Kuwaitis call for boycott of Danish goods - Page 19 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-05-2006, 07:55 PM   #271
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 04:43 PM
Imagine the day when the loons with the full strength crazy (writing letters down wells, executing teenage girls, declaring to wipe out Israel and crush anglo-saxon culture and launching boycotts) get nuclear bombs. The Iranian government is practcally putting economic sanctions on itself with the boycots I don't think that they have any long term plans in the pipeline .
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 02-05-2006, 10:19 PM   #272
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 06:43 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Man
Danish consulate in Beirut ablaze

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/as...sts/index.html




Holy st. I didn't see that earlier. Disgusting.
__________________

__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 02-05-2006, 10:23 PM   #273
Refugee
 
stammer476's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,058
Local Time: 03:43 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by yolland
The chairman of the Muslim Public Affairs Committee said the protesters "did not represent British Muslims".
Unfortunately, British Muslims are only a small percentage of all Muslims. This religion is facing a major crisis on the world stage, and if changes aren't seen soon, I'm afraid of what their future holds.
__________________
stammer476 is offline  
Old 02-05-2006, 10:45 PM   #274
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Zoomerang96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: canada
Posts: 13,459
Local Time: 12:43 AM
i haven't bothered reading all the comments in this thread, so if this has been said already, i apologize.

there's two things worth noting:

1) freedom of speach means you should be allowed to say anything. but by the same token, it doesn't mean you have to go out of your way to provoke anger, hatrid and violence. that's irresponsibile, and the editorial pictures did NOTHING but incite anger. at the end of the day, WHAT was the point?

2) the violent protesters fell right into the hands of the editors who published those cartoons in the first place. isn't that more than a little ironic?

"you're calling our god and our religion violent?!?!?!?! that's absurd!!!! i'm going to torch your buildings, and threaten to kidnap and kill you!!!!!"

um, ok then. thanks for that, guys, but for the love of shit SETTLE THE FUCK DOWN.

both sides look absolutely stupid in this conflict.
__________________
Zoomerang96 is offline  
Old 02-05-2006, 10:49 PM   #275
Blue Crack Addict
 
MissVelvetDress_75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: basking in my post-concert glow still mesmerized by the orbit of his hips..Also Holding Bono Close as he requested.
Posts: 25,776
Local Time: 01:43 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Zoomerang96


2) the violent protesters fell right into the hands of the editors who published those cartoons in the first place. isn't that more than a little ironic?

"you're calling our god and our religion violent?!?!?!?! that's absurd!!!! i'm going to torch your buildings, and threaten to kidnap and kill you!!!!!"

um, ok then. thanks for that, guys, but for the love of shit SETTLE THE FUCK DOWN.

both sides look absolutely stupid in this conflict.
__________________
MissVelvetDress_75 is offline  
Old 02-06-2006, 02:16 AM   #276
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 04:43 PM
To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men - Abraham Lincoln

The artistic merit of these cartoons is non-existent, but in principle what difference does it make if they are trying to ban these cartoons, The Satanic Versus or Piglet?

We only now how free we are by our margins, there is nothing stupid about illustrating how much closer those margins are today - and that extends right up to Nazi hate speech and holocaust denial.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 02-06-2006, 03:41 AM   #277
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 04:43 PM
Quote:
The case for mocking religion.
By Christopher Hitchens

As well as being a small masterpiece of inarticulacy and self-abnegation, the statement from the State Department about this week's international Muslim pogrom against the free press was also accidentally accurate.
Quote:
"Anti-Muslim images are as unacceptable as anti-Semitic images, as anti-Christian images, or any other religious belief."
Thus the hapless Sean McCormack, reading painfully slowly from what was reported as a prepared government statement. How appalling for the country of the First Amendment to be represented by such an administration. What does he mean "unacceptable?" That it should be forbidden? And how abysmal that a "spokesman" cannot distinguish between criticism of a belief system and slander against a people. However, the illiterate McCormack is right in unintentionally comparing racist libels to religious faith. Many people have pointed out that the Arab and Muslim press is replete with anti-Jewish caricature, often of the most lurid and hateful kind. In one way the comparison is hopelessly inexact. These foul items mostly appear in countries where the state decides what is published or broadcast. However, when Muslims republish the Protocols of the Elders of Zion or perpetuate the story of Jewish blood-sacrifice at Passover, they are recycling the fantasies of the Russian Orthodox Christian secret police (in the first instance) and of centuries of Roman Catholic and Lutheran propaganda (in the second). And, when an Israeli politician refers to Palestinians as snakes or pigs or monkeys, it is near to a certainty that he will be a rabbi (most usually Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, the leader of the disgraceful Shas party), and will cite Talmudic authority for his racism. For most of human history, religion and bigotry have been two sides of the same coin, and it still shows.

Therefore there is a strong case for saying that the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, and those who have reprinted its efforts out of solidarity, are affirming the right to criticize not merely Islam but religion in general. And the Bush administration has no business at all expressing an opinion on that. If it is to say anything, it is constitutionally obliged to uphold the right and no more. You can be sure that the relevant European newspapers have also printed their share of cartoons making fun of nuns and popes and messianic Israeli settlers, and taunting child-raping priests. There was a time when this would not have been possible. But those taboos have been broken.

Which is what taboos are for. Islam makes very large claims for itself. In its art, there is a prejudice against representing the human form at all. The prohibition on picturing the prophet—who was only another male mammal—is apparently absolute. So is the prohibition on pork or alcohol or, in some Muslim societies, music or dancing. Very well then, let a good Muslim abstain rigorously from all these. But if he claims the right to make me abstain as well, he offers the clearest possible warning and proof of an aggressive intent. This current uneasy coexistence is only an interlude, he seems to say. For the moment, all I can do is claim to possess absolute truth and demand absolute immunity from criticism. But in the future, you will do what I say and you will do it on pain of death.

I refuse to be spoken to in that tone of voice, which as it happens I chance to find "offensive." ( By the way, hasn't the word "offensive" become really offensive lately?) The innate human revulsion against desecration is much older than any monotheism: Its most powerful expression is in the Antigone of Sophocles. It belongs to civilization. I am not asking for the right to slaughter a pig in a synagogue or mosque or to relieve myself on a "holy" book. But I will not be told I can't eat pork, and I will not respect those who burn books on a regular basis. I, too, have strong convictions and beliefs, and value the Enlightenment above any priesthood or any sacred fetish-object. It is revolting to me to breathe the same air as wafts from the exhalations of the madrasahs, or the reeking fumes of the suicide-murderers, or the sermons of Billy Graham and Joseph Ratzinger. But these same principles of mine also prevent me from wreaking random violence on the nearest church, or kidnapping a Muslim at random and holding him hostage, or violating diplomatic immunity by attacking the embassy or the envoys of even the most despotic Islamic state, or making a moronic spectacle of myself threatening blood and fire to faraway individuals who may have hurt my feelings. The babyish rumor-fueled tantrums that erupt all the time, especially in the Islamic world, show yet again that faith belongs to the spoiled and selfish childhood of our species.
link



Read the whole bit.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 02-06-2006, 07:37 AM   #278
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 04:43 PM
Arab-European League has decided to protest by publishing cartoons with taboo subjects, holocaust deial etc.




Now they really should have had a naked men marrying a male horse, that would breaking taboo barriers.



Yeah wow, the holocaust requires a leap of faith and is implausible argument, so cutting edge, plu-ese Islamists have been pulling that one for decades and their cartoons have the whole Die Ewige Juden motif, this one is tame by comparison.

May not support the content of these cartoons but dammit I see nothing wrong with them being published on their private website or paper for the world to see.

Also free the fuckwit anti-semite David Irving.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 02-06-2006, 02:40 PM   #279
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 07:43 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by stammer476
Unfortunately, British Muslims are only a small percentage of all Muslims. This religion is facing a major crisis on the world stage, and if changes aren't seen soon, I'm afraid of what their future holds.
The protesters he was criticizing WERE British Muslims--namely, the small band of Omar Bakri Muhammad followers whose ugly signs were misleadingly presented by the media as the face of the London protest.

Do you mean to suggest that the violent actions of a few hundred conclusively speak to the sentiments of Muslims worldwide? You are talking about 1.4 billion people. There have been THOUSANDS of protests in countries across the world now, and the overwhelming majority of them have been peaceful. Of course these are not the ones which grab the headlines.

The reduction of violent extremism and the nurturing of electoral democracy in the Muslim world are worthy and reasonable goals to work towards. Expecting scores of countries to embrace Western ideals of civic liberalism and free speech en masse,when they lack all cultural or historic precedent for it, is not. Are we willing to accept this reality and work for peace and compromise that does not demand everyone else to see things our way or be dismissed as unworthy of dialogue? If we are too shortsighted to do this, then I am afraid of what our future holds. Violence and destruction are always to be condemned, but boycotts and strenuous protest are a basic right which should never be denied, nor used as evidence of anyone's unfitness to participate in negotiations.
Quote:
The intially spontaneous protests against the cartoons are now being instrumentalized by extremists...It makes no sense to smash things blindly, without a specific goal. We shouldn't regard Western countries as the enemy.
--editorial in the pan-Arab daily Al-Sharq Al-Aswat


Why do we want more than [apologies]? Do we want Denmark to convert into a Muslim country? Do you want to conquer Denmark? Do you want the terrorists to attack innocent people and kill them?
--editorial, Cairo weekly Soutelomma


Setting fire to embassies and destroying them is wrong. The solution lies in diplomacy, not in guns...We shall all be the losers if we fail to immediately defuse this situation, which can only leave a trail of mistrust and misunderstanding between both sides in its wake.
--Turkish PM Tayyip Erdogan

We do not approve of these wrong and distressing incidents. Extreme reactions exceeding the limits of peaceful democratic actions are dangerous and damage the Muslim world's efforts to defend a legitimate case.
--Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, Sec. Gen. of the Organization of Islamic Conferences


God instructs us to forgive. Therefore, we--as much as we condemn it strongly--must stay above this dispute and not bring ourselves ... to equating ourselves to those who have published the cartoons.
--Afghan President Hamid Karzai


Misguided and oppressive segments of the Muslim community...are projecting a distorted and dark image of the faith of justice, love and brotherhood. They have exploited this ... to spread their poison and revive their old hatreds with new methods and mechanisms.
--Iraq's Shiite leader, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani


The world has come to believe that Islam is what is practiced by Bin Laden, Zawahiri, Zarqawi, the Muslim Brotherhood, the Salafis, and others who have presented a distorted image of Islam. We must be honest with ourselves and admit that we are the reason for these drawings.
--editorial in Al-Ittihad, United Arab Emirates


Who offends Islam more? A foreigner who endeavors to draw the prophet as described by his followers in the world, or a Muslim with an explosive belt who commits suicide in a wedding party in Amman or elsewhere?
--editorial by former Jordanian senator Momeni in Shihan


Lebanon's most senior Shiite Muslim cleric, Grand Ayatollah Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah, issued an edict banning violence, saying it "harms Islam and Prophet Muhammad the same as the others (the publishers of the cartoons) did."

Muslim clerics denounced the violence, with some wading into the mobs trying to stop them. "Regretfully, the march did more harm to the prophet than it did good," said Sunni Sheik Ibrahim Ibrahim, who was in the crowd. He said he and others tried to stop the mob, but "we got stones and insults."

Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora told private Future television: "This has nothing to do with Islam at all. Destabilising security and vandalism gives a wrong image of Islam. The Prophet Mohammad cannot be defended this way."
--source: Associated Press


Why are we so excitable anyway? Why even care what a newspaper thinks? The cartoons, horrendous though they may be, need not affect a Muslim's impression of the Prophet, for our tradition clearly shows him to be a man imbued with dignity, morality and goodness. The Prophet was ridiculed from the moment he started receiving revelation in Mecca more than 1400 years ago...A few cartoons will do little to harm him - or us.

The over-the-top reaction just shows me how much excess energy and strength the ummah retains worldwide. Frankly I wonder if Muslims are not doing a greater disservice to the Prophet when we close our eyes to the suffering and oppression in the rest of the world...Now, if we could only put our efforts to better purposes...
--editorial from the Muslim news portal altmuslim.com

This and other similar actions do not help anything! It detracts from valid criticisms and merely proves "their" point. When the issue blows over, it won't be Indonesians, Palestinians or Saudis who will carry the can, but Danish Muslims...If Muslims are asking for Danes and others to show understanding about Islam, then I don't see why Muslims can't show understanding about Danish and wider European society. There is nothing the Danish Prime Minister could have done to the newspaper or its editors or its journalists or the cartoonists. Can this point be appreciated by Muslims who don't live in Europe? None of this detracts from the Muslims being allowed protest or Danish Muslims making petitions to their government...

Secondly, the principle that people "on the other side" should really be defending isn't some empty platitude about "freedom of expression" but that of a press free from state intrusion. This is a real and practical freedom (right) that I do defend (and something many Muslim living in oppressive states would agree with, I think).
--the Muslim blog underprogress
__________________
yolland is offline  
Old 02-06-2006, 03:07 PM   #280
Refugee
 
stammer476's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,058
Local Time: 03:43 PM
^^ I think you're taking my comment to be much further reaching than I intended. My point was that while I'm sure that these pictures aren't representative of British Muslims, it's not British Muslims that I'm concerned for.

Regardless of what percentage of Muslims worldwide would endorse this behavior, the fact still remains that Islam in general has faced a public relations crisis in the last 5-10 years. What I fear is not Muslim extremists holding up signs, but what the counter-reaction will be; essentially, if things like this begin to escalate. I'm not concerned with reality, but perception.
__________________
stammer476 is offline  
Old 02-06-2006, 03:16 PM   #281
New Yorker
 
U2 Beginner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Luton, England
Posts: 3,123
Local Time: 06:43 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by verte76
I have practiced "self-censorship" of my art because I thought some of my work was needlessly offensive to certain parties. I don't like the idea of putting a bomb on the head of any religious figure, let alone Mohammed. OK, we don't have to follow the rules about not making any images of Mohammed. I'm not a Muslim, therefore that rule doesn't apply to me. But putting a bomb on his head? This disturbs me. This is portraying him as a terrorist, and I'm pretty damned uncomfortable with that. Most Muslims are decent people who mind their own business, not terrorists. I've used Muslim symbols in my art, including the crescent and star and mosques. I don't want to deliberately do nothing in a piece besides piss off my Muslim friends. That being said I'll still buy the Danish cheese.
Thank You.

I wonder what Bono's point of view would be in all of this.
__________________
U2 Beginner is offline  
Old 02-06-2006, 06:32 PM   #282
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 07:43 AM
An Arab-American Muslim student of mine brought this statement from the Council on American-Islamic relations (CAIR), the US' largest Muslim civil liberties group, to our discussion section for Intro to International Relations today. Since they all just wrote papers on freedom of information in international law, it was quite germane to the topic.

The student privately confided to me afterwards that she feels loath in spite of herself to get into a discussion with non-Muslim students about the cartoons and the global response because "I feel like whatever I say will be heard as proving some stereotype or another, rather than what I think. Either I must secretly support this violence because You Muslims always stick together, or else I'm some nice Americanized Muslim who believes all the right things, but can't admit that other Muslims might not be so good." I winced in recognition, because this is precisely the reluctance American Jews so often feel to join in discussions about Israel.
Quote:
What Would Muhammad Do?

“You do not do evil to those who do evil to you, but you deal with them with forgiveness and kindness.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari)

That description of Islam’s Prophet Muhammad is a summary of how he reacted to personal attacks and abuse.

Islamic traditions include a number of instances of the prophet having the opportunity to strike back at those who attacked him, but refraining from doing so.

These traditions are particularly important as we witness outrage in the Islamic world over cartoons, initially published in a Danish newspaper, that were viewed as intentional attacks on the prophet.

Peaceful and not-so-peaceful protests have occurred from Gaza to Indonesia. Boycotts have targeted companies based in Denmark and in other nations that reprinted the offensive caricatures.

We all, Muslims and people of other faiths, seem to be locked into a downward spiral of mutual mistrust and hostility based on self-perpetuating stereotypes.

As Muslims, we need to take a step back and ask ourselves, “What would the Prophet Muhammad do?”

Muslims are taught the tradition of the woman who would regularly throw trash on the prophet as he walked down a particular path. The prophet never responded in kind to the woman’s abuse. Instead, when she one day failed to attack him, he went to her home to inquire about her condition.

In another tradition, the prophet was offered the opportunity to have God punish the people of a town near Mecca who refused the message of Islam and attacked him with stones. Again, the prophet did not choose to respond in kind to the abuse.

A companion of the prophet noted his forgiving disposition. He said: “I served the prophet for ten years, and he never said ‘uf’ (a word indicating impatience) to me and never blamed me by saying, ‘Why did you do so or why didn't you do so?’” (Sahih Al-Bukhari)

Even when the prophet was in a position of power, he chose the path of kindness and reconciliation.

When he returned to Mecca after years of exile and personal attacks, he did not take revenge on the people of the city, but instead offered a general amnesty.

In the Quran, Islam’s revealed text, God states: “When (the righteous) hear vain talk, they withdraw from it saying: ‘Our deeds are for us and yours for you; peace be on to you. We do not desire the way of the ignorant’. . .O Prophet (Muhammad), you cannot give guidance to whom you wish, it is God Who gives guidance to whom He pleases, and He is quite aware of those who are guided.” (28:55-56)

The Quran also says: “Invite (all) to the way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching, and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for thy Lord knows best who have strayed from His Path and who receive guidance.” (16:125)

Another verse tells the prophet to “show forgiveness, speak for justice and avoid the ignorant.” (7:199)

These are the examples that Muslims should follow as they express justifiable concern at the publication of the cartoons.

This unfortunate episode can be used as a learning opportunity for people of all faiths who sincerely wish to know more about Islam and Muslims. It can also be viewed as a “teaching moment” for Muslims who want to exemplify the prophet’s teachings through the example of their good character and dignified behavior in the face of provocation and abuse.

As the Quran states: “It may well be that God will bring about love (and friendship) between you and those with whom you are now at odds.” (60:7)
__________________
yolland is offline  
Old 02-06-2006, 06:36 PM   #283
War Child
 
MsGiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 905
Local Time: 04:43 PM
I'd hate to see WWIII started by a bunch of cartoons
__________________
MsGiggles is offline  
Old 02-06-2006, 07:21 PM   #284
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 07:43 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by stammer476
Regardless of what percentage of Muslims worldwide would endorse this behavior, the fact still remains that Islam in general has faced a public relations crisis in the last 5-10 years.
This is true, but the West is facing its own public relations crisis in the Islamic world as well. We may look from our perspective at the chain of events thus far and reason: Well, really it's mostly right-wing papers that have been reprinting these cartoons; and the US has actually been quite sympathetic to Muslims in its responses; and look, Rasmussen did apologize for the offense they caused, etc. etc. But the perception in much of the Muslim world is: Now look at this, the Europeans--they with their draconian immigration laws and hateful nationalist politicians--they are closing ranks and forming a united front against us, contriving to find us unworthy of a place at the table, and how can it be coincidence that this comes at the same time as mounting sabre-rattling over Iran and continued military interference in Iraq and Afghanistan (and, as always, continued unswaying support for Israel)?

The narratives of distrust on both sides run much deeper than the sensational rhetoric of "fundamentalists" and "infidels."
__________________
yolland is offline  
Old 02-06-2006, 08:09 PM   #285
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 07:43 AM
Substitute the word "Muslim" for "Communist" in A_Wanderer's comments in this thread. Then re-read.



"I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration , Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion, and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids... "
-Base Commander Ripper
__________________

__________________
financeguy is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com