Kuwaitis call for boycott of Danish goods - Page 27 - 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 02-14-2006, 04:39 PM   #391
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 12:22 AM
Cartoon Protesters Rampage in Pakistan

Quote:
Thousands rampaged through two cities Tuesday in Pakistan's worst violence against Prophet Muhammad caricatures, burning buildings housing a hotel, banks and a KFC, vandalizing a Citibank and breaking windows at a Holiday Inn and a Pizza Hut.

At least two people were killed in Lahore, where intelligence officials suspected outlawed Islamic militant groups incited the violence to undermine President Gen. Pervez Musharraf's U.S.-allied government.
Those innocent people should not have been provoked....
__________________

__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 02-16-2006, 04:33 AM   #392
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:22 PM
Quote:
George W. Bush
"We believe in a free press. We also recognize that with freedom comes responsibilities. With freedom comes the responsibility to be thoughtful about others."
Straight from Bush's mouth - and a complete load of codswallop.

Like saying that you have the freedom to think, and the responsibility to think way somebody tells you.
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 03-26-2006, 04:23 AM   #393
ONE
love, blood, life
 
U2Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: at pavel's
Posts: 11,603
Local Time: 09:22 AM
Update:

A French documentary film crew filmed two of the Danish imams who helped incite a lot of the anger over these cartoons in the Middle East. They weren't aware that they were being filmed while the following took place.

One of them (Ahmed Akkari) expressed a wish that the moderate Danish muslim and member of parlament, Nasser Khadar, would be blown to pieces along with his ministry if he was ever appointed a minister in a Danish government.

The other imam (Abu Laban) was telling another one about a certain person that he knew - a martyr - who, according to him, was ready to do a suicide bombing.

Scary stuff, seems like some were finally unmasked here.

The Danish politician, Nasser Khadar is currently considering his political future.
__________________
U2Man is offline  
Old 03-27-2006, 02:06 AM   #394
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:22 PM
Religion of Peace

I would refuse to submit to any God, if that sick creep of a deity really existed I would want it exterminated - possibly with thermonuclear weapons.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 03-27-2006, 04:01 AM   #395
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:22 PM
The UN report on the matter came out

In describing Denmark
Quote:
Their uncompromising defense of a Freedom of Expression without limits or restrictions does not conform with international standards which keep a necessary balance between Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Religion (as if thats a bad thing A_W), in particular non-initiation of religious and racial hatred, agreed upon by all the Member States of the United Nations in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This position is indicative of an alarming lack of sensitivity and comprehension of the religious convictions and the significant emotions of the communities concerned(how sensitive would these "religious communities" be towards an atheist? The answer is about 3 feet of rope and noose with a 10 foot drop - their beliefs should be mocked as savagely as any other belief system). Because of this attitude, these publications consolidate criticisms which have been formulated especially by certain mass media, and in particular since the tragic events of September 11, which associate Islam with terrorism (the faith based initiative was inspired by Mohammed) and which is a central explanation for the recrudesence of islamophobia in the world and in particular in their own countries. However, it’s precisely this amalgam which is at the core of the criticisms formulated against the caricatures of the Danish newspaper. The consecutive debate about the publication of the caricatures revealed in a more worrying way the emergence, from certain intellectuals, media and politicians, of a rhetoric of conflict of cultures and civilizations dividing the world between civilized secular democracies characterized by defense of Freedom of Expression and retrograde and backwards closed countries identified by the defense of religious freedom (religious freedom doesn't extend to killing people for choosing another faith or getting believers to kill unbelievers!) and insisting on their religion’s place in their societies.
link

What a bastard of a report, both treating the concept of free speech as a negative and affirming countries that are "identified by the defence of religious freedom and insisting on their religion's place in their societies" as having religious freedom - that list would include Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan.

Freedom of speech protects religious minorities, freedom of religion is what makes a country have religious freedom, a nation that will kill people for apostacy, ban Jews and Atheists from setting foot in the country and ban other religious texts does not have religious freedom. What fucking topsy-turvy world is the UN living in.

Cut all funding to the UN and move it's HQ to Kigali or Srebrenica ~ truly some of the international communities greatest pieces of cooperation in shifting blame.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 03-27-2006, 06:53 AM   #396
Refugee
 
all_i_want's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,180
Local Time: 11:22 AM
religious freedom to an atheist would be what women's rights are to men - an atheist would have to respect these, just like men have to respect women's rights. Also, saying that a religion doesnt deserve respect because some of its adherents do not respect other religions is the same as saying if there are some racists in a community that community should not expect to be protected from racism. It doesnt make sense.

i dont really like any religion myself, and they piss me off pretty often, the religious types. but everyone has their sensitivities, like if I said free speech should be abolish, or religious scripture would be adopted in public schools, you would be outraged.

Living as a community means everyone has to make compromises, so in this case, why not compromise the right to make religious hate speech? just because you have the freedom to do something doesnt mean you SHOULD do it. The nature of rule of law and democracy requires everyone to give up certain rights they have in nature, like the right to kill, to create a more prosperous and harmonious society. I think the objective still stands.
__________________
all_i_want is offline  
Old 03-27-2006, 07:17 AM   #397
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:22 PM
No, the "right to kill" is a direct violation of the no-harm principle, the ultimate deprivation of another individuals liberty. Cases of execution could really only be justified in the cases where the convict represents a persistent threat to the lives of others - execution for free thought is punishment for trying to excercise liberty.

There is absolutely no right to not be offended, there is however a right to free speech - thats not always pleasent but it exists. It is a guarantee for the people that can keep both society and government in check. If the price is that people get offended and we don't live in a harmonious society then good, a society unified in belief is truly enslaved.

I get offended all the time, I am offended by the religious claiming my fibre of being in perpituity as property of their God, I am offended by their anti-freedom bias, I am offended by smug interfaith dialogues that get together to fuck over unbelievers - the common ground in the major monotheistic faiths will be anti-gay, anti-atheist and anti-freedom (because ultimately the individual is not answerable to themselves or the law but to a higher power that acts in peculiar ways). I am more than happy to just tell people to fuck off, or point

Preservation of secularism is also a part of religious freedom (hence no scripture in public schools), by not having the state engage in religious proclamations it ensures that all citizens are not under duress to adopt a particular religion. The state cannot have role in religion, should that happen then freedom of religion is forfeit and other freedoms are rapidly snatched away.

Religious freedom is freedom to elect to believe whatever you want to believe, it includes the freedom to not believe in the divine. To suggest that as an atheist I cannot have a true concept of religious freedom is ludicrous, I enjoy my right to belief and the protections of freedom of religion - an Islamic theocracy though does not posess religious freedoms, atheism is high treason against God in this system. But in a free society you can be a Christian, Muslim, Jew, Satanist, Buddhist etc. and practice whatever beliefs you want to - but the price is that you cannot infringe upon other individuals rights and you must accept that you are not beyond repproach. Religious freedom does not exist in a state where competing religious texts are shredded upon entry into the country and conversion is punishable by death, they only exist when people can elect to believe what they want to believe without duress.

I refuse to respect religions who's tenents and believers proclaim suspension others individual rights or other ideas that are entirely contrary to what is expected within a free society - it may strike a chord that this just happens to include a lot of segments in various religions.

If somebody threatens my right to do something then I will damn well do it or at least defend the right of others to do it.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 03-27-2006, 12:09 PM   #398
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:22 AM
I have to agree with all_i_want here. I don't think we're talking about freedom of speech here. I think it's "license to offend". We've got to accept the fact that we live in a global community and have to respect others who may be different from us. You can't use a "one size fits all" definition of freedom. Someone I'm in contact with recently cancelled a trip to Turkey because of a demonstration in, I think it was Istanbul, possibly Ankara, I don't know because I didn't' see the article about the demonstration myself. I think she was overreacting in the case of Turkey, their prime minister made an eloquent plea for calm in the case of the cartoon controversy and I'm not worried about Turkey, I'm going. Most Muslims didn't want to kill the people responsible for the cartoons. They simply wanted to express their displeasure with peaceful demonstrations and letters to their newspapers and other things that do not affect the lives of anyone else.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 03-27-2006, 12:19 PM   #399
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 12:22 AM
You are turning Freedom of Speech from a personal freedom to a negative covenant (much like CC&R's). A right exists, but everyone has the right to stop you if it is deemed offensive.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 03-27-2006, 01:10 PM   #400
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:22 AM
OK, there is freedom of speech, but it's not a universal norm. The problem here is that there is no universal norm of freedom of speech. What's freedom of speech for us is license to offend in part of our global community. Both sides went off the wall during the cartoon controversy. The Muslims who wanted blood were being brutes, not people. The people who circulated the cartoons all over Europe were using their definition of freedom of speech but to the Muslims it was license to offend and not freedom of speech. Both were assuming there's a universal norm in these matters. Well, there's not. If you're going to draw a picture of Mohammed with a bomb on his head, that's going to offend Muslims. They have the right to have peaceful demonstrations and letters in their newspapers. If one insists on offending Muslims you've got to respect their right to peaceful and reasonable protests at the very least.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 03-27-2006, 01:13 PM   #401
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 12:22 AM
I don't think you can declare the intent of the speaker based on the response of the hearer.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 03-27-2006, 01:45 PM   #402
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:22 AM
OK, what was the intent of publishing the cartoons in numerous newspapers? The people that printed the cartoons all over Europe knew that they were doing something that offended Muslims. If they didn't know that, they had a heck of a wake-up call. Now that they know they offended Muslims, I don't think they should print this stuff. If they don't care that they offended Muslims, I have a problem with that. It's about like saying that I have a right to take a pig with me to Turkey. Pigs are unclean in Muslim countries. They believe that they can't go to Paradise if they've touched a pig. Do I have the right to take a pig to Turkey? No. It's a secular state and they guarantee religious freedom, but I have to respect the Muslim sensibilities of my hosts. What's freedom to one person is insult or uncleanliness on the part of other members of the global community. You've got to take the whole situation into consideration, not just one side's.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 03-27-2006, 02:15 PM   #403
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:22 AM
Te expand on my point, I think the Europeans went overboard with the cartoons because they didn't show any respect for the Muslims. If they don't show respect for the feelings of the Muslim people, they have to accept the consequences. I'm not talking about burning flags, destroying embassies, or killing people. That was totally unacceptable. The fact of the matter is that the Muslims were offended, and they have a right to not be offended. The Europeans insisted on having their rights at the expense of the Muslim community. If we are indeed a global society than we have to accomodate each other.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 03-27-2006, 03:13 PM   #404
Refugee
 
all_i_want's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,180
Local Time: 11:22 AM
i am being awfully free with analogies today, but here's another one: lets say youre at a dinner table, then you stand up and spit on the table. this isnt forbidden, you are free to engage in such activity. yet, does that make it ok to do so? so, now by doing that you have disgusted your guests and ruined the meal. congrads though, youve exercised your freedom to the very end. doing offensive things just because you CAN is not FINE, and doing them in the name of freedom is even more stomach-turning than the act itself.

though, wouldnt it be nice if there was no society? you would be able piss and spit anywhere! oh freedom...
__________________
all_i_want is offline  
Old 03-27-2006, 03:34 PM   #405
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 08:22 AM
Very good analogy all_i_want. I completely agree.
__________________

__________________
verte76 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 03:22 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