Cartoons upset Danish Muslims

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

"After having overcome fascism, Nazism, and Stalinism, the world now faces a new global threat: Islamism," they wrote.

Good luck with that one. Wrong choice of "ism" word.

Name the movement after a feller would be the way to go if you want folks to rally around a cause. Like maybe that Omar mullah feller who headed the Taliban or some such. He's an identifiable face. Important in the Age of Optics.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Good luck with that one. Wrong choice of "ism" word.

Name the movement after a feller would be the way to go if you want folks to rally around a cause. Like maybe that Omar mullah feller who headed the Taliban or some such. He's an identifiable face. Important in the Age of Optics.

Im not so sure Reg...I think they speak the truth and for the most part reading this thread you can feel that others feel the same. The stupidity of this entire event, the wasted lives, simply because of a cartoon, leave people flabbergasted.
I think they were actually biting their tongue and left it at Islamism instead of putting it all in one bucket and calling it "religiousism".
One "ism" at a time.

[Cheese]

a quick retrack to this post....

Article today from the less radical Muslims...thought it was pretty decent.

The moderates are having a hard time accepting the hard line Muslims...

The new group's leader, Naser Khader, a Syrian-born Social Democrat MP and self-described "cultural Muslim," is already a well-known figure in Danish politics. His fame stems partly from his "Ten Commandments of Democracy," which include a strict separation of religion and politics, unreserved support for freedom of expression, and a rejection of violence.
"Danes see him as a role model - as the ideal Muslim - but many immigrants see him as a sell-out," says Mr. Shah. "A lot of them see [him] as someone attacking Islam. And some of them really despise him actually."

Muslims divided

[Cowperson]

Mostly on topic . . . . the Onion with some hilarious stuff:

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/46031

Cowperson

[Flame On]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

Mostly on topic . . . . the Onion with some hilarious stuff:

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/46031

Cowperson

Classic Onion!

[redforever]

Denmark is reprinting these cartoons, so are some other countries, just to show that they still firmly believe in freedom of speech.

http://news.google.ca/news/url?sa=T&...CKPqqwONuuSZDQ

[Resolute 14]

Good on the Danish press.

There's been a row about this on Wikipedia lately too, over the use of depictions of Muhammad (drawn by Muslim artists in the middle ages, no less) on the Muhammad article. So far, their attempts to squash free speech there has met with similar failure.

[photon]

Early Tuesday morning, Danish police arrested three men with a Muslim background suspected of conspiring to kill Kurt Westergaard, a Danish cartoonist with Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten.

http://jp.dk/uknews/article1263133.ece

[CaptainCrunch]

Frick Muslim's really need to find a way to overcome their violent reputation. If violence errupts again over these cartoons, These radical anti-immigration parties are going to start collecting steam.

As it stands, a lot of European nations are probably going to start limiting Muslim immigration because of the scary connections to that religion.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Frick Muslim's really need to find a way to overcome their violent reputation. If violence errupts again over these cartoons, These radical anti-immigration parties are going to start collecting steam.

As it stands, a lot of European nations are probably going to start limiting Muslim immigration because of the scary connections to that religion.

Oh no, now someone on this forum is going to call you racist.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Oh no, now someone on this forum is going to call you racist.

I've been called worse . . . by girls even

[HotHotHeat]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Frick Muslim's really need to find a way to overcome their violent reputation. If violence errupts again over these cartoons, These radical anti-immigration parties are going to start collecting steam.

As it stands, a lot of European nations are probably going to start limiting Muslim immigration because of the scary connections to that religion.

They can rant and rave all they want, you're right. They're still doing it to themselves.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Good on the Danish press.

There's been a row about this on Wikipedia lately too, over the use of depictions of Muhammad (drawn by Muslim artists in the middle ages, no less) on the Muhammad article. So far, their attempts to squash free speech there has met with similar failure.

I don't see how this is a situation to say "Good on the Danish press".

Yes I support their right to say/print whatever they want (provided it's factual, so any kind of hate speach isn't included in that), but just because you CAN print something doesn't mean that you SHOULD.

Seriously, look at all the trouble these caused last time they were printed, and now they're going to print them again, in what looks a lot to me like a big old "Screw you" to the folks who objected in the first place? They're either stupid or looking to gain a whole bunch of publicity (this is what I see as the most believeable option). I'd wager that their reasons for doing this have little to do with a statement about free speach/press.

Freedom of speach means that I have the right to run up to Eric Goddard, and tell him that I think he's a huge loser, and that I had relations with his mom, sister, and girlfriend all at the same time, but common sense tells me that this is a case where I should probably show a little bit of restraint.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Freedom of speach means that I have the right to run up to Eric Goddard, and tell him that I think he's a huge loser, and that I had relations with his mom, sister, and girlfriend all at the same time, but common sense tells me that this is a case where I should probably show a little bit of restraint.

Haha...Well said!

While re-printing the cartoons has noble intentions, it's also just adding unnecessary fuel to the fire, lowering themselves to those people who committed violence over it the first time.

This is one of those situations where two people keep going back and forth saying "No, You're Wrong!", when the correct answer is "We are both wrong, so lets work together to make things right."

Of course, with human nature, that's asking too much.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

As it stands, a lot of European nations are probably going to start limiting Muslim immigration because of the scary connections to that religion.

But then where will be their next source of cheap labour? With conditions improving in most Eastern European countries, people from North Africa, Asia Minor, and the Middle East were/are doing the jobs no one else wants to do in many countries.

Unfortunately, immigration issues are closely tied to our choice of economic systems in the West. Are people willing to negotiate away a portion of capitalism in order to be more picky about immigration.

For the record, even though I am socially liberal on most issues, I am pretty conservative when it comes to some foreign and domestic policies. I think we should take a more isolationist approach, but it would also mean some pretty big changes overall.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

For the record, even though I am socially liberal on most issues, I am pretty conservative when it comes to foreign and domestic policies. I think we should take a more isolationist approach, but it would also mean some pretty big changes overall.

Last time the isolationist model was in place in North America, Pearl Harbour was bombed.

Now I'm not saying that's going to happen nowadays, but it when the world is rapidly developing globalization through technology and culture, it would seem somewhat of an outdated policy. I only have to think of a country like North Korea to realize that isolationism isn't always the best idea.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I've been called worse . . . by girls even

Racist.

Just kidding....I agree with you.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Haha...Well said!

While re-printing the cartoons has noble intentions, it's also just adding unnecessary fuel to the fire, lowering themselves to those people who committed violence over it the first time.

This is one of those situations where two people keep going back and forth saying "No, You're Wrong!", when the correct answer is "We are both wrong, so lets work together to make things right."

Of course, with human nature, that's asking too much.

This is a bit of a tug of war, tit for tat kind of thing. However, by saying that they shouldn't publish the cartoons because of what might happen only goes to show that western society is being cowed into saying only things that they do not find offensive.

As for BBS remarks about freedom of speach. Freedom of speach is just that, to say what you want. I think there should be some restrictions on people who advocate violance but other than that no other restrictions. Just because someone is offended by something you say, well tough sh*t. Society needs to grow up and quit being so sensitive.

[CaptainCrunch]

To me there always seems to be a huge tolerance issue here. Different groups demand that we be tolerant towards their belief structures and religous structures, but when our belief structures, laws or other issues collide with theirs, they don't believe in two way tolerance.

For example, freedom of speech and expression is one of the pillars of our society, yet it doesn't matter if it conflicts with the Muslim's religeous beliefs, and they're not willing to compromise, or take the steps in this case to assimilate into society.

As an analogy, if my neighbour leaves his house and comes to stay with me and demands that I don't cook meat because he hates the smell, oh and I can't nail my girlfriend because the thought offends him (ok, I'm not pretty)

There's no compromise possible, and this is where immigrant Muslims are getting a poor name.

I read an article where they talked about being isolated from Western Society, yet they make next to no effort to work to change it, or to soften their stance.

Its ok to be bull headed, but its dumb to do it to prove a point.

Just rambling I guess.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

This is a bit of a tug of war, tit for tat kind of thing. However, by saying that they shouldn't publish the cartoons because of what might happen only goes to show that western society is being cowed into saying only things that they do not find offensive.

As for BBS remarks about freedom of speak. Freedom of speak is just that, to way what you want. I think there should be some restrictions on people who advocate violance but other than that no other restictions. Just because someon is offended by something you say, well tough sh*t. Society needs to grow up and quit being so sensitive.

I'm not saying they shouldn't be stopped from reprinting them, I'm just saying that they should have the good sense not to do it.

Does this mean that we are scared to print things that may be offensive?
I don't think so. We've already seen the ruckus these things caused the first time, and now it's being done as a slap in the face to those that reacted violently in the past, and I'd say there's a good chance that violence will be the result again.

Yes part of free speach means having the right to say/print things that are offensive, and I'd argue that when these comics were first printed that the reaction that they received was a complete supprise to the original publishers. However, now that they've seen that these images have the potential to incite violence, they should know to leave well enough alone.

Another part of free speach means accepting that your words may have consequences, and taking responsibility for that, hence shouting "Fire" in a crowded theater is not allowed. Are these cartoons analogous to doing just that? Some would certainly say yes, I'm not so certain, but the reality is that printing these comics will certainly have reprocutions.

If violence erupts because these guys print these comics again, will the editors be responsible? For that matter will I be responsible when Eric Goddard punches me in the face. Well, seeing as both of those are reasonably expected reactions to our use of our freedom of speach, I'd say neither me, nor the editors printing these cartoons should be considered 100% innocent.