Muhammad cartoons...

[Cyman]

I guess this is a very sensitive subject to discuss. Anyway, I want to say two things:

First, people (from the so called western civilisation) generally mix up muslims with islamists. It is the islamists who pull the whole religion and its believers in dirt with their fundamentalism and terrorist acts against people who don't think in their way which for them is the only way to think and to live right! This is the whole fatality in the whole story!

One could write whole books about the causes and the consequences of this situation, so I will go on to my second point.

Secondly, I have to say that I am a big fan of freedom (of whatsoever). That is why I am sad to see that people are freaking out about this whole "cartoon scandal". Again it is the islamists, who are the first to answer violently and in a way which is not up-to-date (to say it in simple terms).

I guess that from a certain point, faith is poisoning the senses of people. We are at a point of global freedom since we have the internet, so why do people argue with arms, blood-shed and violence when it comes down to religion? We have overcome the "dark age" - sadly, some people don't seem to have reached this point yet, but unfortunately with a big difference to the Europeans during the crusades (which were nothinge else than christian fundamentalists). They fought with swords, bows and other weapons of this kind - today the islamists are in possession of fire arms and the know-how for weapons of mass-destruction while in their mind they are at the same point we have been some 700-800 years ago. It's like giving an atomic bomb to a native tribe.

 

Again I have to say that the majority of muslims are "normal" just like the majority of christians (with the very same exceptions). It's just a relatively small minority of a whole civilisation which intimidates the masses with their brutality and violence.

 

That should be it, because otherwise I would spend the whole night writing about this topic.

[Olivier]

Cartoons are from our culture.

 

Yes, we can critiquize by this way, Islam, Jesus, Boudha or everyone in mythology.

 

Even real people like the Pop.

 

This is democraty, and free speech.

 

But I know, democraty is not for everyone.

 

What would be nice, is to look cartoons that are made everyweeks in newspaper from Iran, Syria, etc.

 

They are much stronger that those one, and we never burn in Paris, Geneva or Roma, flags from those countries.

 

So, imagine that we where living in an Islamic coutry...Do you thing we will be free to make same manifestations ? Never !

 

And, do not forget that the interdiction to make picture of gods are an islamic law, and it not apply to us.

 

Most important, islamic law or other religious law have no importance in our laic coutries. What a luck.

 

 

Best regards, and long life to free speech

[quixos]

depressing thread

[suleiman]

After having viewed all of your responses and opinions on this matter, I thought as an active board member, as a Muslim, and as an American civil rights activist, I ought to shed some light on the situation.

 

For starters it's important to address the matter of freedom of speech and what bounds or limitations exist on that right. As a law student I can begin by informing you that in the United States your right to freedom of speech is not without bounds. Hate words or "Fighting Words" as their often referred to, are completely illegal for example.

 

Barely 3 years have passed since Virginia v. Black (Decided April 7th, 2003), when the Supreme Court of the United States held that conduct “with the intent to intimidate” was not protected speech, and could constitutionally be prosecutable conduct. Virginia v. Black dealt with members of the Ku Klux Klan who were burning crosses to intimidate African Americans.

 

But there is something to be said about the perception surrounding rights such as freedom of speech. When you throw around democratic, constitutionally “guaranteed” rights, such as freedom of speech, you have a tendency to perceive those rights as without bounds. As the writers of the constitution (James Madison in particular) have expressed however, the constitution is a framework upon which to build a society. The rights and obligations conferred by it are very much subject to this broader, societal goal.

 

But enough of the Constitutional Law bit. Let me now address you as an American civil rights activist of several years. I have worked intimately in the civil rights and liberties camps, with reputable organizations such as Amnesty International, American Civil Liberties Union, and the Leadership Council of Chicago. All of them have provisions in their charter dedicating their entire existence to the sole protection of particular civil rights and liberties. I can assure you freedom of speech ranks high on their lists.

 

There is but one problem with freedom of speech, and everyone in the civil liberties camp is no stranger: speech has potential to spark and set public policy, and public policy sets the law. This somewhat oxymoronic relationship between the liberties civil rights organizations are set out to protect and the threat inherent in the limitless institutionalization of those liberties, is an integral element of the paradigmatic system under which these organizations operate. There is balance to be sought in the application of every right, and discretion to be implied in the conference of any liberty.

 

The case in Denmark centers on this discussion of balance. It begs the question of whether the value of freedom of speech is outweighed by the threat of harm it engenders.

 

But I promised I would speak to you as a Muslim. Before brandishing the labels which profess to describe the dearest part of my identity, before introducing loaded terms such as “Moderate” and “Fundamentalist,” so ignorantly construed by Western professors, politicians, and cartoonists, allow me to present it in the light I best understand, as a Muslim.

 

To me, being a Muslim is about faith in one God and all the Prophets (peace be upon them). It is about belief in the Angels, the devil, heaven and hell. I believe that if I stand and pray 5 times a day I am following my Creator’s command. I believe that if I fast for a month during the Holy Month of Ramadan, be honest, remain modest, humble and generous, I will gain unlimited rewards in the hereafter. I believe, in the Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him), and I believe in his message.

 

When the Prophet you hold in the highest regard is vilified in such a degrading and politically insensitive manner, the reaction will be profound, loud, and serious. The humiliation and embarrassment felt by Americans during the Abu Ghuraib scandal is a needle drop in the ocean compared to the insult felt by Muslims over this incident. I am hurt, I am shocked, and I am insulted.

 

To many Muslims around the world the knee-jerk reaction to such a personal assault is to burn flags, make threats, and produce violence. I do not condone their actions, but I do appreciate their anger. To other Muslims there is recognition of the wrong but anger is only directed inwards. And to other Muslims still, the response to this issue is about as serious as a paper cut.

 

To all Muslims everywhere however, these drawings pose a threat. Even if you could care less about practicing your faith, Islam is your religion until it is renounced. In today’s world, where Muslims are quickly becoming the next best villains, it is all too easy to take these drawings and categorize them in a column completely distinct from the cartoons Nazi’s made of Jews during Hitler’s reign, and the sketches of “Jap’s” made by American “journalists” during the second World War. To all of you who have already fallen prey to this instrument of the modern media machine, I will rest only with my best advice: resist the temptation.

 

The reality is the world is changing in subtle but horrific ways every day. Each loaded cartoon, article, and “production” of the O’Reily Factor successfully pushes the envelope further, and all under the banner of the sanctified rights Americans hold so dear. Now not only are Muslims blowing up our buildings, they’re also taking away our constitutionally protected rights. They’re destroying the very fabric of our society. They’re terrorizing the neighborhood all because they can’t take a joke. Yeah right.

 

Having grown up in an American educational system, having learned the mistakes of the past and memorized them well, I can assure you there shall be no greater debacle in my lifetime then having to bear witness to them once again.

[johan]

To all Muslims everywhere however, these drawings pose a threat. Even if you could care less about practicing your faith, Islam is your religion until it is renounced. In today’s world, where Muslims are quickly becoming the next best villains, it is all too easy to take these drawings and categorize them in a column completely distinct from the cartoons Nazi’s made of Jews during Hitler’s reign, and the sketches of “Jap’s” made by American “journalists” during the second World War. To all of you who have already fallen prey to this instrument of the modern media machine, I will rest only with my best advice: resist the temptation.

 

The reality is the world is changing in subtle but horrific ways every day. Each loaded cartoon, article, and “production” of the O’Reily Factor successfully pushes the envelope further, and all under the banner of the sanctified rights Americans hold so dear. Now not only are Muslims blowing up our buildings, they’re also taking away our constitutionally protected rights. They’re destroying the very fabric of our society. They’re terrorizing the neighborhood all because they can’t take a joke. Yeah right.

 

Having grown up in an American educational system, having learned the mistakes of the past and memorized them well, I can assure you there shall be no greater debacle in my lifetime then having to bear witness to them once again.

 

Hello suleiman,

 

Thx for your response.

 

I know that a lot of Muslims feel discriminated, and also that discrimination is a reality in society.

 

Discrimination is wrong.. I agree...(by the way, I also have studied law and I am a member of amnesty international. …so that’s not what this is about)

 

But to compare the treatment of Muslims , for example cartoons of Jew during nazi Gemany and the cartoons of Muslims in Denmark. Well that is not a fair comparison.

 

The equality of the Muslim population is protected by law. Its not an official law to discriminate Muslims, on the contrary. However in Nazi Germany discrimination was in the Law. The Jews were stripped of there basis human right. So that’s a different story. But I do agree that the American policy towards Guantanamo bay is very wrong, it has no legal base and it is humiliating to all people and Muslims.

 

Denmark has no policy to discriminate Muslims. You as a law student should understand the difference.

 

As for you speaking out as a Muslim. Why do so many Muslims only speak out now? And why do not speak out when other people in the name of Islam murder people, cut of heads. Why , tell me.. when 9-11 happened .. al lot of Muslims in the Netherlands were happy and went on the streets to party.

 

The root problem to me is.. the big difference in western culture and some Muslim culture.

Muslims have to modernize their faith, just as Christians did. Stop putting down non believers, women rights, {censored} rights. Stop preaching hate and condemn violence of any sort.

 

I say Muslims community , take a look at you self.. and change. Have the ability the be critical of yourself and don’t blame others for everything and stop playing the victim all the time. In western society its normal to be critical of religion, politicians and government. It’s a basic right we have. I am not going to give up that right, because some Muslims take offence and feel that their religion is so special that it may never be the subject of critical opinions.

[Ouch]

To compare gun touting extremists to muslims is unfair. To me it is quite clear that the people who flew two planes into a building do not have the same faith as those muslims who were as appalled by the tragedy as you and I.

 

Its also interesting to me that all satire is apparently not equal - although a newspaper seems happy to print cartoons of a muslim prophet as a bomber how many other social stereotypes would have been considered too taboo still? Would they have printed a cartoon say of a black youth mugging an oap? I think not - but what is the difference between the two stereotypes both of which seem as pervasive in society today? It seems that racial satire has gone out and has been replaced by religious satire in the 21st century.

[johan]

To compare gun touting extremists to muslims is unfair. To me it is quite clear that the people who flew two planes into a building do not have the same faith as those muslims who were as appalled by the tragedy as you and I.

 

Its also interesting to me that all satire is apparently not equal - although a newspaper seems happy to print cartoons of a muslim prophet as a bomber how many other social stereotypes would have been considered too taboo still? Would they have printed a cartoon say of a black youth mugging an oap? I think not - but what is the difference between the two stereotypes both of which seem as pervasive in society today? It seems that racial satire has gone out and has been replaced by religious satire in the 21st century.

 

 

Muslims demonstrating in London..

 

 

 

 

 

[DrJägermeister]

Muslims demonstrating in London..

Someone should tell this guys in London that "draw Mohammad contest" has begun and they can take part of it

Fun against terror, draw Mohammad

[Cyman]

First off, I agree with Olivier's opinion. I wanted to say the same.

Imagine you are a faithful Christian and you want to live your faith in a Muslim country such as the Iran or such. It is just not possible because you don't have the right to!

Then I want to give you an example to say something about respecting other religions from the view-point of islamic countries:

Do you all remember what the Talibans did with the 1500 year-old Buddhas which were part of the World cultural heritage? Just imagine what it must have been for buddhists to see the Talibans blow up statues of their God! If this is not an act of intolerance and disrespect, I can't understand why some pictures on some pieces of paper cause people to swear they would kill their own father to help defending the honor of Muhammad, the prophet (I saw this in the news)! This is so sick!

 

I think everyone should read the open letter from Jyllands Posten which is addressed to the Muslims in the world in order to apologize for the publishing of the cartoons.

 

Maybe this helps calming the situation.

[johan]

Someone should tell this guys in London that "draw Mohammad contest" has begun and they can take part of it

Fun against terror, draw Mohammad

 

this dutch website has a contest;

 

http://www.retecool.com/comments.php?id=13539_0_1_0_C

 

(warning: not suitable for people who dislikes muslims-cartoons)

 

 

More pictures from London:

 

 

 

[suleiman]

Johan, a few matters are in need of being addressed.

 

Specifically you fail to see the parallels between the sketches Nazi's drew of Jews pre-WWII and the sketches being drawn of Muslims today. You come to this determination based solely on the lack of legal justifications for discrimination in the latter case.

 

I fear you have failed to grasp the preliminary argument in my previous post: speech fuels public policy, and public policy sets the law. It wasn't always "legal" to discriminate against Jews in Nazi Germany. It was made legal after Hitler succeeded in convincing a nation of followers that Jews were inherently evil and needed to be exterminated. Political sketches were just one mechanism in his arsenal of propaganda tools, and I can assure you they played a veritable part of his campaign.

 

You raise a very important point about the need to be self-critical as Muslims and the need to not judge and condemn others as a Muslim. On both points I can tell you only that Islam requires the Muslim community and its individuals to do both. Under Islamic Law Muslims are not permitted to judge other Muslims, and absolutely cannot enjoin upon them their own assessments of whether they're bound for heaven or hell. As a community Muslims are mandated to be self-critical in the manner which you describe, and to better themselves as a community but also to serve as the best of moral citizens everywhere.

 

The rationale behind why those provisions of our faith are not being lived up to right now are two-fold. For one, not every Muslim is a moderate personality. Many of these individuals are high-strung, come from stubborn backgrounds and upbringing, and are poorly educated both secularly and religiously. To these individuals Islam and being a Muslim is like being a Hutu or a Tutsi. They are concerned more with having a shared identity to latch on to and defend than with any set of Islamic principles or laws governing conduct.

 

The second rationale is the fear factor you alluded to earlier. I will implore you Johan to ask yourself just how well you could understand the fear felt by Muslims today. When you say you "know that Muslims feel discriminated," do you understand that you're own impressions can extend only to just that, your impressions, and could not by their very nature reach the level of understanding as those who experience it. It was very easy for the bulk of the Muslim world to undercut, and in some cases even celebrate, the fear felt by Americans post 9/11.

 

The reality is they are in no position to judge Americans because it's not their people, it's not their land, and subsequently, not their harm. Bottom line: the one who gets stabbed in the back will always be more in touch with the damage done than the one who only witnessed it.

 

You post on this forum your views about Muslim culture clashing with western culture by virtue of its very nature. This view was first exposited by Harvard professor Samuel P. Huntington over a decade ago, and it has since been dejected by numerous scholars of equal or greater repute. The belief that one group, because of its values, practices, and beliefs, has no destiny other than to clash head-on with the values we have grown to love and honor, is another successful media ploy to which you have unfortunately picked the bait.

 

I will rest this response by according you with this guarantee: no matter what groups you may belong to, whether you are homosexual, Jewish, Black or White, I will judge you based on the character of the individual I interact with. I will not draw a single conclusion or make any assumptions about the groups to which you may belong based on negative impressions I may have of you. Nor will I give heed or value to any authority, be it political or media-based, which professes to have insight into who you truly are.

[johan]

Specifically you fail to see the parallels between the sketches Nazi's drew of Jews pre-WWII and the sketches being drawn of Muslims today. You come to this determination based solely on the lack of legal justifications for discrimination in the latter case.

 

You are contradicting yourself by saying:

 

I fear you have failed to grasp the preliminary argument in my previous post: speech fuels public policy, and public policy sets the law. It wasn't always "legal" to discriminate against Jews in Nazi Germany. It was made legal after Hitler succeeded in convincing a nation of followers that Jews were inherently evil and needed to be exterminated. Political sketches were just one mechanism in his arsenal of propaganda tools, and I can assure you they played a veritable part of his campaign.

 

The Danish government has no involvement in the cartoons, The nazi Germany government did have. So to me that’s a big difference.

 

Under Islamic Law Muslims are not permitted to judge other Muslims, and absolutely cannot enjoin upon them their own assessments of whether they're bound for heaven or hell. As a community Muslims are mandated to be self-critical in the manner which you describe, and to better themselves as a community but also to serve as the best of moral citizens everywhere.

 

Oh, but they are allowed to judge non believers than. You know , I don’t really care what the Koran says. These laws don’t apply for me or anyone who lives in the west. Our democratic elected government determents what rules to live by. Not the koran,

 

You post on this forum your views about Muslim culture clashing with western culture by virtue of its very nature. This view was first exposited by Harvard professor Samuel P. Huntington over a decade ago, and it has since been dejected by numerous scholars of equal or greater repute. The belief that one group, because of its values, practices, and beliefs, has no destiny other than to clash head-on with the values we have grown to love and honor, is another successful media ploy to which you have unfortunately picked the bait.

 

I disagree, when the Muslims modernize and become more liberal . And they will have to, they will be able to live in harmony and peace in democratic countries. So I do see a better future.

 

 

I will rest this response by according you with this guarantee: no matter what groups you may belong to, whether you are homosexual, Jewish, Black or White, I will judge you based on the character of the individual I interact with. I will not draw a single conclusion or make any assumptions about the groups to which you may belong based on negative impressions I may have of you. Nor will I give heed or value to any authority, be it political or media-based, which professes to have insight into who you truly are.

 

 

Well thats great, but really not the issue here. To me its about our rights, to be able to speak out. And its about some Muslims who hate Western democratic life style.

[suleiman]

The Danish government has no involvement in the cartoons, The nazi Germany government did have. So to me that’s a big difference.

 

Your historical facts are sizably skewed Johan. When Hitler wrote his seminal work, Mein Kampf, he was not only not a member of government but was in fact an inmate at the German Landsberg prison--a placement he acquired for treason. The point is in the post WWI atmosphere in Germany, where the majority of the population was still upset over the huge losses and payouts made by their government, the book provided everyone with a convenient enemy to blame: the Jewish. It didn't matter whether Hitler was a representative of the government or in jail for treason, so long as he could claim to represent the view of the masses. Sales for Mein Kampf were surpassed only by the Bible, indicating his strong support with masses. In short, your assertion that the Nazi government had an involvement in the discrimination, whilst true on its face, is an extremely thin examination of the dynamics that were at play both prior and during Hitler's reign.

 

 

Oh, but they are allowed to judge non believers than. You know , I don’t really care what the Koran says. These laws don’t apply for me or anyone who lives in the west. Our democratic elected government determents what rules to live by. Not the koran,

 

 

Forgive me for being unclear Johan, Muslims are not permitted to judge anyone. The final judgment calls, as in the Islamic faith at least, rest with God alone. As for your assertion that "our democratic[ly] elected government deter[mines] what rules to live by. Not the [Quran]," I'll point you towards the same Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that provides you with the much coveted Freedom of Speech guarantee. Freedom of Religion, the right to practice and follow one's own beliefs, is in fact also a constitutionally guaranteed right. It provides an individual to choose which laws they will apply to themselves, in addition to the democratically elected laws. Contrary to your assertion, these laws can and do apply to many who live in the west, including me.

 

I disagree, when the Muslims modernize and become more liberal . And they will have to, they will be able to live in harmony and peace in democratic countries. So I do see a better future.

 

Without getting into what would likely be a never-ending debate about modernization, globalization, and culture, I will instead refute your point by example. Amish communities do “live in harmony” in the west, despite many of them choosing not to adopt modern technologies such as electricity, let alone modern/liberal social attitudes. The idea that “everyone must conform” to popular, liberal, or “modern” culture in order to live in harmony and peace essentially undermines the entire democratic philosophy of government.

 

 

Well thats great, but really not the issue here. To me its about our rights, to be able to speak out. And its about some Muslims who hate Western democratic life style.

 

And now we get to the heart of the matter. Is this truly a discussion about the balance of rights vs. the threat of harm to others? Or is this, as I suspected at the start of this thread, really just about sticking it to “those Moslems” who just “hate Western democratic life style” so much?

 

I’ll ask you to breakdown what you just said. Do you really believe that 1 billion people the world over, or even a majority, or even a sizable minority, actually hate Western democratic life style? Would you feel as confident in your assertion if I told you that the majority of Muslims living in the Middle East live under oppressive regimes they would change in a heartbeat with a democratic one?

 

The image you have been led to believe in, of Muslims who “just hate our way of life” is, as I have told you from the start, a vigorous media campaign to vilify Muslims and Islam to which you have unfortunately been a victim. I don’t blame you, you’re one of the scores of people affected by this modern day plague, and I’m certain had I not been Muslim I would have been amongst you.

 

However, I finished my last post with that little blurb about not being prejudiced because it is entirely on point. I’m not defending Muslims the world over because of any kind of spiritual bonds I feel with them, I’m defending them because I have been to their home countries. I have seen the way they live. As a sociology student I have met and discussed with them intimately what their thoughts, views, and perceptions of Americans and the “Global War on Terror” were. Two thirds of the “journalists” on Fox news can’t even claim to have done that much to search for the truth Johan. Can you?

[johan]

I’ll ask you to breakdown what you just said. Do you really believe that 1 billion people the world over, or even a majority, or even a sizable minority, actually hate Western democratic life style?

 

I clearly stated.. some Muslims...

 

So not all Muslims. So that’s a big difference!

 

Especially considering that some Muslims are saying that they are offended by the hole country of Denmark. Although only a few individuals made the cartoons. Speaking of generalisation.

 

 

I have seen the way they live. As a sociology student I have met and discussed with them intimately what their thoughts, views, and perceptions of American and the “Global War on Terror” were. Two thirds of the “journalists” on Fox news can’t even claim to have done that much to search for the truth Johan. Can you?

 

I teach Muslims the Dutch culture and our values( as I am a teacher). And that our law protects the freedom of speach.

 

So i know a lot of Mulims and speak to a lot of them. So I know what they have told me.

 

I have had a lot of discussion with them for example about Hirsi Ali.

 

Do you know her?, she made "Submision" a movie about the bad treatment of women in the name af Alah.

 

The moviemaker(van gogh) then was killed by a extremist muslim .

 

 

 

 

 

 

Support Denmark:

 

 

http://skender.be/supportdenmark/

 

http://www.petitiononline.com/danmark/petition.html

[intradink]

suleiman I think you've put forward a well thought out and fair assesment.

 

People say that in the west we have a 'culture' of ridiculing things like this. Great. All this highlights to me is a lack of understanding of the type of offence this is. I'm trying to think of analogies. Maybe this is similar to having a nude picture of your mother/daughter/wife/lover published by someone, for everyone. Just because someone can publish them, doesn't make it any less offensive to you. The point is that it's personal, not just some third party, but personal to you. Depending on how personal it is, will determine your reaction. Clearly this issue is very personal to a lot of people.

 

All I know is that I'd be upset if anyone published a hurtful article/cartoon/movie of someone I cared deeply about.

 

As spiderman says, 'with great power (read: freedom of speech), comes great responsibility'.

[suleiman]

I clearly stated.. some Muslims...

 

So not all Muslims. So that’s a big difference!

 

Especially considering that some Muslims are saying that they are offended by the hole country of Denmark. Although only a few individuals made the cartoons. Speaking of generalisation.

 

Johan, my point with the comment you made was not really concerned with the amount of people you were making the generalization about, but really that you were making it at all.

 

Allow me to provide you with an example. In the United States there are people who believe abortion should stay legal and those who believe it should not be. In the “pro-life” camp, as it’s often referenced, there are those who are vocal about their beliefs, and those who are staunch advocates. But there are others still who believe so intensely in their views that “terrorist” activities such as bombing abortion clinics and taking innocent lives is a perfectly acceptable practice.

 

Despite the actions of those few individuals, which are arguably just as outrageous and appalling as any other act of terrorism, the rest of the people in the pro-life camp are never “brandished” as terrorists, extremists, or fundamentalists. People will never band them together because the media makes a point of portraying the terrorist act as the actions of one man or one group.

 

For Muslims every time a Muslim commits an act of terrorism the Media will unfailingly report it as an act of “religious warfare,” “fundamentalism,” and “extremism.” Islam and the Muslims will be pitted with the blame for the actions as if they held the smoking gun.

 

This mistake by the media machines in the West has had the doubly detrimental result of giving “terrorists” and their supporters the vindication that if no one else, at least the West believes their actions to be religiously justified. One feels more like a Muslim when blowing up skyscrapers thanks to Fox and CNN telling them that’s what everyone took away from it. In addition it steadily inculcates in the collective conscience of the general public what “Islam” really is, and who “Muslims” really are.

 

I teach Muslims the Dutch culture and our values( as I am a teacher). And that our law protects the freedom of speach.

 

So i know a lot of Mulims and speak to a lot of them. So I know what they have told me.

 

Johan I find your profession to be one of commanding respect and importance. You must understand however, that “knowing” and even “speaking” to a lot of Muslims, particularly western Muslims, will not provide you with an accurate picture of Muslims the world over. I am not belittling what knowledge you have already garnered from your relationships with these people, but I am intimating that if you still hold the beliefs you do, you aren’t speaking to the right people.

 

I have had a lot of discussion with them for example about Hirsi Ali.

 

Do you know her?, she made "Submision" a movie about the bad treatment of women in the name af Alah.

 

The moviemaker(van gogh) then was killed by a extremist muslim .

 

I am aware of Hirsi Ali, and van gogh, and also of the extremely controversial movie “Submission” and the far more controversial murder of van gogh. What I would ask you to do is to look at yourself and try to assess why you made reference to those people and their actions (specifically the murder), particularly in light of the points I emphasized above. If a pro-life supporter had murdered an abortion doctor who had produced a movie showcasing his views would you have had the same reaction? Would you be calling the individual a “pro-life extremist” and if so, would you be making brash claims about pro-life supporters based on his actions?

 

Intradink: thanks for your support, it's nice to know people are drawing something from my rants!

[johan]

.

I am aware of Hirsi Ali, and van gogh, and also of the extremely controversial movie “Submission” and the far more controversial murder of van gogh. What I would ask you to do is to look at yourself and try to assess why you made reference to those people and their actions (specifically the murder), particularly in light of the points I emphasized above. If a pro-life supporter had murdered an abortion doctor who had produced a movie showcasing his views would you have had the same reaction? Would you be calling the individual a “pro-life extremist” and if so, would you be making brash claims about pro-life supporters based on his actions?

 

@suleiman, just a question.

 

I wonder, how than to speak about those individual’s how commit murder in de name of Islam. How to speak about those individuals how have burned down the Danish embassy. How to speak about those individuels who commit crimes in the name of Allah.

 

How should the media and people like me address these issue’s , Without giving individuals like you the feeling that the media are generalising Muslims. Tell me.

 

For me it’s really difficult you know. Terrorism is an issue that has to be addressed. The difference of thinking between the “old” Europeans and a lot of “new” Europeans ( immigrant) is something that really worries me. So for me the only way to address these issues is a dialogue. A dialogue were we have to put names on things and to adress that there are tensions between groups and to be able to pronounce the difference between people.

 

What worries “liberal”, "left wing" people like me is. That I will have to give up my rights, because of old fashioned backward thinking. To me it’s a clash of cultures .. and idea’s. And about not giving in to people who use non democratic ways to enforce their ways on others.

 

And I think , that this is happening right now. I see individuals how say: Do what we ask of you, or else. Suffer the consequences. To me, that’s a really big problem.. This problem has to be addressed. Somehow. And by doing that, I really don’t want to hurt individuals like you.!

 

So Suleman, In stead of talking about the bad western media. Tell your views on how to deal with those individuals who don’t respect democratic way’s and who use violence to get their way’s Tell me about your ideas. I really would like to know.

[DrJägermeister]

Never a sect like the catholics, moslems, satanists, scientology or every other weird guys should ever get some special rights in Europe. It's a free continent and everybody can live there in peace, but noone should expect that we have respect for his religion.

God doesn't exist, the history shows that. I can accept that some guys in my country believe in {censored} (and we let them do), but I can't accept that they want "special rights" witch forbid me to say what I want. NEVER a religion (no matter what kind of religion) should get "special rights" in Europe.

Right now the Moslems want some laws to protect their religion against these cartoons. This should never happen, the same rights for all citizens and nothing else. Freedom to speech for everyone.

 

Just say NO to every religion and sign up the "Anti Religion Anti God" Petition:

http://www.petitiononline.com/antigod1/petition.html

 

P.S: Will I burn in hell now

[johan]

update: angry people in London (calling themselves Muslims) threatening to use violence.

 

read this bbc news item:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4682262.stm

 

 

Denmark and Norway have condemned Syria for failing to stop attacks on their embassies

 

 

http://www.petitiononline.com/danmark/petition.html

http://skender.be/supportdenmark/more2.html#NL

 

 

[39thRonin]

Without getting into what would likely be a never-ending debate about modernization, globalization, and culture, I will instead refute your point by example. Amish communities do “live in harmony” in the west, despite many of them choosing not to adopt modern technologies such as electricity, let alone modern/liberal social attitudes.

 

I live amongst the Amish and Mennonites. They don't fly planes into buildings and cheer when Americans die. They do not advocate killing anyone who is not of their faith. They participate in our society - though it is much different than their own.

[intradink]

This is an issue about responsibility and not freedom of speech, or the rights of religious belief.

 

I think this bbc link sums it up well. The problem here is the association of the prophet of islam with terrorism. This is irresponsible and displays a lack of understanding. If it had been a cartoon of 'an arab', then noone would have cared. Turning it into a question of freedom of the press, just helps get more media coverage and fan some flames.

 

That said, the reaction is also unjustifiable.

 

Mullahs and the western media whipping the masses into a frenzy, and helps perpetuate this idea the islam and the west are on a collision course.

 

An editor made a bad judgement, was fired, that should be the end of it.

[DrJägermeister]

An editor made a bad judgement, was fired, that should be the end of it.

It was wrong to fire him, he was right to publish that. No religion/sect has any rights to censor the press.

[intradink]

Any person in power who makes a bad decision that affects an entire nation, should be prepared to take the consequences.

 

I'm not questioning if he had the right to publish. I'm saying it was a bad decision.

 

In the worst case some Danish companies may go bankrupt, or be forced to make redundancies due to losses in profits resulting from his actions (rightly or wrongly)... It's a bad judgement call.

[johan]

Any person in power who makes a bad decision that affects an entire nation, should be prepared to take the consequences.

 

I'm not questioning if he had the right to publish. I'm saying it was a bad decision.

 

In the worst case some Danish companies may go bankrupt, or be forced to make redundancies due to losses in profits resulting from his actions (rightly or wrongly)... It's a bad judgement call.

 

Well being prepared to take the consequences. Some people are than thinking about this:

 

Some people trying to force there way by violence or the treatment with violence. And this is wrong.

 

Everybody has to take responsibility for their own actions. You say the publisher of the cartoons is responsible for the violence.

 

I say not. Those people who are violent are responsible for their own actions.

Its not like those people don’t have a mind of their own

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.petitiononline.com/danmark/petition.html

http://skender.be/supportdenmark/more2.html#NL

 

 

[DarkCarnival]

As a dane, I'll just say the following:

 

Is it about freedom of speech ? Yes and no, clearly the newspaper "Jyllandsposten" who originally published these cartoons (I believe they held a contest of sorts, or at least hired the cartoonists) had the intention of amusing the papers readers and making fun of muslims (more or less).

 

It was wrong to publish these cartoons as they really weren't vital for our freedom of speech. But it's imperative that any who enter this discussion get their facts right. The danish people have a *long* tradition of making fun of things, christianity, politicians, nazi's, muslims, reborn christians, serial killers and such (no particular order). Basicly it boils down to us being unable to accept anyone or anything which claims it's perfect and that it has found the one true path, that's why Bush as a person is very ill-liked here.

 

Anyone or anything which claims to be perfect, will naturally end up being a target for satire, you must understand that according to muslims, religions aren't equal. Any religions predating Islam, is viewed as imperfect interpretations of the true religion, only when the prophet Mohammed came, did people learn how to really worship god. Any religion that followed after the introduction of islam, is considered herectic religions.

One must keep in mind that shortly after Islam began, the muslims expanded their empire with enormous haste, it was not until the crusades that their expansion were nearly brought to a halt, ever since then, the muslims have been in a defensive battle against the west. This problem has followed up to present times, the west had colonies and expeditions around the middle-east after the collapse of the osmannic empire.

 

 

And now look at what a bunch of drawings have done, although they were published for the wrong reasons, embassies have been put to the torch, our wares been unofficially banned, the lives of salesagents, embassadors and travellers have been threatened.

 

As a danish columnist pointed out today in a different newspaper. It cannot possibly be the drawings themselves that tick them off in such a way. There's underlying economic and social problems too. The economy of the middle-east is (apart from their oil-economy) in a constant decline. The muslims are forced to see the west, and lately asia, prosper and grow while their situation gets worse. Most of their leaders are more or less dictators, their goverments are often suffering from corruption and the people opressed by it's own police. Many believe that the reason that these drawings have triggered such hatred, is that some of the regimes are using this as a way of letting their people blow off some of the steam that would otherwise have gone into overthrowing them -which could explain why syrian authorities didn't intervene when the angry mobs torched the danish (and swedish!) embassy.

 

Many danes have a hard time seeing how the muslims can be victims. Yes "we" (an independant newspaper) published some drawings which offended something that was sacred to them. We on the other hand, have seen our royal seal being stomped on by angry muslims, our flag (which is a symbol of everything we are) being torched in the streets on *numerous* occasions. Our people threatened and to top it off, we are asked to banish the right to freedom of speech (which also is something sacred to us).

 

Don't you think you hurt our feelings too ?