I am so tired of this

[Scrapheap]

It isn't merely a question of some innocent cartoons. There is a strong tradition among Muslims to not allow depictions of the Prophet, at all, and even those fractions that do allow it stress the importance of the depictions to be respectful.

Yes, and the term for this is called "Intolerance".

[Scrapheap]

I suppose there's very little I can say or do to change your current modus operandi, however. People like you need to believe in a clearly defined evil,

And you don't have a clearly defined "evil" scapegoat ??

The world needs a scapegoat so what's more perfect than a bunch of dark-skinned weirdos turning to Mecca five times a day and refusing to accept that their God is routinely insulted in most ways imaginable

Most western Jounalists go out of their way to not be insulting, despite the dark-ages mentality that the majority of Islam holds on to. Fundamentalist monotheism begs to be mocked.

by the same folks that bomb them,

Turn on your T.V. , they're the ones doing the bombing.

sanction their supplies,

Who has been sanctioned who did'nt first violate U.N. mandates ??

and steal their oil.

Yes, I forgot how poor oil countries are.  They have to beg on the streets to make their Mercedes payments. 

[Scrapheap]

I'll admit that it's a nice device to use those pictures to give your argument some emotional weight, but it won't make the accusation true.

Photographic evidence is now just "emotional weight" ??

That video of me shooting that cop ......... man that was just used for "Inciting the jury" 

Uuuuuh those pics are doccumentation of behavior and would stand up in any court of law. Have to call you on this one odeon. 

[Scrapheap]

I suppose you're a bit too young to remember the controversy with Monty Python's Life of Brian (a film that was banned in Norway, of all places, because of the way it made fun of the life of Christ) but do you remember the book The Last Temptation of Christ or Martin Scorsese's film adaptation? Both the book and the film caused demonstrations all over the Christian world, some of them very violent, and both book and film were banned more than once.

The reason why I mention these is because they show that there are equally touchy subjects among Christians, but also because while fanatic Christians made most of the noise, nobody accused the moderate Christians of agreeing with the nutcases by not opening their mouths.

Fundamentalist monotheists are cool-aide drinkers ............................................................... what's new ??

[ASpHole]

Current Muslim Belief , and the spread of that belief system is being financed largely by Saudi Arabia, and the school of Muslim philosophy practiced  there. It's called Salafism, which is a yet more restrictive offshoot of an older  fundamentalist belief set called Wahhabism, which also originated in what is now Saudi Arabia.

Historically, Saudi Arabia has pretty much always been an intellectual and cultural backwater in regards to Classical Islamic Culture, whose intellectual and cultural centers was first in Syria, then later in what is now Iraq, and later in Istanbul. While Saudi Arabia laid claim to the two of the major holy sites of Islam, It was still pretty much of a cultural backwater not unlike the Islamic world's very own Mississippi, or West Virginia until the discovery of oil in the early 20th Century.

Since Saudi Arabia was united under the house of Saud, it has used it's oil wealth to help spread it's strict interpretation of Islam, and to help spread a culture that has basically remained unchanged from the 7th Century. The reason why it was able to do this was because of the fact that when the Ottoman Empire Collapsed, so did the Ottoman Caliphate, who had been the main political force in the dissemination of Islam.

The fundamentalists basically took over in the  Power vacuum that followed the Ottoman Caliphate's Collapse, and no we have fundamentalist Crazies who in turn indoctrinate and intimidate other's into Islamic fundamentalism. 

[duncvis]

It isn't merely a question of some innocent cartoons. There is a strong tradition among Muslims to not allow depictions of the Prophet, at all, and even those fractions that do allow it stress the importance of the depictions to be respectful.

Yes, and the term for this is called "Intolerance".

This is my issue with all the dummy spitting - the cartoons which offended the fundies were published in a Danish newspaper. A Western country with a tradition of free speech and challenging taboos. The Muslims living in Denmark moved there by choice. If you move to a country and have issues with their dominant cultural values, you don't get to cry foul when someone barbecues your particular sacred cow. You accept that they do things differently in your adopted homeland, and either adapt or go somewhere which offends your delicate sensibilities less. On a global level, Muslims have no right to insist that others universally respect their religion's prohibitions in their own lands, any more than any other faith has.

I'm no Islamophobe. I have Muslim acquaintances and neighbours, I grew up with Pakistani kids, I admire some aspects of the way they live. What I do not accept is that if a different cultural group moves into another land they have the right to make the host country change its ways - if I move to Saudi Arabia do I have the right to scream about how they treat their women and cut the hands off thieves? No. I might not like it but tough shit.

Finally, quoted for absolute truth - I'm an equal opportunity fundie-baiter:

Fundamentalist monotheism begs to be mocked.

Spot on. +

[odeon]

I suppose there's very little I can say or do to change your current modus operandi, however. People like you need to believe in a clearly defined evil,

And you don't have a clearly defined "evil" scapegoat ??

No, not to my knowledge, no. My philosophy is live and let live. What's yours?

The world needs a scapegoat so what's more perfect than a bunch of dark-skinned weirdos turning to Mecca five times a day and refusing to accept that their God is routinely insulted in most ways imaginable

Most western Jounalists go out of their way to not be insulting, despite the dark-ages mentality that the majority of Islam holds on to. Fundamentalist monotheism begs to be mocked.

On this I agree, absolutely. But the cartoons were not about that, they were about ridiculing so many more people than just a few fundies. The cartoonists (and above all, the people pulling their strings) are hiding--and mocking--behind the pretense of freedom of speech, and I'm not saying that they aren't allowed to because they are. I'm saying that it's unwise, unnecessary, and downright stupid. Just because it's within your rights to call someone an arse, it doesn't mean that you have to. Freedom of speech is not just a right, it's a responsibility because most of the time, the world isn't black and white.

by the same folks that bomb them,

Turn on your T.V. , they're the ones doing the bombing.

I have, and long before they were, the US was, in the case of Iraq, or a number of other Muslim countries out there. Do you have any idea of how many civilians that died, both as the results of direct bombings and the results of the long-term sanctions?

And can you honestly say that it wasn't then, or is now, a question of their oil rather than the freedom of the Iraqi people and other propagandist nonsense?

sanction their supplies,

Who has been sanctioned who did'nt first violate U.N. mandates ??

and steal their oil.

Yes, I forgot how poor oil countries are.  They have to beg on the streets to make their Mercedes payments. 

Iraq is a classic example of a poor country with vast oil resources, the Mercedes payments notwithstanding. Without the oil, Saddam would still be in power. (And if you disagree, why is that guy in Zimbabwe still ruining his country?)

Why do you think the US is interested in sanctions against Iran, right now? Can you spell "Halliburton"?

[Peter]

I suppose there's very little I can say or do to change your current modus operandi, however. People like you need to believe in a clearly defined evil,

And you don't have a clearly defined "evil" scapegoat ??

No, not to my knowledge, no. My philosophy is live and let live. What's yours?

My philosophy is to live and let live, but also to take whatever means are necessary to make sure that other people 'let live' with respect to me.  I'm fine with Muslims living in whatever hell-holes they create, but I have a very big problem with them telling me who I'm not allowed to draw pictures of, and I won't stand for people moving into my country and then demanding that I change my behaviours to suit them.

On this I agree, absolutely. But the cartoons were not about that, they were about ridiculing so many more people than just a few fundies. The cartoonists (and above all, the people pulling their strings) are hiding--and mocking--behind the pretense of freedom of speech, and I'm not saying that they aren't allowed to because they are. I'm saying that it's unwise, unnecessary, and downright stupid. Just because it's within your rights to call someone an arse, it doesn't mean that you have to. Freedom of speech is not just a right, it's a responsibility because most of the time, the world isn't black and white.

The right to free speech is worthless when it can't be exercised without a significant fear of violent retaliation, and by threatening us with violence for expressing ourselves as we see fit, the extremists are undermining the very core of our value system; a value system they clearly hold a great deal of undisguised contempt for.  We cannot lay the blame for violence at the feet of those who express themselves and remain a free society.  Only by defending those who wish to express themselves from those who'd use violence to silence them can we truly be free.

Iraq is a classic example of a poor country with vast oil resources, the Mercedes payments notwithstanding. Without the oil, Saddam would still be in power. (And if you disagree, why is that guy in Zimbabwe still ruining his country?)

Why do you think the US is interested in sanctions against Iran, right now? Can you spell "Halliburton"?

I don't dispute that the West has bombed and exploited the Middle East to serve it's own purposes, and I find it deplorable, as do many other Westerners who're in no way shy about showing their disdain for our leader and their policies, who hold protests against the actions they find so despicable, and who vote against those who take those actions.  Are there anti-suicide-bombing protests in the streets of Baghdad to mirror the anti-war protests in the streets of London?

[Scrapheap]

The right to free speech is worthless when it can't be exercised without a significant fear of violent retaliation, and by threatening us with violence for expressing ourselves as we see fit, the extremists are undermining the very core of our value system; a value system they clearly hold a great deal of undisguised contempt for.  We cannot lay the blame for violence at the feet of those who express themselves and remain a free society.  Only by defending those who wish to express themselves from those who'd use violence to silence them can we truly be free.

QFT !!! 

[Peter]

I'll admit that it's a nice device to use those pictures to give your argument some emotional weight, but it won't make the accusation true.

Photographic evidence is now just "emotional weight" ??

That video of me shooting that cop ......... man that was just used for "Inciting the jury" 

Uuuuuh those pics are doccumentation of behavior and would stand up in any court of law. Have to call you on this one odeon. 

Agreed, and one of the protesters was put in prison based on photos of the protest, since it was a violation of his parole (he was dressed as a suicide bomber).

[odeon]

The right to free speech is worthless when it can't be exercised without a significant fear of violent retaliation, and by threatening us with violence for expressing ourselves as we see fit, the extremists are undermining the very core of our value system; a value system they clearly hold a great deal of undisguised contempt for.  We cannot lay the blame for violence at the feet of those who express themselves and remain a free society.  Only by defending those who wish to express themselves from those who'd use violence to silence them can we truly be free.

QFT !!! 

Why is it that only your value system counts? A society that divides between "us" and "them", and says that if "they" don't follow "our" rules "they" aren't welcome, is not free.

Why is it that your definition of respect should be the only one to count?

Here's a dramatic picture for you:



Do you think I'm being fair if I claim that all American soldiers in Iraq are like Ms England?

[Calandale]

Do you think I'm being fair if I claim that all American soldiers in Iraq are like Ms England?

Not at all. She's cuter than most, and has kinky tastes. Most soldiers seem a lot more vanilla to me.

[McGiver]

i thought it was ironic.

the way that they subjugate their women, just to have a woman treat them like a dog.


fuck them!
i am still a bit of a sexist pig myself.  but not to the same degree that many middle eastern countries treat their women.

[Litigious]

They immigrate to our country, calling Swedish girls "Swedish whores", because they dress as they please. They can at most get prosecuted for insult or defamation for that. If the Swedish girls yell "Fucking Arabs" or "Fucking Muslims" to them, they risk prosecution for hate crime. I love this country. 

[odeon]

It's so great when you use stereotypes to avoid argumentation, instead of actually considering the point I was making. McJ, how do you know that Ms England's pet in the picture a) treats his wife badly and b) is a Muslim? Do you think that since he's already in prison, he should somehow be punished because there are people whose morals and way of life you don't agree with?

-1