Kuwaitis call for boycott of Danish goods

[A_Wanderer]

And that goal proved the hypothesis, if there wasn't this level of outrage and demands for censorship then those who say that these community leaders are against free speech would be lying.

 

[A_Wanderer]

"The modern, secular society is rejected by some Muslims. They demand a special position, insisting on special consideration of their own religious feelings. It is incompatible with temporal democracy and freedom of speech, where you must be ready to put up with insults, mockery and ridicule. It is certainly not always equally attractive and nice to look at, and it does not mean that religious feelings should be made fun of at any price, but that is less important in this context. [...] we are on our way to a slippery slope where no-one can tell how the self-censorship will end. That is why Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten has invited members of the Danish editorial cartoonists union to draw Muhammad as they see him. [...

Jyllands-Posten is not the Christian Magazine.

Also the Islamic Society of Denmark brought fake cartoons aroung the Middle East to stir the pot and attributed them to the Danish paper.

 

[yolland]

( ^ re: first post above)

Yes, fair enough, I'll agree to that. But I'm enough of a prudent diplomat/brainwashed apologist, whichever you prefer, to question whether they'll achieve anything substantive in the long run for having forced that reaction.

Yes, I knew about the fakes.

 

[A_Wanderer]

Free speech gets dismantled piece by piece and we have to know the margins - be it cartoons of Mohammed or Bush is exterminating Muslims at the behest of the Likudnik neo-con fascists with his war for zionism protest banners. The merit of the speech is irrelevent, if people pay attention is irrelevent but making the statements and not facing government dissapearence or death threats is relevent and those freedoms should be defended at every turn.

I think exactly the same thing about the South Australian attorney general trying to shut down a white supremacist website that advocates race hate. It is disgusting speech to be sure, but if those Nazi's can spew their bile then I think that the rest of us can be sure that our speech is also protected. Same goes to the shit being peddled out of the Brunswick mosque in Melbourne.

 

[yolland]

Yeah, I know, but I'm just not confident deeming those situations equivalent to this. Offensive speech as spontaneous expression of already existing prejudices is one thing. But planned offensive speech as social engineering project of sorts, which to me is what that statement of purpose reads like--I am just not so sure.

We're probably just going in circles at this point, though. I fully respect and appreciate your perspective, it's just I don't share your conviction that we must never pause to question the motives. Not advocating censorship--just skepticism.

Ironically, I fear Jyllands-Posten's apology (or expression of regret, whichever; how different are those words in Danish?) may have undercut their original intent, anyways.

 

[A_Wanderer]

I see the use of the blood libel and anti-Jewish propaganda by Arab governments as a form of social control. Directing hatred against the "zionist entity" is a useful means of preventing dissent against the regimes. On that level I differentiate it. But it is relevent when Arab governments come to the table with boycotts and condemnation against countries because of the publications in an independent paper.

I am not saying that we shouldn't question motive, the motive here was to ilicit a response to test a hypothesis. One that deals with the self censorship that has been recognised since at least 1989 and that has only grown since then. The moves towards what are essentially blasphemy laws in the western world are so very retrograde and I think that this sort of agitation can help people see the true nature of it's supporters.

They apologised for offence caused and not publishing the cartoons. I think that the apology is disengenous and they shouldn't have given it. I would just issue a statement affirming the value of free speech and the need for it to be preserved.

 

[A_Wanderer]

It seems that some sanity still exists

The government has suffered two shock defeats over attempts to overturn Lords changes to the controversial Racial and Religious Hatred Bill.

In a blow to Tony Blair's authority, MPs voted by 288 votes to 278 to back a key Lords amendment to the bill, which targets incitement to religious hatred.

The prime minister voted in the first division but not in the second, which was lost by one vote.

Home Secretary Charles Clarke told MPs the bill would now become law.

Mr Clarke claimed what had happened had been "a purely political act" by Tories, Lib Dems and members of his own side to defeat the government, rather than a genuine consideration of the issues in the bill.

The bill was aimed at extending the concept of the UK's race hate laws to cover belief but critics said ministers' proposals would have made it too wide-reaching.

link

Now to bring some of that common sense down to the arse end of the world.

 

[nbcrusader]

French and German papers run Danish Islam cartoons

PARIS (Reuters) - Newspapers in France and Germany reprinted Danish caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed on Wednesday, saying press freedom was more important than the protests and boycotts the cartoons have sparked across the Muslim world.

The Danish embassy in Damascus was evacuated after a bomb threat that turned out to be a hoax and Syria recalled its ambassador from Denmark in protest against the cartoons, one of which shows the Prophet Mohammed wearing a turban shaped like a bomb.

In Copenhagen, security police met Islamic leaders in a bid to calm reactions there. Muslims consider images of prophets distasteful and caricatures blasphemous.

Perhaps the rest of the world can reprint the cartoons and the boycott will become global.

 

[Justin24]

Does anyone have a link or can post the Cartoons that the muslims are so mad about.

 

[deep]

see below \/

 

[deep]

link here

 

[Justin24]

I don't see anything wrong with that. I see it as Islam Exploding in to something it should not, which is falsehood thanks to extremests.

 

[deep]

and some people might not see anything wrong with naked pictures of your sister


you might be outraged
and others might say
"I don't see anything wrong with that."

 

[Justin24]

The point is People get so easily offended by things. Like I said many times, listen to this Carlos Mencia who is a comdedian and how he talks about people being wimps today and whine and bitch about eveything.

 

[Justin24]

I dont have a sister. So

 

[deep]

I suppose you have a mother.

Wanna see some pictures?

 

[Justin24]

No, but I am sure lots of us want to see pictures of your mom.

(dont bring mothers into this)

 

[deep]

so some things are out of bounds to you?

 

[Justin24]

Why bring up something about Mothers when the discussion is about a fucking political cartoon. I am sure you laugh if they did some thing like that against bush.

 

[deep]

Mohammed is not a politician.

There are lots of cartoons of BinLaden, Hamass leaders, and Saudis, etc.

You hold your mother sacred

Moslems hold Mohammed sacred.

 

[nbcrusader]

I'm not sure we do well as a nation with treating sacred matters with respect and dignity.

 

[Justin24]

Mohammed was like a politician of his time. Dictating to the masses,

 

[randhail]

Mohammed was like a politician of his time. Dictating to the masses,

Couldn't you say that about Jesus as well?

 

[Justin24]

yes, and both religons take it really far. And since we have free speech. Christians go out and protest and complain when their being offended. Which these muslims are doing, but then there are some who say death to anyone that offends Mohammed. Mohammed was a pawn of god to spread his word like Jesus. Although Christians belive Jesus is the Son of God.

 

[deep]

I think most of you can gather about my personal beliefs on religions.

That aside, I believe many are just using this as an opportunity to take a whack at Moslems.

Their belief is no images, likeness, of any kind of Mohammed.

To print cartoons, in derogatory portrayals, is only intended to offend.

To apply our opinions of what is reasonable is hypocritical
or just ignorant of a basic understanding of Moslem beliefs.

 

[nbcrusader]

Couldn't you say that about Jesus as well?

Perhaps in a very abstract way.

As for how follower should interact with society, Jesus never spoke about overturning the established government. Mohammed, on the other hand, did lead raiding parties to take over the cities of Mecca and Medina.

 

[nbcrusader]

To apply our opinions of what is reasonable is hypocritical
or just ignorant of a basic understanding of Moslem beliefs.

That is a fair statement.

Do you think we should extend respect and dignity to the followers of other religions as well?

 

[randhail]

Perhaps in a very abstract way.

As for how follower should interact with society, Jesus never spoke about overturning the established government. Mohammed, on the other hand, did lead raiding parties to take over the cities of Mecca and Medina.

I was unaware about Mohammed leading raiding parties and after a couple minutes I realized Jesus wasn't exactly dictating to the masses.

Mark that up as another bad example by randhail!

 

[Justin24]

http://www.digitalsword.co.uk/truthaboutislam.htm

 

[Justin24]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad