no idea who you are but you sure sound very out of control.
what i meant was after the russians, taliban, if they were the right minds and didn't assasinate the good leaders within, could have a great country such as afganistan.
you owe me an apology..
now to the situation whith the cartoons.
If they where made out of racist motives or to hurt muslims or just as some kind of joke, or as a reaction to terrorism or because out of fear of growing self-censorship in the " western"world . I don't know .
But the "funny" thing is that that makes no difference , in the violent reactions at the moment, they would have been the same nomatterwhat the intentions of the makers are .
From what I understand from you , Orhan, that people whith such (for me)extreme religious ideas feel that they have to rect in this way because the koran says so (correct me if I am wrong). But for me it sounds so strange that as a little human beiing you have to go and defend ,lets call" your" god '.
What also strikes me in this matters that the moderate muslims, a lot of times say ' yes this is not good but..and then there always follows , like in this case : those cartoons shouldend have been made , because then this shit happens. I not much hear a clear refusal.
It is something like "they have no choice because the believe this"
That means end of discussion.
And I agree whith doberman that you say the muslims are the new jews of europe is very inappropiate.
I get the feeling that you are also very sensitive for criticism on islam.
But more a problem for you then for me , and I like to keep it that way .
But its for me interresting to hear your opinion and to discus about it.
What I don't like ,and is dangerous for a society ,is people here who make more and more selfcensorship , which will in the long run undermine our "free" society"
I don't represent any religion, faith or organization.
i am not an expert on quran, bible or torah. altough my father had all three in his library, i've never read their entire content ever. i don't consider myself a religious person and would never advocate one.
i love people of all races, gender, religions and backgrounds. i love all animals and plants, mountains, rivers, oceans, deserts and sky.
i am 'sensetive' and 'against' racism and discrimination anywhere. i am against violence.
if i had one wish, that would be a world united under one love. i know it is not possible in my lifetime.
this would be my last post in this thread, which, now, i think was a mistake because it gave an opportunity to an evil person to spit out ugly insults towards otherwise peaceful people who senselessly got stereotyped.
i've been follwing this thread and although i've almost posted a few times i've found myself unable to do it because i'm feeling somewhat speech.ess by much of this.
did anybody else notice that adanish/norwegian embassy was burned to the ground on account of these cartoons? wtf? it was just a cartoon, do we really need to burn buildings down on account of this?
likewise, i appreciate orhan's concern about rising conservative sentiments in europe. about three years ago one of my teachers predicted that "right-wing politics were the next big thing"...i thought he was nuts because i felt that if anythingright wing politics were yesterday's news (at least that's how it seemed here in the states), but sadly i think he was correct and that we probably haven't seen the last of this.
still, as much as i'd like to turn the other cheek, i have been somewhat troubled recently by a movie i watched as part of my little civil right awareness efforts for mlk day. i know that many of you are familiar with the ghandi movie and as i watched it i was stricken by the incredible scrifices ghandi made in order to aid all of those in his community, both muslim & hindu, and despite his impressive successes he was assasinated by an extremist of his own religion. again, wtf? it almost compels me to ignore the ideals of civilisation and embrace the most basic laws of nature. kill or be killed. maybe we should just "nuke the bastards" why restrain and limit ourselves to cartoons or embassy burnings?
it's worth noting that although i was raised catholic, i have thoroughly disavowed myself of all religious belief. no good comes from it. there's no point in believing in heaven & hell. we only get one chance at consciousness and this is it. very naive to honestly feel that you are worthy of eternity (regardless of whether it's salvation or damnation). i often avoid discussions of religion but when i do involve myself, i have taken to asking believers if they would be willing to trade their religious beliefs in exchange for a peaceful world. the answer is obvious to me but i am almost always alarmed that most would not.
i guess that my final sentiment is simply one of utter disbelief. i increasingly feel like an alien on my own home planet.
I don't think religious beliefs themselves are the problem...it's what those beliefs are and whether they accept coexistence with non-believers (as Hinduism, Buddhism, and Christianity do). The real problem is militant, intolerant religious extremism...possibly a lingering medieval mindset where nation-states are organized around faiths (Christiandom, etc...)
These people need to join the 21st century and moderate their religion, because it doesn't appear to be compatable with civilization.
To clarify the absolute absurdity of the RADICALS in the Muslim religion read this:
HINDUS CONSIDER it sacrilegious to eat meat from cows, so when a Danish supermarket ran a sale on beef and veal last fall, Hindus everywhere reacted with outrage. India recalled its ambassador to Copenhagen, and Danish flags were burned in Calcutta, Bombay, and Delhi. A Hindu mob in Sri Lanka severely beat two employees of a Danish-owned firm, and demonstrators in Nepal chanted: ''War on Denmark! Death to Denmark!"In many places, shops selling Dansk china or Lego toys were attacked by rioters, and two Danish embassies were firebombed.
Have you noticed that whenever there is this kind of protest, they always happen to have the appropriate country's flag handy. I mean, if I was going to join in and burn a Danish flag, I'd have no idea about where to procure one. Maybe flag retailing is a big business in some countries...
I'm troubled. If something as innocent as a parody cartoon can rise to levels of public calls for execution, when will an architects design offend so much that there will be a violent response?
there was a good article in the journal this morning about how this whole mess evolved from the limited influence of a few disguntled clerics in denmark to an international concern. i was surprised to learn that there was a rather large months long effort on the part of the secular gov'ts of several muslin countries in order to seem more devoted amongst their constituents. turned out that these secular-minded governing types are literally playing with fire.
hey did someone think of starting to burn
syrian, palestinian, iranian, ... flags ?
these bas***rds burned the danish and norwegian flag!
there's a white cross on the danish flag - clearly a christian symbol!
this blasphemous act should hurt the religious feelings of every true Christian.
we (!) should not allow them (!) to proceed with this blasphemy !
I've decided that in my act of solidarity, this weekend I'm going to buy some legos....and while i'm constructing a castle or moon base or whatever...i'll be getting drunk off some carlsberg beer.
Just my little part to help out my danish friends.
Well, being in a Middle Eastern country (probably the best one) I asked some of my Muslim colleagues what the thought of the whole thing (and, they're not over zealous fanatics)
They were all unanimous in their opinion that, they do condemn the cartoons, simply because they are not supposed to depict their prophet's image anywhere. This was so that Idolatry would be avoided.
The reason why this got out of hand was because, when the cartoons were first published in September and there was a public outcry over it, the ambassadors of 11 Muslim countries wanted to meet up with the Danish prime minister to discuss it. They were refused an audience. Then came the Norwegian cartoon and that could not be tolerated anymore. It was more like Islam was being a punching bag for the west. Do whatever you want with them, say whatever you want about them and then let all sit and laugh at them.
They went on and on about it... and I was quite convinced from their POV ... being in an Islamic country, I have a lot of Muslim friends. And trust me when I say this... they are all wonderful people, amazing even. Not all of them are what you picture them to be. The ban on Danish products is on over here, and 90% of the population here supports it ... and keep in mind that 80% of the people here are expatriates and 50 % of that would be westerners!! You gotta live among them to understand them.
All this would never have happened if the editor of the paper simply apologized when he found out that he had offended the Muslims. It was like telling the “F U! We'll do what we want with your beloved prophet!!! We have the freedom of the press and freedom of expression… and we want to express that your religious sentiments don’t mean anything to us" you expect the Muslims to sit still and take that beating at that time. Europe has to learn to respect what other people believe in, before they profess freedom of expression.
So I believe that this was a case of, not, freedom of the press, but misusing that freedom to insult... that in turn - provocation!!
Of course... burning the flags and torching down the embassies was condemned here too ... they say that that just gives out the wrong message about Islam. I can see what they said was true, after reading the messages above.
Learn about the religion before forming opinions!!
Nevermore: - You remember a few years back when a French designer had used images of Hindu gods and goddesses on shoes and lingerie?? You remember the outcry then? Of course the designer apologized immediately and withdrew all the products and stated that he did not know that he would be offending the Hindus religious beliefs!! And that’s how it should have been handled. Though initially I was pissed of about it, later it was all ok, considering that he was truly sorry.
anyways dont want to comment more cos the individual who started this thread calls me a muslim-hater etc.and he believes in the concept of the taliban (atleast the idealogy)
Thanks sporadic, finally some decent commentary on this. The issue is complicated since what is constitutionally allowed in Denmark ("free press") has because of its context become a internationally political question, holding the danish government responsible for what has happened. This is an impossible situation, since an excuse from a danish politician would undermine the whole system of free press.
What I don't understand is how upset WESTERNERS get from non-violent muslim protests. Firstly, the comparison to christian mockery is ridiculous - the criticism was historically directed towards a powerful christian establishment, not towards a globally and nationally weaker group. Secondly, isn't it anybody's right to boycot goods? What about the boycots on french wines, first after the renewed nuclear bomb tests, then because they didn't want to join an illegal war? A slightly more humble attitude could be wished for, or as a danish intellectual put it: "You have the right to free speech, but you also have the right to shut up sometimes"
^listen man, stop taking my words out of context and associating me with religious fanatics like taliban. how can i support their ideology when i start the sentence with 'fuck taliban'
however here is 'your' open 'distaste' for muslims that draw my attention. yes i agree 'hate' was little too strong for me to use towards you but i wasn't the first ever either. http://www.archinect.com/forum/threads.php?id=31572_0_42_0_C
The big points here, to me, are #1 most of us westerners don't understand the first thing about the Muslim faith and #2 the Muslim faith better do something to tame the extremists, because the rest of the world is really going to get pissed off.
Sure, I'd buy there is planning to get reactions by some, but not the majority. And it worked (assuming there was thought put into it, and I don't believe there was, beyond a joke at a religion), now the world is watching as people literally go crazy, call for executions, etc.
It's great to say everyone needs to learn the intricacies of each religion, in order to avoid pissing anyone off, but that is impossible and ridiculous to assume that this will ever happen.
Now, if it were a Muslim that printed the cartoons, I'd understand more of an outcry, but it wasn't.
Imho, there is no excuse for physical violence - absolutely none. That's the bottom line for most of the world. Sorry, I am naive about your beliefs and apologize for my ignorance, but its absolutely absurd to cause destruction and violence because the world has a different point of view or is naive.
The power hungry reaching out in the name of religion could very well bring down the world if something isn't done soon.
From what I've read about the original cartoons this all originated from a book author not being able to find someone to illustrate his book. Apparently the subject of the book was somehow related to Muslims, but not in a derrogatory way at all. The illustrators all declined because they feared for their safety.
Remember that it wasn't too long ago that a film maker was killed because he made a documentary about the lack of women's rights within the muslim community.
An obscure Danish newspaper picked up on the authors story of not being able to find an illustrator and published a story about self-censorship. Where a law doesn't forbid it, but because of public pressure and fear they self-censorship. I applaud that paper for making a very valid point.
I conceed the cartoons, although tame by western standards, are offensive to other cultures. I conceed that both the newspaper and the gov't haven't handled the situation as best they could. Still, I don't see them as telling the muslim world to "F*ck off." They were making a point about censorship. That's why other papers picked up the cartoons. It's not done to piss off a religion. It's about freedoms of the west and how they shouldn't be bullied by a culture and religion.
The boycotting of goods is fine. Peacefull protests are fine. Burning down buildings and riots in front of millitary installations are not fine. Granted those are the radicals, and I have tried to emphasize that my problem is only with the radicals. I support the goal of the original paper so I have the right to buy Danish goods and support their economy.
Westerners don't get upset over non-violent protests. They do get upset when clerics call for execution of cartoonists or when violent protests burn down embassies and endanger their citizens. The road does travel both ways. The Muslim press has published a lot of mockery of Jewish and Christian religions. Now that this story got so big a lot is starting to show up in the western press. I think it's ridiculous to say the comparison isn't valid since Muslims aren't from powerful nations. Nations shouldn't matter. Is it ok to pick on someone because they are bigger than you? That doesn't make any sense at all.
My fear is that this story is bigger and getting bigger while most people have no idea how the story originated. That paper had a very valid point back in September. The world outrage has made their point. I fear that the response will just further supress freedoms in the west. That's what really scares me.
Yes, "pick on someone because they are bigger than you" makes absolute sense, because the purpose is different. I'm not saying that one should be legally allowed and the other not, but rather to explain why I think one is - let's say - moral, and the other not - why I can allow myself to criticize the publication. The point of free press is not about "being able to say whatever you feel like", even if tabloid media has made fortunes following this dogma. Free press originates from the struggle of publications to be able to criticize the ruling class, to be able to even ridicule those who aren't possible to "get to" in any other way, because they are in power. Free press is about giving everybody the right to be able to speak to a larger audience, not the right to publish garbage.
So, the conclusion of this is that the publication is just mere provocation, because if the owners of Jyllandsposten were seriously concerned about free press, they could have investigated the befriending of dictatorial regimes by western governments and companies (like google above), instead of insulting 1 billion believers. I'm of course against any violent protests, but if I read the comments above, there is a tendency to criticize islam itself, not the few violent protesters that of course get the most western media coverage.
I mean, A, how often have you been lying sleepless because you can't find any children's books with illustrations of the prophet Muhammed? Is this what is holding back democracy in the Middle East? Do you think the point has been made well? Do you think it was worth it?
Det var så lidt. By the way, it was a bit unfair to take only Google as an example. They were after all, the last search engine to give in to censorship. MSN and Yahoo didn't even try to protest.
a-f - "point of free press is not about "being able to say whatever you feel like", "
actually, that is what 'free' is about. You can say whatever you want as long as you aren't breaking any laws (like slander, etc.).
The point is that it's 'free'. It's up to the individual writers and publishers to determine what they want to publish. You can publish hate papers advocating Nazis, you can publish papers calling Bush a liar, you can publish papers stating all religions are only useful to manipulate and control, etc., etc - you can publish what you want, when you want.
Well, I think that is more an American take on press, which is more aggressive than our European counterpart. Again, I'm not talking about what the law allows, but rather how law is interpreted, where the law comes from, and what the motives of a serious newspaper is.
i've said no more posting in this thread, but i've been getting some racist and nasty e mails to my business address from spam like sources.
here is a link that describes more eloquantly where i am coming from. read it and stop sending me offensive and defaming e mails or state who you are so i can deal with you properly. coincil for secular humanism
yes, I am sorry too that people have stooped so low. It's one thing to discuss your point of view on a forum, but completely immature and uncalled for to take it off the forum, especially to someone's personal business.
I would suggest setting up a Yahoo (or whatever) account to catch your emails. I learned not to ever use business emails because of idiots like that long ago.
Mr. Skunst - here's a good example why not to use your real name ;-)
skunst: are you the person suggesting on one thread that people should use their real names, whilst not using your own real name, and then on this thread suggesting that someone here is paranoid and offensive for pointing out the dangers of using real names?
Freedom of Press or Provocation?
pimpanze: amen.
well, so to speak...
But Pimpanzee, isn't the way western media has used some reactions on the cartoons truly awful? While the imams of Beirut have taken to the streets trying to prevent any violent reactions, all that people remember published are the types of images like secretingredient posted above? I don't see the very point of this publication - a demonstration of freedom of speech, yes - but why in such a distasteful and brutal manner, completely insensitive to an already complex situation? You might say that anything can be said in a free press, and therefore it must, but I'm afraid neither tabloids nor bad cartoons are the best role-models that people living under state-controlled media should look to.
levelmore. what is so offending to you? your hate for muslims is well documented in your previous posts. i remember..
Orhan,.............The word "Muslim" is a compound of two middle eastern root words
"musallam + iman" = muslim
musallam ( unbreakable/unshakeable )+ iman ( faith/belief) = a muslim.
one whose faith is unbreakable and unshakeable against any force.
( may it be cartoons or by anything else .)
knew that ???
( smile )
regards.
levelmore..,and...?
People take life too seriously...instead of rioting, go have a beer and get some ass...these people are obviously way too pent up.
the danish paper had every right to print whatever it would like. the other papers who stupidly printed the cartoons for provocations sake also have every right to print whatever they want. they should all take responsible for their mistakes, and for the most part they have done that. Those responsible for the distastefull cartoon have been sacked or appologized.
If there is to be any kind of improvement of western/islamic relations this ridiculously irrational reactionary m.o has to end. Americans, Brits, Europeans in general need to stop associating Islam with extremism, and Muslims need to stop associating westerners with our hypocritical governments.
Most muslims disagree with their extermist counterparts, and most westerners disagree with our governments.
we are poluted stardust.
And for the rest everybody has the basic right to expres him/herself whithout being threatened whith hell on earht
If there is any chance for humanity to survive , its to avoid putting fear in the minds of others and so, also yourself . Fear leads to agression .
Agression leads to destruction .
We seem to be able to think , but we cannot be sure .
Looking at the "bright" past and present achievements of humanity .
But the creation of beautiful arts and the(possible) positive force behind that could make the urge for destruction less.
All curtures are linked by this.
If we see the great achievements in all the cultures , for example in architecture . we all can enjoy and appreciate it .
Culture can be hope .
The communication on this forum is a small example.
And irony is here appreciated , which for me is very pleasent and important.
respect
skunst
Get over it you freaks. Your religion is painting you all to be obsolete in the 21st century. If you dont stand up to Islam, We will.
Ohran- The fact you claim the Taliban had a chance but blew it means your a bigger dick than I originally thought. Please dont bring your religious Bullshi*t to my favorite website.
evilshit, watch your words!
i have no idea who you are but you sure sound very out of control.
what i meant was after the russians, taliban, if they were the right minds and didn't assasinate the good leaders within, could have a great country such as afganistan.
you owe me an apology..
now to the situation whith the cartoons.
If they where made out of racist motives or to hurt muslims or just as some kind of joke, or as a reaction to terrorism or because out of fear of growing self-censorship in the " western"world . I don't know .
But the "funny" thing is that that makes no difference , in the violent reactions at the moment, they would have been the same nomatterwhat the intentions of the makers are .
From what I understand from you , Orhan, that people whith such (for me)extreme religious ideas feel that they have to rect in this way because the koran says so (correct me if I am wrong). But for me it sounds so strange that as a little human beiing you have to go and defend ,lets call" your" god '.
What also strikes me in this matters that the moderate muslims, a lot of times say ' yes this is not good but..and then there always follows , like in this case : those cartoons shouldend have been made , because then this shit happens. I not much hear a clear refusal.
It is something like "they have no choice because the believe this"
That means end of discussion.
And I agree whith doberman that you say the muslims are the new jews of europe is very inappropiate.
I get the feeling that you are also very sensitive for criticism on islam.
But more a problem for you then for me , and I like to keep it that way .
But its for me interresting to hear your opinion and to discus about it.
What I don't like ,and is dangerous for a society ,is people here who make more and more selfcensorship , which will in the long run undermine our "free" society"
Note:
I don't represent any religion, faith or organization.
i am not an expert on quran, bible or torah. altough my father had all three in his library, i've never read their entire content ever. i don't consider myself a religious person and would never advocate one.
i love people of all races, gender, religions and backgrounds. i love all animals and plants, mountains, rivers, oceans, deserts and sky.
i am 'sensetive' and 'against' racism and discrimination anywhere. i am against violence.
if i had one wish, that would be a world united under one love. i know it is not possible in my lifetime.
this would be my last post in this thread, which, now, i think was a mistake because it gave an opportunity to an evil person to spit out ugly insults towards otherwise peaceful people who senselessly got stereotyped.
Does everybody get equally upset by Google's website filtering in China?
i've been follwing this thread and although i've almost posted a few times i've found myself unable to do it because i'm feeling somewhat speech.ess by much of this.
did anybody else notice that adanish/norwegian embassy was burned to the ground on account of these cartoons? wtf? it was just a cartoon, do we really need to burn buildings down on account of this?
likewise, i appreciate orhan's concern about rising conservative sentiments in europe. about three years ago one of my teachers predicted that "right-wing politics were the next big thing"...i thought he was nuts because i felt that if anythingright wing politics were yesterday's news (at least that's how it seemed here in the states), but sadly i think he was correct and that we probably haven't seen the last of this.
still, as much as i'd like to turn the other cheek, i have been somewhat troubled recently by a movie i watched as part of my little civil right awareness efforts for mlk day. i know that many of you are familiar with the ghandi movie and as i watched it i was stricken by the incredible scrifices ghandi made in order to aid all of those in his community, both muslim & hindu, and despite his impressive successes he was assasinated by an extremist of his own religion. again, wtf? it almost compels me to ignore the ideals of civilisation and embrace the most basic laws of nature. kill or be killed. maybe we should just "nuke the bastards" why restrain and limit ourselves to cartoons or embassy burnings?
it's worth noting that although i was raised catholic, i have thoroughly disavowed myself of all religious belief. no good comes from it. there's no point in believing in heaven & hell. we only get one chance at consciousness and this is it. very naive to honestly feel that you are worthy of eternity (regardless of whether it's salvation or damnation). i often avoid discussions of religion but when i do involve myself, i have taken to asking believers if they would be willing to trade their religious beliefs in exchange for a peaceful world. the answer is obvious to me but i am almost always alarmed that most would not.
i guess that my final sentiment is simply one of utter disbelief. i increasingly feel like an alien on my own home planet.
I don't think religious beliefs themselves are the problem...it's what those beliefs are and whether they accept coexistence with non-believers (as Hinduism, Buddhism, and Christianity do). The real problem is militant, intolerant religious extremism...possibly a lingering medieval mindset where nation-states are organized around faiths (Christiandom, etc...)
These people need to join the 21st century and moderate their religion, because it doesn't appear to be compatable with civilization.
To clarify the absolute absurdity of the RADICALS in the Muslim religion read this:
HINDUS CONSIDER it sacrilegious to eat meat from cows, so when a Danish supermarket ran a sale on beef and veal last fall, Hindus everywhere reacted with outrage. India recalled its ambassador to Copenhagen, and Danish flags were burned in Calcutta, Bombay, and Delhi. A Hindu mob in Sri Lanka severely beat two employees of a Danish-owned firm, and demonstrators in Nepal chanted: ''War on Denmark! Death to Denmark!"In many places, shops selling Dansk china or Lego toys were attacked by rioters, and two Danish embassies were firebombed.
FULL STORY
My thoughs exactly.
Have you noticed that whenever there is this kind of protest, they always happen to have the appropriate country's flag handy. I mean, if I was going to join in and burn a Danish flag, I'd have no idea about where to procure one. Maybe flag retailing is a big business in some countries...
diabase...i had the same thought.
ps. freedom of the press = the right to provoke/approve/disapprove/disagree/endorse/etc.
The opposing force to this is the right of the public to provoke/approve/disapprove/disagree/endorse/etc.
I'm troubled. If something as innocent as a parody cartoon can rise to levels of public calls for execution, when will an architects design offend so much that there will be a violent response?
there was a good article in the journal this morning about how this whole mess evolved from the limited influence of a few disguntled clerics in denmark to an international concern. i was surprised to learn that there was a rather large months long effort on the part of the secular gov'ts of several muslin countries in order to seem more devoted amongst their constituents. turned out that these secular-minded governing types are literally playing with fire.
hey did someone think of starting to burn
syrian, palestinian, iranian, ... flags ?
these bas***rds burned the danish and norwegian flag!
there's a white cross on the danish flag - clearly a christian symbol!
this blasphemous act should hurt the religious feelings of every true Christian.
we (!) should not allow them (!) to proceed with this blasphemy !
I've decided that in my act of solidarity, this weekend I'm going to buy some legos....and while i'm constructing a castle or moon base or whatever...i'll be getting drunk off some carlsberg beer.
Just my little part to help out my danish friends.
Well, being in a Middle Eastern country (probably the best one) I asked some of my Muslim colleagues what the thought of the whole thing (and, they're not over zealous fanatics)
They were all unanimous in their opinion that, they do condemn the cartoons, simply because they are not supposed to depict their prophet's image anywhere. This was so that Idolatry would be avoided.
The reason why this got out of hand was because, when the cartoons were first published in September and there was a public outcry over it, the ambassadors of 11 Muslim countries wanted to meet up with the Danish prime minister to discuss it. They were refused an audience. Then came the Norwegian cartoon and that could not be tolerated anymore. It was more like Islam was being a punching bag for the west. Do whatever you want with them, say whatever you want about them and then let all sit and laugh at them.
They went on and on about it... and I was quite convinced from their POV ... being in an Islamic country, I have a lot of Muslim friends. And trust me when I say this... they are all wonderful people, amazing even. Not all of them are what you picture them to be. The ban on Danish products is on over here, and 90% of the population here supports it ... and keep in mind that 80% of the people here are expatriates and 50 % of that would be westerners!! You gotta live among them to understand them.
All this would never have happened if the editor of the paper simply apologized when he found out that he had offended the Muslims. It was like telling the “F U! We'll do what we want with your beloved prophet!!! We have the freedom of the press and freedom of expression… and we want to express that your religious sentiments don’t mean anything to us" you expect the Muslims to sit still and take that beating at that time. Europe has to learn to respect what other people believe in, before they profess freedom of expression.
So I believe that this was a case of, not, freedom of the press, but misusing that freedom to insult... that in turn - provocation!!
Of course... burning the flags and torching down the embassies was condemned here too ... they say that that just gives out the wrong message about Islam. I can see what they said was true, after reading the messages above.
Learn about the religion before forming opinions!!
Nevermore: - You remember a few years back when a French designer had used images of Hindu gods and goddesses on shoes and lingerie?? You remember the outcry then? Of course the designer apologized immediately and withdrew all the products and stated that he did not know that he would be offending the Hindus religious beliefs!! And that’s how it should have been handled. Though initially I was pissed of about it, later it was all ok, considering that he was truly sorry.
Btw… beef is freely available in India
Just my 2 cents worth
yea sporadic..I remember.
anyways dont want to comment more cos the individual who started this thread calls me a muslim-hater etc.and he believes in the concept of the taliban (atleast the idealogy)
to each his own.
Thanks sporadic, finally some decent commentary on this. The issue is complicated since what is constitutionally allowed in Denmark ("free press") has because of its context become a internationally political question, holding the danish government responsible for what has happened. This is an impossible situation, since an excuse from a danish politician would undermine the whole system of free press.
What I don't understand is how upset WESTERNERS get from non-violent muslim protests. Firstly, the comparison to christian mockery is ridiculous - the criticism was historically directed towards a powerful christian establishment, not towards a globally and nationally weaker group. Secondly, isn't it anybody's right to boycot goods? What about the boycots on french wines, first after the renewed nuclear bomb tests, then because they didn't want to join an illegal war? A slightly more humble attitude could be wished for, or as a danish intellectual put it: "You have the right to free speech, but you also have the right to shut up sometimes"
^listen man, stop taking my words out of context and associating me with religious fanatics like taliban. how can i support their ideology when i start the sentence with 'fuck taliban'
however here is 'your' open 'distaste' for muslims that draw my attention. yes i agree 'hate' was little too strong for me to use towards you but i wasn't the first ever either.
http://www.archinect.com/forum/threads.php?id=31572_0_42_0_C
that was to 'nevermore'. over and out.
The big points here, to me, are #1 most of us westerners don't understand the first thing about the Muslim faith and #2 the Muslim faith better do something to tame the extremists, because the rest of the world is really going to get pissed off.
Sure, I'd buy there is planning to get reactions by some, but not the majority. And it worked (assuming there was thought put into it, and I don't believe there was, beyond a joke at a religion), now the world is watching as people literally go crazy, call for executions, etc.
It's great to say everyone needs to learn the intricacies of each religion, in order to avoid pissing anyone off, but that is impossible and ridiculous to assume that this will ever happen.
Now, if it were a Muslim that printed the cartoons, I'd understand more of an outcry, but it wasn't.
Imho, there is no excuse for physical violence - absolutely none. That's the bottom line for most of the world. Sorry, I am naive about your beliefs and apologize for my ignorance, but its absolutely absurd to cause destruction and violence because the world has a different point of view or is naive.
The power hungry reaching out in the name of religion could very well bring down the world if something isn't done soon.
From what I've read about the original cartoons this all originated from a book author not being able to find someone to illustrate his book. Apparently the subject of the book was somehow related to Muslims, but not in a derrogatory way at all. The illustrators all declined because they feared for their safety.
Remember that it wasn't too long ago that a film maker was killed because he made a documentary about the lack of women's rights within the muslim community.
An obscure Danish newspaper picked up on the authors story of not being able to find an illustrator and published a story about self-censorship. Where a law doesn't forbid it, but because of public pressure and fear they self-censorship. I applaud that paper for making a very valid point.
I conceed the cartoons, although tame by western standards, are offensive to other cultures. I conceed that both the newspaper and the gov't haven't handled the situation as best they could. Still, I don't see them as telling the muslim world to "F*ck off." They were making a point about censorship. That's why other papers picked up the cartoons. It's not done to piss off a religion. It's about freedoms of the west and how they shouldn't be bullied by a culture and religion.
The boycotting of goods is fine. Peacefull protests are fine. Burning down buildings and riots in front of millitary installations are not fine. Granted those are the radicals, and I have tried to emphasize that my problem is only with the radicals. I support the goal of the original paper so I have the right to buy Danish goods and support their economy.
Westerners don't get upset over non-violent protests. They do get upset when clerics call for execution of cartoonists or when violent protests burn down embassies and endanger their citizens. The road does travel both ways. The Muslim press has published a lot of mockery of Jewish and Christian religions. Now that this story got so big a lot is starting to show up in the western press. I think it's ridiculous to say the comparison isn't valid since Muslims aren't from powerful nations. Nations shouldn't matter. Is it ok to pick on someone because they are bigger than you? That doesn't make any sense at all.
My fear is that this story is bigger and getting bigger while most people have no idea how the story originated. That paper had a very valid point back in September. The world outrage has made their point. I fear that the response will just further supress freedoms in the west. That's what really scares me.
Yes, "pick on someone because they are bigger than you" makes absolute sense, because the purpose is different. I'm not saying that one should be legally allowed and the other not, but rather to explain why I think one is - let's say - moral, and the other not - why I can allow myself to criticize the publication. The point of free press is not about "being able to say whatever you feel like", even if tabloid media has made fortunes following this dogma. Free press originates from the struggle of publications to be able to criticize the ruling class, to be able to even ridicule those who aren't possible to "get to" in any other way, because they are in power. Free press is about giving everybody the right to be able to speak to a larger audience, not the right to publish garbage.
So, the conclusion of this is that the publication is just mere provocation, because if the owners of Jyllandsposten were seriously concerned about free press, they could have investigated the befriending of dictatorial regimes by western governments and companies (like google above), instead of insulting 1 billion believers. I'm of course against any violent protests, but if I read the comments above, there is a tendency to criticize islam itself, not the few violent protesters that of course get the most western media coverage.
I mean, A, how often have you been lying sleepless because you can't find any children's books with illustrations of the prophet Muhammed? Is this what is holding back democracy in the Middle East? Do you think the point has been made well? Do you think it was worth it?
a-.f thanks.
Det var så lidt. By the way, it was a bit unfair to take only Google as an example. They were after all, the last search engine to give in to censorship. MSN and Yahoo didn't even try to protest.
a-f - "point of free press is not about "being able to say whatever you feel like", "
actually, that is what 'free' is about. You can say whatever you want as long as you aren't breaking any laws (like slander, etc.).
The point is that it's 'free'. It's up to the individual writers and publishers to determine what they want to publish. You can publish hate papers advocating Nazis, you can publish papers calling Bush a liar, you can publish papers stating all religions are only useful to manipulate and control, etc., etc - you can publish what you want, when you want.
Well, I think that is more an American take on press, which is more aggressive than our European counterpart. Again, I'm not talking about what the law allows, but rather how law is interpreted, where the law comes from, and what the motives of a serious newspaper is.
i've said no more posting in this thread, but i've been getting some racist and nasty e mails to my business address from spam like sources.
here is a link that describes more eloquantly where i am coming from. read it and stop sending me offensive and defaming e mails or state who you are so i can deal with you properly.
coincil for secular humanism
Realy nasty that this happens Orhan .
It proves how primitive people can be
sorry to hear about that orhan. completely uncalled for.
yes, I am sorry too that people have stooped so low. It's one thing to discuss your point of view on a forum, but completely immature and uncalled for to take it off the forum, especially to someone's personal business.
I would suggest setting up a Yahoo (or whatever) account to catch your emails. I learned not to ever use business emails because of idiots like that long ago.
Mr. Skunst - here's a good example why not to use your real name ;-)
Trace you are a paronoid offencive little person
this is in this context of this topic an insult
you are suggesting something nasty
skunst: are you the person suggesting on one thread that people should use their real names, whilst not using your own real name, and then on this thread suggesting that someone here is paranoid and offensive for pointing out the dangers of using real names?
I am baffled by your buffoonery.
Thats not the point herediabase , trace is suggesting that I maybe send nasty mails to Orhan
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.