Slashdot Mirror
Danish, Western Websites Under Attack
caese writes "The BBC is reporting that almost 900 Danish websites have been defaced by crackers angry about the recent controversy over cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad. From the article: 'What is extraordinary for this Danish case is the speed in which the community united'. Another 1600 or so Western websites have been defaced by the same group. The defacements have ranged from condemnation of the cartoons to outright calls for violence."
If they start defacing websites for just a cartoon, imagine what they will do if it was a offending movie/act: take whole servers and backbones down? Oh the horror.
Serious note: Lets take a look at this situation.
Attack: Cartoon
Defense: Death threats, burn down buildings, deface websites, protests, and the list goes on.
Conclusion: Overkill?
Why can't they deface web pages out of boredom and bloody mindedness like normal people.
I wonder how long it'll be we're just all at war...seems to be what they want.
I mean seriously, if a supermarket had a sale on steak and put up cartoons of Vishnu, you wouldn't see Hindus violently protesting. Neither if they had a sale on pork and put cartoons in the window of YHWH.
People need to take a serious chill pill...
"Christ what a design! I could eat a handful of iron filings and PUKE a better emergency pump than that!"
These are not worth fighting over.
Trolling is a art,
next on your list:
http://www.drawmohammed.com/
But Islam is a relgion of Peace, remember?
They get angry over a cartoon but when they burn an American Flag it is OK.
Go figure.
Q: How do you know your religion is the wrong one?
A: When you riot because of a one panel cartoon.
Iran will get nukes, they will nuke Israel, Israel will nuke them and then it'll all end in tears, you hear me now. In a few years time you'll know I was right. When I was a lad....
cracker, honkey, snow-white or any other racial stereotype that these "jigs" want to refer to me as. I'm a human being. Gosh, get some sensitivity training.
That has the Muhammed with a bomb in his turban, a molitav cocktail in his hand and a machine gun slung over his back, with a crazed expression saying "That will teach them not to depict me and my followers as violent and intolerant.". In the backround there should be an embassy burning and lots of burning pieces of paper flying around with the words 'defaced website' on them.
For good measure, we could have a cartoon of Jesus using thumbscrews or having sex or something too. I'd host it. I think those cartoons would make an excellent worldwide protest against this sort of idiotic behavior.
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
The muslim world HAS to learn to play nicely with the rest of the world or face becoming marginalized. There's only so many times people can read about young girls being gang raped to punish their brother or young girls being forced to stay inside a burning building because they don't have their headgear on... not to mention all of the totally innocent contractors, journalists and students that are murdered for doing their job or even going to school. Where are the women's rights groups?!?!? Where are the "peaceful" muslims?
ConsultingFair.com
It used to be possible to defend Islam to the right wingers in this country (USA) by saying that the terrorism and violence were coming from a relatively tiny number of the practicers of that faith with a very screwed up idea of what that faith meant. No more. Between the raging violence in France and the widespread violence and death threats coming from these cartoons, who can reasonably defend Islam as nonviolent any more?
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
Well, time to start the popcorn since I can't do much but watch. [1] Don't worry -- I won't let the tinfoil hat mess up the microwave popcorn.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
whats up with 'community united'? 'degenerate asshats congealed' would be more appropriate.
Please sign petition to restore sanity to our banking system!!!
http://financialpetition.org/
So they're getting all bent out of shape about a comic depicting them as violent and what do they do to protest the comic? They get violent, start riots and deface things.
Seems a bit counter-productive to me.
Cartoon is published that accuses my religion of supporting terrorism and violence.
I protest that characterization by calling for or comitting acts of terrorism and violence, both in the real world, and on the internet.
Nope, no hypocrisy here!
Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
obviously we can say these nutjobs are not in their right mind. What should the jewish people do when they see a cartoon of Sharon eating a muslim baby? Should they nuke all countries that harbor the cartoon writers?
... well you guessed it muhammad http://www.tshirthell.com/muhammad.htm
Here's a link to one of my fav satire sites... this week poking fun at
it's funny, it's offensive, it's great
The cartoons were published in September, protests happened in the last couple of weeks. Speed? Not much. What is more astonishing is the extent to which muslims have been shown to be prone to manipulation (on par or worse than the manipulation seen in the US post-9/11). I suppose that is the inherent power of mass religion, "the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions."
...it's a good thing it's not fundamentalist Christians doing the rioting.
That would be indefensible by the media.
Hey, come to think of it, there really isn't a lot of that rioting and setting-things-ablaze-for-days thing at all here in The West. Why d'you suppose that is?
g'head, g'head, discuss this amongst yourselves...
...is furthering the views that many people already hold: that Muslisms are freedom hating terrorists. How many people do you think are looking at this situation now and saying to themselves "Maybe the cartoonist's depicted opinion of Islam isn't that far off reom reality?" I'm not saying it is, but these violent protests do nothing except strengthen these beliefs.
This has become quite the shitstorm. Just because you can say something, doesn't mean it's always the best idea to say certain things. There's certains things like tact, compassion, etc. This whole situation is unfortunate though.
I hate sigs.
You find out the cartoons have already been circulating widely in the muslims world during height of ramadan in Oct 05. Next, you find out a Danish Immam invader added more cartoons to the bunch. Then you find out the Danes will head the security council in the near future. What makes it even more funny, is your own western papers ( not knowing the cartoons were circulated in the islamic world without riots ) then turn around and censor the cartoons to the american public -- out of multicultural sensitivity.
-----
The Ranting Sandmonkey, an Egyptian blog, illustrates just how bogus the MSM refusal to discuss the Danish cartoons "out of respect for Islam" is:
Freedom For Egyptians reminded me why the cartoons looked so familiar to me: they were actually printed in the Egyptian Newspaper Al Fagr back in October 2005. I repeat, October 2005, during Ramadan, for all the egyptian muslim population to see, and not a single squeak of outrage was present. Al Fagr isn't a small newspaper either: it has respectable circulation in Egypt, since it's helmed by known Journalist Adel Hamoudah. Looking around in my house I found the copy of the newspaper, so I decided to scan it and present to all of you to see.
------
'The past as prologue'
http://fallbackbelmont.blogspot.com/
The cartoons were published in Egypt, and there was no problem:
y cott-egypt.html
http://egyptiansandmonkey.blogspot.com/2006/02/bo
Anyone heard about this? Looks like there is a double-standard.
http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_
Anyone else find it troubling that so many sites out there are vulnerable to such attacks?
There's no genuine anger about the cartoons. They were published 6 months ago.
The cartoons are just an excuse. The cartoon riots are about rioting, not about cartoons. Rioters riot for fun and profit. Protests are arranged to gain political power for the people arranging them.
Web sites are defaced for the same reason bricks are thrown through windows. It's the same reason Reginald Denny was beat up. It's a combination of hate and the idea that "we can get away with it this time".
I advise not enabling the rioters and web-page defacers by giving them what they want: attention, concessions, etc.
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/698
for the cartoons
I love the irony of the calls for violence against political cartoons, several of which, ya know...imply things about Islam and violence...
So far, said Mr Preatoni, there was little evidence that western hacker groups were taking any action in retaliation for the Islamic attacks.
Zombie Tron has risen from the dead to wreak vengence on those using his name, and retaliate for the attacks...
Does this justifies the cartoons? Why not trying being more considerate about other's feelings.
Now don't tell me that we dont know that religion has always been a volatile issue. Almost everytime the communal riots have happened, it has started with someone's "casual" remarks (like irresponsible humour).
... then they could protest with dialog, constructive articles, and some of their own cartoons of the West instead of obnoxious, self-destructive, and STUPID violence.
It is hypocritical to attack others when you do not want them to attack you.
What do the owners of these websites have to do with this entire controversy?
Most of them - NOTHING.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
..that to the way Hindus reacted when pictures of Hindu Gods were depicted on toilet seats (in UK), on footwear and on bikini wear! They had silent (non-violent) protests. Cowards? no, matured!
"The Religion of Peace(TM) strikes again!"
We all remember the China pilot arrest thing right? And the ensuing hackfest?
Mark my words, it's starting again. This time is going to be bigger though. It's going to make that war look like nothing more than a crapflood!
I haven't been this excited since I last went out in public!!!
Maybe the pen really is mighier than the sword...
Either way, these demonstrations are ridiculous. The fact that individuals are actively protesting freedom of speech in this day and age completely boggles my mind.
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
I certainly respect the Muslims who feel offended, but if they are going to live in a liberal democracy, they're going to have to just accept the fact that they're going to be offended.
I'm agnostic. I get offended when my state's motto is "With God, all things are possible". I don't like hearing "God Bless America" every time George Bush opens his mouth. I do understand I live in a country with religious freedom, and I'm just going to have to take it. If I can't take it anymore, I'll move to a country that supresses religious liberties.
Many of the European Muslims think they can get the good benefits of a liberal democracy (decent jobs, market-based economy), while asking for special status for their religious beliefs. Someone needs to tell them part of living in a liberal democracy is having thick skin.
..that the cartoonist was none other than Salman Rushdie, who by no small effort had his own, albiet "plastic" defacement - and thus caused what will later be known as "The Great 2006 Defacement of the Internet and the rise of the great Middle Eastern Nations against the cartoons of the wicked west."
Fundamentalist Reactionaries vowed that they will never eat Apple Danish again.
"So far, said Mr Preatoni, there was little evidence that western hacker groups were taking any action in retaliation for the Islamic attacks."
Slacker westerners! Get off your mothers couch and go wag a digital war!
Kidding!
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
Here I though Religion would have been abolished by now. Those Pesky humans!
can't wait for the US to declare that the after-life is supporting terrorism and therefore should be destroyed ... or at least liberated ... blowed-up either way.
This just goes to show that Muslims (or for that matter, anyone what takes religion too seriously) have no sense of humor. The slightest perceived insult, or slight, and they go off on a killing spree.
Stupid sods. I'm Danish, you want a pice of me? Bring it on. We Danes are not afraid of anyone.
So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
I look forward to the Retaliation by western hackers... this could be quite entertaining
I'd be interested in stats on what OS and web services these sites were running.
Because of the relative ease they seemed to be cracked into, I'm assuming they were Windows boxes with IIS... but I figured that part of the world was heavy on Linux... so I'm confused...
Btw, Mohamed would certainly be against this kind of vandalism.
I thought these cartoons were first published back in September. It's surprising that it only took four months for people to start whacking websites?
Just junk food for thought...
Is it just me or is the real story here how 900 websites managed to have lax security? That really scares me.
I had this this freindly messeage displayed on a danish website a few days ago, (I know very outdated version of phpbb)
... for sarcastic coment is priceless !
I shall go turn my blog into a defacement parody now.
Maybe we deserve this world ?
You know, the usual.
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
And how this all got started was that someone got a pea into his nose, because pictures of Muhammed were printed. How did this person know what Muhammed looks like in the first place, anyone?
http://www.loljesus.com/
Come on, where's the riot?
The issue about Islamic fundamentalism (and fundamentalism in general) is that it promotes simple responses to simple stimuli. Hypocrisy is simply beyond most of these people to comprehend. Worse, fundamentalists actively seek to ignore higher-level representations. Intelligent Design is about the appearance of adopting scientific thought while actively attempting to shut it down. Islamic militants consistently praise Islam as a religion of peace while threatening others, often taking out their wrath on people who do not have anything to do with the situation. Why? No higher-order reasoning.
Bel, the mostly sane.. "Of course I can't see anything! I'm standing on the shoulders of idiots." -- Me
I'm getting sick of all the "They're only cartoons! feckin ragheads" comments, so:
With regards to the whole cartoons/muslim thing, lets be fair here. I fully expect that if the press made a public showing of doing something extremely disrespectful against the christians (wiping our asses on pages of the bible maybe? raping blow up jesus dolls?), the christians would be damn upset too, or at least the christians that still believe in christ. What? Cartoons are different from bibles and blow up dolls? Don't assume that just because it's not disrespectful to you that it isn't disrespectful to anyone else...
Once we've gotten a large group of people to the "being upset" stage, it's for the most part ringleaders who keep urging the masses to start burning embassies down and the like. Don't feel smug, because America and to a lesser degree the rest of us western countries had the same experiance after the twin towers. "My god we've been attacked by terrorists! Lets go bomb the first country our beloved leaders point us in the direction of".
Should innocent websites be caught in the crossfire and defaced because of this mess? No, but then again a lot of westerners could do with quitting the attitude of "Let's go piss off the ragheads! We can turn around and say that they're only cartoons afterwards." Overall this mess isn't the fault of any one side - it's everyone adding fuel to the fire.
Don't take the above poster too seriously. He doesn't.
I dont care if they deface our website, we got backup.. The real issue is that 3 or more of our embassys have been attacked, and one of them burned down to the ground.
If those cartoons were published in the US or a other big country, they would not have dared to react like this.
I'm just wondering if anybody here has even attempted to understand the other side's argument. Now it's clear that a violent repsonse to the cartoons is way way out of proporation, and somebody is inflaming the situation. But anger seems justified to me.
Basically, just take a look at how Moslims are being treated in Europe. It's bad. It may seem strange to us when they ask a government to do something about what a paper publishes. Freedom of the press and all that. Except the press is not totally free. Many European countries have hate speech laws. Anti-semitic speech; not allowed. Somebody publishes an irreverant version of the last supper? Catholic church succesfully sues. So if Moslims ask the governments to do something about the papers, they're seeking equal treatment. Why do Christians and Jews get protection, but they don't?
Then there's laws that intefere with their freedom of expression and religion. French law that bans wearing religious apparel in schools, when Islam is the only religion that strict about apparel. Countries considering banning burkas, which only Islam uses.
So yeah, these actions are way way out of proportion, but consider the source. Moslims see Europe as being hostile to their religion. This cartoon is not the first insult to them, and nor are these insults coming from just some newspaper. To them, it seems as if the governments of Europe are against them. Who wouldn't be angry about that?
I am no expert but it seems quite clear that those that are protesting so profusely think differently. While most of us have grown up with "freedom of the press" no matter how inane, they have not. Most of the people that are rioting in the street have grown up in a society in which there was no freedom of the press, non-approved thought was discouraged and religion was forced down your throat in order to control the masses living in squalid conditions.
My point is that we find it quite hypocritical to object to the cartoons by acting in the same exact way the satirical cartoon was intending. They do not see any problem with it. This won't change over night or within a decade. It will require a generation or two of exposure to alternate thought, religion, points of view etc before this crap stops.
To respond to a previous poster, there are "peaceful" muslims out there that are calling for calm but they are being drowned out by those that want the violence to escalate.
B O R I N G
You'll get more attention for burning 'American Flag' onto CD than for burning an actual American flag!
Since the liberal attitudes of Europeans toward religious tolerance are fading, the Muslim world has a serious problem. Without any friends in the US, Europe, or China, the Muslim world as a whole will be held in even less regard. Muslims of all stripes will become more marginalized, and they will become more violent as a result.
Unless someone comes forward to break the cycle, Muslims are running the risk of making themselves extinct.
sig?
Salt Lake city, Utah USA, Feb. 6 -- Mormon anger over Belgian cartoons that satirized the Prophet Joseph Smith continued to swell across the American East and elsewhere in the State of Utah on Monday, turning silly in Salt lake city, where at least five protesters Cried and more than a dozen police officers and protesters were Bored.
."
:Said Director of Freedom to draw stuff , Tobias Bunfun
UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan expressed alarm about the riots and urged restraint. But Biscuit giant Utah, which is reviewing trade ties with countries that published the cartoons, vowed to respond to "an anti-Mormon and Mormophobic Meanies
Some of the cartoons depict Smith as a Saxophonist. One image depicts the prophet wearing a Stetson shaped as a boob with an erect nipple.The other image Displays The Prophet wearing special Mormon Magic Diapers
Ministers from 17 Mormon cities on Tuesday urged Belgium's government to punish the newspaper for what they described as an "offence to Mormon".
Reporters Without Borders said the reaction in the Mormon world "betrays a lack of understanding" of press freedom as "an essential accomplishment of piss taking."
It is OK for Mormon Newspapers to depict Cartoons of Belgians eating Polish Sausage , but when a Belgian draws an Image about Joseph Smith It becomes an international crisis
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
Bottom line is these 14th century nitwits armed with modern technology are a danger to everyone for their ease of manipulation and lack of reason when it comes to anything remotely regarding Islam.
I really doubt Moslems are going to survive in their form for another 50 years. They either blunt themselves (as Christians did) or they're eliminated just like every other non-viable belief system. (Shakers, zoarastrians, et al)
You better watch out, there may be dogs about . .
Islam = Nazism
Discuss.
prediction: mushroom cloulds over Iran.
Can't wait until we take to gloves off with radical Islam
Dad brings his daughter to the place where the world trade center was in 2054.. Dad: This is there the muslims flew planes into the world trade center buildings. Daughter: Dad..whats a muslim? My point is: The net effect of this violence and rage over cartoons will lead to their own destruction.
Perhaps I'm being a nut job conspiracy theorist type here but I could easily see this being one of the things that starts a major, perhaps world, war between primarily the middle east and the west. There has been a great deal of tension between these two groups for a long time which isn't helped by the middle east having something the west wants badly (oil).
I think the general feeling of the west is that the middle east is somewhere that we unfortunately have to deal with because they have oil. No sane person is really willing to go to war over oil yet because the middle east is playing ball with us. It isn't a happy relationship but one that both parties are happy enough to just live with.
A few gangs of thugs smashing up the local town centre and making the majority of the local populace afraid is likely to lead to serious negative feelings towards anyone that looks like they might be involved with that group. Once that negative feeling is in place it's hard to get rid of and it becomes easy to then convince the populace that it is time to invade. Lets face it that's what Bush and Blair want. A nice little crusade into the middle east.
I'm not saying that this has been put together by people in black helicopters - I'm sure the people stirring up problems are really just that stupid - but it's damn convenient if your long term plan is to invade the middle east.
I used to have a better sig but it broke.
(Disclaimer: I am politically "liberal", pro-gay-rights, pro-choice, etc.)
ATTENTION, MUSLIM PROTESTERS: This is the difference between Americans and yourselves. When Americans get mad, they yell and make lots of noise, and sometimes vote in new politicians. When Muslim fundamentalists get mad, they break shit and set things on fire.
Goodness knows I have no end of contempt for my countrymen, but the people protesting these cartoons could learn a thing or three from Joe Average American-- and that's sad, if not outright pathetic.
It's also, as many have pointed out, incredibly ironic that in response to a cartoon of Mohammed wearing a bomb for a turban, you have reacted with... well... violence!
I hereby extend an invitation to the Muslim world, from all Americans ("liberal", "conservative", and everything in between), to wake up, smell the coffee, and join the second millenium. Maybe even the third.
I'm a Jew. If Jewish groups were setting fire to things in response to cartoons making fun of the Holocaust, Jews worldwide would be jumping at the opportunity to distance themselves from the carnage and condemn the violence. Where's the outrage from Muslim world leaders?
With spending like this, exactly what are "conservatives" conserving?
It's true! Death to the Cathy Infidels!
Now I gotta wipe up coffee
It's not because cartoons were published depicting Mohammed as a terrorist, it's because cartoons were published. This is something that's completely forbidden in their Religion.
It doesn't matter if they depicted Mohammed as a peace-loving hippie, the reaction would have probably been the same.
Another big factor was the spread of fabricated cartoons and the incitement of violence through rumours spread via sms messages.
And of course, the fact that a few years ago Jyllands-Posten rejected Jesus cartoons on the grounds that their readers would find them offensive.
When even the peaceful protestors are chanting things like "Death to America, Death to Israel", is it painfully obvious that this is really NOT about religion. These people (and I use the term as a LARGE generalization) have so much repressed anger about their perceived state of the world that they will look for any slight as an excuse to react violently. I think is is further compounded by the fact that there is still a large population of uneducated, poor Muslims who are much like poor, uneducated Christians in the US - they have twisted their respective religions around to justify whatever moronic behavior they truly desire (like little children justifying their actions). And they will listen to anyone who gets on their soapbox and tells them to light the torches. But it is still VERY distressing that these pseudo-Muslims in particular have such a blatant disregard for human life, including their own. Things seem to be really sliding downhill...
the problem with this situation is that it feeds extremists, western and muslim. the tragedy of the commons is that one j***off can hijack a forum and ruin it for everyone else. if the forum in question is freedom of expression on the world stage, we have western and muslim extremists loudly and belligerently clearing the room of all the moderate quiet reasonable voices, western or muslim.
the real tragedy for us all is that moderate voices are not driving the situation anymore, extremist voices are. the polarization in the world feeds their agenda. and frankly, i don't see how moderate voices can get a handle on things again.
it's as if the slashdot trolls rose up with +1 insightful and +1 interesting and +1 funny everywhere, and drowned out all reasonable discussion. what would be the result? reasonable discussion would die on slashdot, and reasonable people would leave slashdot.
that is exactly what is happening in the world today. depressing, and i don't know how moderates are supposed to gain the upper hand again. it's doubly depressing because extremist voices only wind up with one certain end: violence. lots of dead who didn't deserve to die, muslim and western. that's the end game here, and i don't think anyone knows how to reverse the tragedy of the commons going on now on the world stage.
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/ArabCartoons.htm
Hypocrisy? Yes.
muslims threatening violence because the subtext of a thougtless cartoon is accusing them of being a violent people. i'm not trying to make a generalization here saying all muslims are violent, but those who do make generalizations might be a bit confused by the strong and threatening response. it's poor judgement defending yourself by committing the crime of which you've been accused. that being said i realize that this is an emotional response, and not one that was particularly thought out. i just feel that this world would be a better place if we instilled a sense of irony, and a disgust of hypocrisy in our children. this whole thing is akin pro-lifers murdering doctors.
Jerry = "I guess i'll just have to develop a sence of humor then"
I wonder if the media has an agenda here?
... The best way of manipulating the public is to supress your reasonable opponents and exaggerate the unreasonable opponents. It's a subtle variation on a straw-man argument. If the only people the public sees oppose you are lunatics, it makes it much easier for them to believe yours is the only reasonable course of action. ..
See this comment made earlier today:
That particularly rung true to me because I like to digest information in quick hits. I like to check out the summaries of news items and if something is interesting, hear some commentary on it and dig a little deeper.
If all the headlines are "Muslims have taken hostages in..." or "A radical Islamic group exploded...", then people become conditioned to believe that Muslims and Islam are violent when they really aren't.
In a thread a while back, someone made a fantastic observation about Africa. The general premise was that most people still think that the entire continent of Africa is nothing more than corrupt leaders and starving children and this viewpoint was partly blamed on the media and mostly blamed on the influx and inundation of "Save the children" commericals in the 1990s.
parent comment withdrawn; I just reread the post I responded to and realized I'm a complete moron.
You better watch out, there may be dogs about . .
Come on mods, this is funny!
Anyone want to draw the Prophet Mohammed sitting at a computer running nmap?
1) Draw cartoon, publish
2) Angry mobs burn take to streets burning stuff
3) ???
4) Prophet!!!
There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.
Thats fine by me. We in the west simply don't care about your silly protests over cartoons. The only destabilizing force in the middle east is the middle easterners themselves...
People who can't permit "Free Speech" and call for violence must have unlimited and unrelentless violence visited upon them. If the West Kowtows to these Fuckers it is the end of our civilization. Fuck religious zealots (and that includes the Christians, Jews, Hindus, or whatever the fuck other nutcases are out there). We have a duty to uphold the rights of free speech or watch our civilization crumble in ignorance.
Over-the-top Response Guy! Giving "Over-the-Top Responses" since 1970.
Mobs are traditionally anonymous ways to conduct agressive protests. Take Slashdot trolls for example, they feel empowered by their AC status and like minded loser buddies and lash out against the world by telling geeks about Natalie Portman being naked and petrified with hot grits. Muslim countries don't have democracies and you can be locked away for protesting something. There's a lot of mis-education and anger there, so when a chance to join an anonymous mob comes up, it doesn't really matter what the reason for the mob is, it's just time to vent like everyone else is doing. In the west we are lucky, we still have the "letter to the editor" and Slashdot to vent our anger on. Some people only have western embassies to leave their mark on without going to jail after.
I'm not saying it's a good thing they burn stuff that isn't theirs, but I'm saying it's understandable, and it's not because they are savages, it's because thir society is different and less developed.
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
This cartoons were published in September, but just until recently they "protested" (if you can call using violent behaviour a protest).
I wonder if this has anything to do with the fact that IRAN is being taken to the UN Security Council???
I can't say anything about people from IRAN...All I can say is that if more people were like their president we already would have ended the World
It's never too late to stop doing something wrong, or to start doing something right.
Worse, fundamentalists actively seek to ignore higher-level representations. Intelligent Design is about the appearance of adopting scientific thought while actively attempting to shut it down.
So as you attack "fundamentalists" for "ignor[ing] higher-level representations," you make a completely wrong generalization about Intelligent Design. I don't know any ID people who are attempting to "shut down [scientific thought]." Sounds like you have an extremely simplistic understanding of ID to me, if you can call that an "understanding." Wait. Or maybe you are a fundamentalist who attacks other fundamentalists for their simplistic reasoning, using simplistic reasoning. Then this would make more sense.
But, think back a few months, when al jazeera commented how bush was a murderer, and people here were cheering on the crackers who defaced that site.
Same situation, but now you're on the other side.
Changa hates change.
why is everybody surprised by this? you'd think that people would realise after all this time that islam is fucked up, but no that would be wrong, OMG NO , WE NEED RELIGIOUS RIGHTS! RELIGIOUS RIGHTS! yeah and while you chew on that bs, let us see how many more poeple will die because of it or any other religion, and of course saying that makes me a troll. funny world we live in.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The Washington Post published one that, while not exactly what you're requesting, is in the same gist:
i mages/Toles/c_02072006_520.gif
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/opinion/ssi/
Oh Noes: a double standard!!!
I'm sure as soon as the hypocracy of their building-burning is sarcastically pointed out to them, the mob will disperse...
I'd bet that way more than 900 have lax security.
Lame link to some study
Man, you really need that seminar!
Its about mass at-will web site defacement. My question would be about how all these sites were defaced so easily and what can I learn from it to protect my own sites from these tactics.
Is Danish web security so poor that anyone can hack into their sites? Is it being done to just one web server or multiple? What OS were they running and what was exploited? Details, we need details.
I don't care who is doing it or what they believe, all I care about is preventing it from happening to MY server. We can't let these people bring down the internet the next time they get offended. This issue seems much broader than offense and really an issue of web security. IMHO.
Do we necessarily _know_ that jihadist Muslims are doing the handiwork? Or could it be a particular Western government's lackeys who are trying to fan flames?
At any rate, has anyone investigated as to who is actually doing the defacing?
Steve Magruder, Metro Foodist
I love how everybody is PC on this calling these people not muslims, but muslim "fundamentalists". Well, looking at them in comparison muslims in western countries, perhaps they seem a fringe element. The reality is that there are a lot more muslims wanting to shut the Danish up over a silly cartoon than just a few wack-jobs.
The level of animosity in the comments modded up is astounding (though part of me shouldn't be surprised by the number of smug know it alls on /.). The cartoons were terribly offensive, both because they depicted the Prophet and because they depicted him as a terrorist.
Raised in the U.S., I think that Muslim countries were well within their rights to boycott Danish goods. They were well within their rights to protest. I think the violent protests went way too far, but (and for once I find my self in a vague uneasy agreement with the Bush admin); someone is using these cartoons for their own gain; more likely than not the Syrian and Iranian governments.
But you know it all Slashdotters are ready to jump all over all Muslims, or even all reigions, because a few uneducated people in third world countries are angry. I don't see why they would do more than protest (actually I do, but I think it's a stupid reason to protest when America's killing Iraqis left and right and stepping up the Iran rhetoric). But the Danish paper should have exercised more restraint (or not - I think the boycotts were what they deserved, I'm not sure if that's what they wanted). The cartoons don't offend me (or the idea of them, I toyed with the idea of googiling for them, but as a sunni, I don't care to look), but the callousness of the paper, of the Danish government, and of people like those commenting on Slashdot, really sicken me.
"There is no time, sir, at which ties do not matter," Jeeves, (Jeeves and the Impending Doom)
http://toronto.dose.ca/webx/Blogs/Live%20from%20Be irut/
"Beiruties, Muslim and Christian, gathered downtown to show unity and denounce the violence."
Did you hear that in the news, no? Guess because it does not feed into the notion of Muslims as savages.
The are huge number of Mullahs and ordinary Muslims denouncing the violence and the over reaction, but that does not sellpapers.
I, as every reasonable person, agree with the parent's comment.
Just imagine if after that retarded holocaust cartoon competition the iranians are holding, the israelis start burning iranian flags and shouting 'death to mohammedans', rioting every muslim country's embassy, defacing websites and so on. Wouldn't that be 100% the same pure stupidity that we see today on the other side?
Although many Muslims are upset about these cartoons for depicting Mohammed and for criticizing Islam, the reason they are so angry is becuase most countries in the area have state news agencies and so to many the cartoons are seen as an 'official' or majority opinion. The idea of a free press where an individuals's opinion is heard, especially a unique one, is unheard of. It is seen as an attack by all of the West, not just that cartoonist.
In the US and Europe, a cartoonist that does something offensive, say in this case South Park using Jesus in an 'offensive' way, results in comlaints to the network and/or the creators.
In the most of the Middle East, a cartoon (which seems to me to be criticizing Islam for being violent, ironically), is met with smoldering generic rage against not just the cartoonists, or the newspapers, or the country, but all western nations.
I am dissapointed in the crackers though. I would have thought that repressed people that had internet access would be a little more aware and less sheep-like than the unwashed masses that are usually manipulated by their rulers.
My favorite quote from a bbc article yesterday went something like this: "This is a test by western nations to see if Muslims are radical or not. Death to them and their newspapers." I wonder why they think we think they might be dangerous...
Oman is a perfect example of what a determined, hard-working people behind a good ruler can do. Very inspirational, if only the rest of the Mid-East could follow this example. It's one of the nicest countries anywhere, and I have been all over the US, Europe, and Asia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oman and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sultan_Qaboos
The 'Net is a waste of time, and that's exactly what's right about it. - William Gibson
If Danish cartoonists aren't free to express their thoughts, then Muslim hackers shouldn't be free to deface web sites.
Religious Fundamentalist ideological intolerance is incompatible with post-enlightenment western civilization. Whether it's Christian Fundamentalists, or Muslim Fundamentalists, of Scientology Fundamentalists, or Free Market Fundamentalists. All are a threat. What do we do with such threats? We let them speak. Because the power of their freedom lets them dig their own graves.
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
It's just like the L.A. Riots years back, just an excuse for a bunch of hate-filled thugs to raise hell. It's very sad and very stupid
dB Masters
from http://egyptiansandmonkey.blogspot.com/2006/02/bo
personally, I see the problem as being religion. I dont expect anyone to deny other people freedom based on their sexual orientation either, but you have that in the USA. If anything, I would say that the islamists are more ready enmasse for violence than the americans which let their governement handle the violence for them.
I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
Is anybody else here sick and tired of the razor-thin line we have to walk for these fundamentalists? Maybe being raised Catholic I just don't understand it, but when revelations finally surfaced that priests were molesting kids left and right I didn't feel the sudden urge to bomb or burn down a building .. not that it wasn't well known before but the black eye the catholic church received didn't spur anything like this (not 100% on that but am pretty sure). Can you imagine if a journalist did a full-blown expose on how these fundamentalists brainwash kids to blow themselves up and serve as human shields? Salman Rushdie's ordeal comes to mind ..
Since this debacle started, there's been talk in Europe about passing anti-"hate speech" laws forbidding the defamation of religion. This is a Bad Idea(TM).
The achilles' heel of liberalism (disclaimer: I consider myself one) is the idea that we must tolerate intolerance. The idea that we must coddle the beliefs of others, even when those beliefs pose a threat to the continued existence of Western liberalism. We're seeing it here, where Islam responds to criticism with violence, and we respond by trying harder to accommodate their culture. We see it here in the U.S., where fundamentalist Christianity is condemned for individual acts of intolerance, but their foundation of faith remains unquestioned, and publicly unquestionable.
There's a confusion between equality of individuals and equality of ideas. No one, from UFOlogists to holocaust deniers to religious fundamentalists, has the right to force others to treat their beliefs with kid gloves. In fact, if we have a better idea, we have a duty to promote it with the same tenacity as our intellectual opposition. Better ideas don't win by themselves. Good ideas like freedom of speech are constantly usurped by more virulent ideas, like fundamentalism and nationalism. Forward thinkers had better wake up to this fact, or they'll find themselves facing a new dark age that they helped usher in under the banner of tolerance of ideas.
Step into a huge movement. Don't Tread In Me.
Not opting for a diplomatic debate, I would agree they go extra lenghts over matters of religion, and never have a lighter vein if one was to joke on Muslims, which is contrary to how Hindus take things. But thats how it is.
Soon to be seen on many Muslim Websites, especially if they use ASP and MS SQL server (should teach them to use technology of the Great Satan (tm)).
Has anyone yet found out where the mussel men are getting all those virgins?
Inquiring minds wanna know.
Everything in the Universe sucks: It's the law!
All religions contain only circular references and as such, are eligible for garbage collection.
(Taken from my page. Seemed applicable since the indiscriminate labelling in this thread is just off the scale.)
Good and evil... right and wrong... even noble and dastardly... these are the social mileposts by which we measure ourselves and others.
In a rush to apply these labels, though, we often forget that these are not objective measurements. They are completely subjective, guided by our upbringing, our surroundings, our faith (or lack thereof), even our mood.
And when we seriously disagree with somebody elses viewpoint we often choose to label them "evil". One large, omnipresent example of this type of labelling occurred with the destruction of the World Trade Center.
It's difficult to rally people with a cry of, "Those people with different lives, values and backgrounds who felt it necessary to challenge us in a way that is foreign to our thinking must be dealt with in some fashion!"
Far more effective is the battle cry of, "The terrorists have engaged in evil acts, and must be hunted down and punished!"
Problem is, "evil" is an EXTREMELY subjective term. By many tenets of their upbringing and faith, these Muslims have every right to find the U.S. to be "evil", "decadent", even "doomed". By their morality, they are justified. They aren't wrong, because everything is a point of view. And I guarantee you that when they have their 8:00 a.m. morning meeting to discuss the agenda, the title on the page is not "Evil To Spread This Period". They firmly believe they are both "right" and "good".
There is no such thing as objective morality. There is no universal "good" or "evil". We choose to define these things the way we do because of who we are. But to expect the rest of the world - all 6 billion of us - to toe the line with respect to values is ridiculous.
I know the religious will claim that absolute "good" and "evil" exist. They'll also almost certainly believe that their particular religion is the source of these definitions. The problem is that religions are neither universal nor consistent within themselves. To declare ones own religion to be correct is to declare others to be incorrect. Many people will claim exactly that, though. To those people I have no response. There can be no meaningful discussion with somebody possessing complete, unshakeable faith. Such faith leaves no room for the idea that one might not be completely right.
But even within our own social sphere it's a big wash of grey. It's wrong to steal a stereo. It's not really wrong to steal bread when your child is starving - and no judge would sentence anybody for it. It's wrong to cheat on your fiance... unless he's a jerk and you're on board the Titanic and you meet a guy you dig - then it's romantic. It's wrong to kill. But it's not wrong to kill to defend your family. Everything is situational.
Western governments are big on tossing out the label of "evil" as an absolute. It's a useful tactic, employed by every government in wartime. The vilification of the enemy is practically a necessity. If the troops see the other side as thinking, feeling, fully-formed people, they will not kill them with the same expediency. Even more critical is the process of defining its own actions as "good", so that they do not come under scrutiny in the near term. After all, if we're "good" we shouldn't have to adjust our foreign policy (as an example).
We are a world at war. That has really only been brought home to the average North American in the last five years. And things are going to get worse before they get better.
But we can't expect to make any headway on peace through any means except by conquest unless we finally try to truly see both sides of each issue. And we can't do that until we stop painting everything in black and white. As long as we call a group "evil" we will never be able to see their side. It's a blinding mechanism.
Good and evil... right and wrong... judgments. Judgments that get in the way. These terms should only be used in measuring ourselves and our actions, because we are the only ones for whom these evaluations apply. As soon as you start evaluating others in this way, you are on extremely shaky ground.
If islam didn't have violence codified into it's literature.
But it does, and no amount of equivocation changes that.
And no, I'm not saying the same isn't true of Christianity. The difference is, literalism is alive and well in Islam, but virtually unheard of in other religions.
How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
My web site hosts one of the more offensive cartoons made in response to the rioters.
. jpg
http://unixclan.no-ip.org/~the1/muhammaddevareaux
Additionally, if you add an account for yourself, you can use scp to download a copy of Theo Van Gogh's film, Submission. He was murdered by a Moslem angry over its contents.
http://unixclan.net/
If anyone has a problem with my expression of free speech, they can try to hack me all they want, if they succeed, the content will be back up within a few days. Moreover, it is already available in hundreds of places (especially on p2p networks); redundancy is key to Internet content resilience. The Moslem attackers will not succeed in anything except convincing everyone else that fundamentalism is idiotic.
------ Take away the right to say fuck and you take away the right to say fuck the government.
Personally I'd like to say we shouldn't listen to religous zealots
and make no compromises about the freedom of speech and press.
But I think we should also have a look at what standards are applied
when christians get offended to avoid bigotry.
Over in Italy, a muslim became angered when the hospital refused to
remove the crucifix in the room his mother was stationed in. He threw
the cross out of the window. As a result, he was sentenced to 8 months
of jail time.
And over in Germany it was forbidden to offer a t-shirt depicting a
crucified pig.
I just do not understand them, and I think they do not understand us. I believe it is human nature to make fun of everything, people, gods, nature, human behavior, nobody and nothing is extempt. In Europe and the Americas there are lots of sites making fun of fundamentalist Christians, their churches, ministers, saints and even gods, yet nobody is protesting, at least not at this scale. Face it, laughter and humour cannot be defeated!. My favourite site is http://www.landoverbaptist.org/, a great site. The baptists have a reputation of being fundamentalist, however, they have not done anything serious against this website.
Muslim people believe in some stereotypes:
1) If you are a real native (not an immigrant) from a European or American country you are automatically a christian. Wrong! I am from the Czech Republic, and, according to the last census, in 2002 60% of our population is officially atheistic. In 1992 only 39% of the population was atheistic, we can be really proud, in this respect we are the most advanced nation on Earth, despite all American missionaries we are getting rid of all religion and mysticism, at a rate of 2,1%/year, if this trend would continue, in four decades we would be a completely atheistic country (probably the expansion of atheism will stop, and we will reach an equilibrium value say, around 70-75%)
2) If you are a Christian you are very passionate about your religion, therefore you hate muslims and their god. Wrong again. At least in my country, most christians are not practising, they only go to church for batptisms, marriages and burials, they are too busy with their lives, have no time to think about their religion or god, they are christian because their ancestors were christian, they just inherited their religion, if their parents were muslims or buddhist, not christians, they would be muslim or buddhist. Because they do not think much about religion, they are not interested in convertinmg to another faith.
Face it, sectarianism and labeling people according to their religion is bad, look at Lebanon. The best thing to do is to get rid of all religions altogether, we are doing this in the Czech Republic right now.
Fortunately, with a few exceptions (Serbia, Bosnia, Croatia) most of Europe is secular, not religious, and hopefully will stay this way.
Most discussion here seems to be about the cultural/religious conflict between Islam and the West. There's another "religious" war this applies to, like what network OS and Web management software were the defaced sites running? Does anyone have any data on how many were Microsoft IIS vs. Apache or NT vs. Linux?
TLR
A man no more knows his destiny than a tea leaf knows the history of the East India Company
First of all: Most hacked "sites" were blogs with their passwords in plain files. I think few if any servers as such got hacked. The attacks against Jyllands-Posten's site was a DDOS.
Second: I agree with most of you commenters here. This whole debate/boycott/etc is really something going on between the fractions of extremists in the respective camps. Most Muslims and Danish people are quite reasonable.
Here's a collection of links to some of the most misunderstood details of the debate, the most positive stories - moderate Muslims and Danes reaching out for each other - plus a little note on some of the ghosts in the closets. PS: Don't hack that blog, he is a very nice guy :)
One issue is that there shouldn't be any graphical representation of Muhammad. Reason being that they don't want it to be possible to idolize him.
Yet, by threatening to kill anyone who insults the Prophet, or going out of their way to deface web sites, I believe they have succeeded in idolizing him.
I also theorize that this is just an excuse to attack the West in general. A lot of Western countries had nothing to do with the cartoons, and yet they are also targets for violence.
:(){
A tenth is 10%. 10% of 1.3 billion is 130 million.
Although, that is over a million, as you said.
"Most of the sites targeted were run by small organisations and companies that do not have dedicated security workers and cannot keep up with the latest alerts and patches for vulnerabilities."
Adding "up2date -u" as a cron job is too much of a burden, is it? You need dedicated security personel to take the 30 seconds this requires?
Before you get all updates-must-be-tested-first on me, realize that something like RHEL doesn't do big updates. The only updates they provide are the small security-fix variety. The chance of the entire server going down because of one of these updates is much smaller than the chance of somebody exploiting one of the security flaws.
Angry Mobs of Cartoonists Set Syrian And Arabian Embassies Ablaze
COPENHAGEN, DENMARK -- Today, several demonstrations led by angry cartoonists turned into violent riots in downtown Copenhagen. The police forces proved incapable of preventing the rioters from attacking the embassies of the countries where the cartoons pbulished in "Jyllands Posten" were considered offensive. The embassies of Syria, Lebanon and Saudi Arabia were ransacked by mobs on the rampage before being set on fire in the name of freedom of expression.
"We are absolutely outraged that those people took offense at our artwork", said one of the leading rioters. "We demand sanctions from their governments to punish such disrespect !".
The local authorities have declined to comment on the apparent idleness of the police forces towards the rioters. Denmark, which is considered a rogue state by the Middle-East countries, is accused of inciting those riots as a retaliation to the Mid-Eastern embargo on Danish Blue that started last week, following the publication of the cartoons.
In Soviet Russia, our new overlords are belong to all your base.
Note how an Egyptian paper reprinted the cartoons last October. No riots then. But now there are? Either muslim fundamentalists are slow to comprehend or this is politically motivated action, not religious.
"It won't stop me from defending those muslims who don't go around rioting at the drop of the hat."
No one is attacking them (at least not anyone worth listening to) so why do you feel a need to defend people who don't need defending?
How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
"it's because thir society is different and less developed."
That's a pretty good descriptiong of savage.
Draw two partially overlapping circles. One label it Muslims, the other label Idiots.
Notice that not all Muslims are Idiots and that all Idiots are not Muslims. Yes, there are Muslims that are Idiots, but by the all-powerful Flying Spaghetti Monster, please don't generalize.
The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
Turn the other cheek? Oh, yeah, uh, nevermind.
Looks like there is a double-standard.
Well, it has never been about the caricatures (well, it has, but not really). The muslim world - or at least part of it, centered around the more fundamentalist governments - need an outside enemy. Egypt really isn't outside, and the Saudis don't want to anger the US - enter Denmark. A relatively small country with basically no impact whatsoever on life in Saudi Arabia; the perfect target.
According to Islamic teaching, Muslims are forbidden from maintaining images of Muhammad to help discourage idol worship. In this case, how would any Muslims recognize that the cartoon was, in fact, depticting Muhammad? Did the cartoon have an arrow pointing at the guy with a label saying, "This is Muhammad the founder of Islam and not some archetypical Muslim named after him" or something?
I pity the foo that isn't metasyntactic
People keep saying "if they made fun of Jesus in Caroons, there would be no violence against Muslims in the street over here!"
But this is not a fair comparison--Christianity does not hold the same moral status here that Islam does there. But we have our sacred cows. Imagine what would happen here if the press across the Middle East ran any of these over and over, in increasing frequency despite our protests and objections:
- A series of cartoons showing black people being lynched, raped, and whipped, with the word "Niggers" appearing prominently in them in various ways
- A series of cartoons showing famous molested children like Jean-Benet being graphically fondled by prominent political figures like George W. Bush and Dick Cheney
- A series of cartoons graphically and gleefully depicting the 9/11 disaster victims meeting their deaths in various amusing ways
You can bet that if these kept getting reprinted in the prominent Arab press, protests here would rise to violence, to riots, and to a general call by the citizenry to GO TO WAR WITH THE ENTIRE REGION, NOW. The streets would not be full of Americans congratulating Islam on its embracing of free speech if a cartoon with Bush's hand up a little girl's wa-wa or MLK hanging from a tree were being shown on the news every night.
That is what we have done to them: assault their sacred cow, make fun of their deepest moral conviction. Those cartoons have one possible effect: to offend someone. They are not clever, or original. They do not lend a new insight to anyone in the west. They're just designed to create outrage.
And that they have done.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
I find it sad that shallow and crude anti-Muslim comments are getting moderated "insightful" in this discussion: that in itself indicates what a mess we are in.
The Danish journalist (Flemming Rose) who commissioned these cartoons knew exactly what he was doing: he has more or less stated as much. There was a calculated intention to provoke, and it was successful.
Why should he have wanted to do this? It's been pointed out that Flemming Rose is an associate of, and has written approving about Daniel Pipes, the notorious Zionist neo-conservative figure who is behind the organisation http://www.campus-watch.org/, which is attempting a McCarthy-type witch-hunt against people in US universities who don't share their views.
At a time when the United States is planning yet another war against a Muslim nation, the images of Muslims rioting over this matter have acted as powerful propaganda for that war.
See also: http://xymphora.blogspot.com/2006/02/danish-cartoo n-conspiracy.html and
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1 703501,00.html for a description of how the same newspaper rejected cartoons lampooning Jesus Christ.
Allow me to comment on this as a Danish citizen.
What happened was
A Danish newspaper, who have been at the forefront of an ongoing hetz against immigrants and especially muslims, published a number of cartoons depicting Mohammed in ways that can only have been meant to express contempt. Further, if you have been following Danish news, you will know just how vitriolic and hatefilled the debate has been there for a very long time; and this is prominent politicians we're talking about. This has even been commented on in foreign news, with horror and disgust. To a moslem depicting the profet is totally forbidden, apparently, which the newspaper in question certainly knew; and not surprisingly a group of Danish moslems vented their anger in their home countries.
Personally I think it could have been defused then and there if the newspaper or the prime minister had had the decency and backbone to simply apologize; after all, there is such a thing as simple politeness, and no one would need to give up fundamental freedoms etc. How much would it actually have cost anybody if our PM had said something like: 'It is not Danish policy to insult people of other cultures, and I apologize for the distress these insensitive pictures have been published. However, I can not dictate what the newspapers print'? Not a thing.
Instead there has been a load of stilted nonsense about 'freedom of speech' - what a load of crap. Freedom is not the right to get away with whatever you do - there is a responsibility for all your actions as there should be. If you kick a hornets' nest, you'll get stung.
So, to sum it up: Denmark is festering in xenophobia and inflamed rhetoric; a newspaper decides to try to cash in on stirring up the shit and behave a spoiled brat; instead of being mature and apologize, the West is spiteful. Whatever one may think of the moslem world, this is simply not an honourable way to behave.
Instead of attacking our web sites Muslim countries could have a trade embargo with Denmark ...
Actually seeing as the main exports are Danish Bacon and Lager I guess it wouldn't have that much impact.
If you aren't far left by the age of 18 you have no heart. If you aren't far right by 30 you have no brain.
and would like to point out the one group of muslims which is NOT tearing down the house: those living in... Denmark. Not a single demonstration yet. They know what they have to lose. From the Cyber-angle: the foreign ministry is mounting a counter attack: arab-speaking danes are flooding chat-sites and sending SMS messages all over the middle east to try and counter the unbelievable crap which is spread this way. Chatsites right now are full with rumors that we are depicting the prophet as a pig, violently beating down demonstrations,burning the koran... So now we have government employees payed to counter-flood with more realistic descriptions of the situation in site .DK. Talk about cyber-warfare...
10 ?"Hello World" life was simple then
Time to strike back in a peaceful way by helping Denmark out by defeating the boycott. Buy Danish. Lego is a Danish company so buy some.
Here is the links to Buy Danish/Denmark products:
Queen Margarethe did not issue a statement "we need to show our opposition to Islam." The closest thing was a statement saying "we need to show our opposition to radical Islam and religious fundamentalism that endorses violence." Actually, it was considerably more eloquent than that, but I'm not much of a translator and Danish is my 4th language.
From the standpoint of the Danes, Islam itself, until recently, had never been perceived specifically as a threat.
The Danish right had long rallied against Denmark's highly liberal immigration laws and social programs, in part because the porous borders were permitting a lot of opportunism -- originally for southern Europeans, but more recently for people from the middle east.
Denmark's not much different than the rest of the world where a tautological marginalization and systematic disenfranchisement of Muslims is occurring. I think it's intentional, not on the part of the west, or on the part of Muslims in general, but on the part of a faction of Muslims specifically looking to overtake the majority and establish themselves as a ruling class.
Fascism is not a hard drug to sell. Better still if you can sell it to your neighbors (the USA, for example, is a much more fertile ground for fascist rhetoric than it once was; it's even mainstream "neoconservatism" in some places).
Somebody is poor. They move somewhere where they don't speak the language, nor understand the culture, nor how to deal with the bureaucracy. They are told by people they trust, people that understand them and speak their language, that they aren't accepted, that their new neighbors disrespect their beliefs, that they should not associate -- Some of it sticks, some of it doesn't, but plant the seed and fertilize it with the natural confusion and frustration and draw focus to support the thesis that they are downtrodden or pariahs persecuted for their worldview and - BANG! True or untrue you've got yourself a sympathetic person. And you work your way from there.
This is where it becomes a tautology. The perception leads to behavior that produces backlash that reinforces the perception which redoubles the behavior which redoubles the backlash... ad infinitum. Generally, such a situation would peak then wane, but in this instance there are a number of parties that very actively pump energy into keeping the feedback loop in place.
Islam is merely being used as a means to an end here. For those in the islamo-fascist end of the loop, the rallying point is jihad (which a conflict with "the west" cannot be since jihad is a holy conflict with infidel, which, by definition must first be Muslim; nor can non-believers blaspheme). For those in the occidento-fascist end of the loop, it's the "global war on extremism" and all the nastiness that one could justify with that tag-line.
Yet for the majority of us (both east and west), it's just irrational people doing dangerous and irrational stuff that we'd just as well assume they do somewhere far away from us. Count us out guys. Do as you will, but try not to make too much of a mess because we meek peaceful-types stand to inherit the place one you're all gone (your various religions agree on that point, don't you know).
Religion is the most useful mechanism for dividing people into groups and using this division for whatever political reasons, for example to justify wars.
My own cartoon depicting Muhammed as an Evil Genie, who came out of the Jag of Ignorance and is lighting up a bomb, that is the entire planet, with a match, that came out of a matchbox with the Iranian flag drawn on it. Sorry for the quality of the drawing, it was done in quite a short period of time with a touchpad.
My own cartoon depicting Auschwitz concentration camp, where my grandfather spent 2 years of his life (and survived,) and a lineup of people to be burnt in the crematorium while still alive, and a Nazi, who stops the next in line (who is supposedely my grandfather) and says: Sorry folks, vee ar klozed for zee day, vee ar aut of zee wooden for burning.
I also have made a couple of drawings on the Muhammed theme, that could be interpreted more insulting, with Muhammed screwing a goat and a goat screwing Muhammed, but I don't think you would be interested.
You can't handle the truth.
"I'll defend every muslim who doesn't participate in a riot and related actions until they're either all killed, or I die."
Since this isn't about them, shut up.
Or stay on topic. Your (repeated) attempts to turn genuine criticism into persecution don't hold up, aren't relevant, and don't do anything but draw attention from the actual issues.
Oh, lastly, your analogy is stupid. Australia is a country, defined by a location. Islam is a religion defined by beliefs and actions. If you can't see why "Australians" are different from "Muslims" I don't know why you're commenting in the first place.
How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
it's not because they are savages, it's because thir society is different and less developed.
"Different" is fine, but "less developed" certainly sounds like a synonym for "savage" to me. After all, a savage is one without culture or civilization. If you're less developed, then you're not civiliized, so you must be a savage.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
...unless you t want Slashdot to be the next on their defacement list!!!
w00t
How is this posible? what is the explanation?. In most former communist European countries religion has come back with a vengance, many atheists stay in the closet (like in the US). I am a Romanian atheist and, out of 22+ million, only eight thousand something of us are officially atheist.
Congratulations Czechs, you are the most advanced nation on Earth! Economy and wealth are not everything, spiritual progress, getting rid of all religion and misticism is more important!. Sad for us, Romanians, we are going back to the Dark Ages, where religious mysticism used to be everything. In a while we will become as fanatic and backwards as the muslim people.
I generally think we should respect religion... and not go out of our way to insult it.
But, the thing is, too many religions are also political philosophies. Once you bring your religion into politics, your religion should be fair game for ridicule, insult, or any sort of nasty speech. Islam, (as well as Christianity, but I could go on and on about that, so I will leave it out of this post), is also a political ideology. It is being used as a basis for laws, for systems of government... Heck, even where I live in Canada people are pushing to have Sharia Law enforced in family courts!!!
Once you cross that line, then watch out. There is nothing wrong with insulting Islam as a political ideology, any more than there is anything wrong with insulting Socialism, or Capitalism, or Facism, or Communism. There is nothing wrong with making an insulting cartoon of Muhammad, than making an insulting cartoon of G. W. Bush. It is all part of free political discourse. Political satire is a of democracy and free expression.
If you don't want your religion insulted, then don't try to force your religious ideals on me through the political system. If you are promoting Intelligent Design, or Sharia Law, or anything else on me and at my expense through the political system, I have a right to call out your retarded political philosophy.
Instead of defacing websites, any person who is upset about having their ideology insulted should adopt the lifestyle of the 5th century from which Islamic philosophy began... That way they will not have to be exposed to a diverse global media of the 21st century. If you are going to adopt an ancient political ideology, you need an economic system and technologic lifestyle that is compatible with your belief system. It has worked pretty well for the Amish and Mennonites.
Who currently has more oil?
A) Saudi Arabia
b) Alberta
According to the NYTimes, it was this meeting that set things off
The powers want to discredit the Internet as a source of information and a useful tool. The intelligence agencies have agents provacateurs planted in these IRC "hacker networks", and are able to ssed them with info and tools for performing this.
They discredit the Internet, and then vcreate anti-islamic sentiment among otherwise tolerant and moderate people - who will silently back attacks on Iran and Syria.
"Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
People wanting peace are the silent or at least not so militant majority. We don't get much press... We don't go into a town square and shoot our guns in the air nor do we make as much noise as a suicide bomber on an israeli street.
We will have huge congregations where the Imam will denounce terrorism but who the hell want's to cover that?
Hmmm... Pie...
While Bin Laden may use the word Ji-had a lot it still doesn't take away from the meaning of the word that means struggle. This struggle can either be in a muslim's heart or in the open battle field. Either way the media uses the word incorrectly and so is the grand parent.
Hmmm... Pie...
The cartoons were originally published in Egypt back in October or something. Did we have riots and protests with Molotov cocktails and petrol bombs? No. The most hypocritical aspect of this entire situation: thousands of Muslims are rioting, fighting police, burning down buildings, and declaring that those who insult their prophet must be executed all because drawing his picture violates Muslim law. My interpretation, after taking a few classes comparing Judaism, Islam, and Christianity back in college, is that violence is also a violation of Muslim law. Suicide bombing is against Muslim law. I'm also pretty sure that burning down the embassy of a relatively friendly nation because someone at a newspaper in that nation printed a picture you don't like is also against Muslim law.
Next we have word that a paper in Iran is going to have a Holocaust comic competition. They want to know if the world's view of freedom of expression will tolerate parodies of one of the largest tragedies in the history of the European and Jewish communities. While I agree that if we're going to make fun of one community it is only fair to parody them all, I believe that this is a childish way to react. I certainly understand some of the hostility between the communities. After all, I'm sure most of us would be a bit peeved if we were forced out of our homes by a foreign government to make a holy land for a group people you didn't necessarily get along with over the past few centuries. Either way, I believe that Iran's response is only going to fuel the fires of hate between these two communities as well as those between the Muslim community and the rest of the world, which will of course lead to more bloodshed.
It is sad but true facts, that no matter how many benevolent and peaceful people follow Islam, or any other religion, having violent and deadly extremists attaching themselves to that religion only hurts the reputation of the religious community as a whole. Many members of the Muslim community have spoken out against the rioting and condemned the violence and destruction. But is that really going to change anything? How do you reason with someone who believes that they are doing what is right in the eyes of god? Seriously, I don't know....
No one cares what your captcha was
Houston TX, USA
Geo. W. Bush hisself defaced all those websites, because he wants to make Moslems look like extremists...
If you disagree with me on social issues, then it's pretty clear that you are a narrow-minded bigot.
if the Islamic world could come together and agree about something other than how much they hate someone or something?
They really haven't ever gotten anywhere: they had one brief golden age 1000 years ago, in between killing each other in Arabia 1300 years ago, and trying to kill or opress everyone they see now. For many, the standard of living hasn't risen much since Mohammed was around.
I feel sorry for all the reasonable muslims out there (and there seem to be quite a few), blocked by the antics of their idiot coreligionists from doing anything positive even if they wanted to. I see the US government as fundamentally evil too, but I try to take a more constructive attitude.
>> Rioters riot for fun and profit. Profit? Don't you mean "stealing"? Its not the same thing.
...they should kill the guy who writes the Heathcliff cartoons.
"The issue is that the Danish newspaper culture editor who commissioned the drawings is in fact a devotee of Daniel Pipes, the rabidly anti-Muslim Zionist."
Flemming Rose the culture editor is a journalist who has once interviewed Daniel Pipes. Does that make him a devotee?
"The cartoons were commissioned specifically as a psyop to generate trouble."
They we commisioned because a danish author could not find any illustrators willing to illustrate his childrens book about Muhammed due to fear of reprisals from muslims. The newspaper wanted to challenge that situation and reveal what the muslim reactions would be.
"Many Muslims, including "moderates", are upset because the cartoons demonstrated that the West is indeed against their entire culture and religion."
Well, if you mean that the West is for freedom of speech and against censorship due to religious dogma you are right. If that is all Islam contains then I feel sorry for the muslims.
"In fact, the Queen of Denmark issued a statement some time back explicitly stating that "we need to show our opposition to Islam.""
This is blatantly false and is due to a wrong translation. The translator confused the two danish words "modstand" (opposition/resistance) and "modspil" (literally "play against", which has a much more peaceful meaning than "show our opposition to").
"Three years ago, the exact same paper REJECTED images of Jesus that the editor at the time claimed were offensive."
Someone sent in a drawing of Jesus. The editor rejected the drawing stating that he didn't think his readers would find it funny _and_ that it was offensive. Actually Jyllandsposten has printed a (offensive) cartoon of Jesus a couple of years ago (it is a secular newspaper - not a christian newspaper). Jesus is regularly ridiculed in Danish newspapers.
"And now that Iran has suggested running cartoons of the Holocaust, the current editor first said he would run them - and has now been overruled by the paper, which said yesterday they would NOT run them."
The cultural editor was overruled by the chief editor who stated that Jyllandsposten would allow itself to be used in a media stunt from the Iranian regime.
"Double standards, anyone?"
Nope, just standards.
Can't trust anyone who borders on China, if you ask me.
You better watch out, there may be dogs about . .
"a savage is one without culture or civilization."
Which is why Muslims can not be described as savages - they have a culture, and a civilization, it's just not our's. Who's to say for instance that burning infrastructure isn't the most effective way to bring about societal advancement in the end? It worked for the West in WWII, after all.
Burning things doesn't fit in the Western culture anymore, because we have the ability to get results through the courts, parliaments, and letter writing to stir up shit. Perhaps burning nice things is an unfortunate precursor to developing those rights?
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
"Muslims are upset over the simple act of depicting their prophet. Not because the prophet is depicted as violent."
I've seen you post this several times, so show me the survey you used to determine this.
YOU don't know WHY these people are protesting. Stop acting like you do.
How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
Shouldn't this discussion really be about what type of Operating System and Server allows hackers to get in to do the defacement of the sites?
Most muslim's that do such things do it in a suicidal fashion, whether it's the 9/11 hijackers or a suicide bomber in Israel. I'm not sure how they'll be collecting the gold. The interpretations of the afterlife is far too great in length and scope to be in this thread so we'll skip that too.
Next, none of the attacks were done to reduce the number of infidels. Thats ridiculous logic even for the terrorists. Grats on you for believing it and the mods that modded you up. They all have political motives and something personal that drives them to the brink. The suicide bombers in Israel are typically kids who've lost family members from israeli aggression. It's a cycle of revenge for the people doing it and political for the people planning it.
Some Palestinian's openly admit they dont' do it for religious reasons and they themselves aren't very religous.
Hmmm... Pie...
Perhaps the most insightful /. comment of all time. You win.
I would say it's not necessarily Islamic retailiation responsible. Perhaps there are others, even joe blow amatuer's contributing to this using the current cartoon situation as a smoke screen.
"Combine that many people with the abject levels of poverty and living conditions a good portion of the Middle East lives in, and you get the type of behavior we're seeing."
You're making excuses, and it's unseemly. Need I point out the many areas of the globe that are populated by non-muslims, living in similar conditions, that don't have the same problems?
How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
Name one scripture in the Bible that would give an adherent cause to kill a non-believer. One that would suggest to me for a moment that I should kill someone who doesn't share my beliefs.
Have you actually read the Bible, or do you just tend to make randomly speculative claims about it?
Read my sig if you like, but I'll never see yours, thanks to Discussions, Viewing, Disable sigs...
I'm quite sure a lot of these: http://aljazeerah.info/Cartoons/Cartoon%20Links/Ca rtoon%20links.htm are more "offensive" that the Muhammad cartoons they're all busy rioting about.
I thought that was the thing that the Muslims eat with their Sushi...
I mean, really, how hard is that to figure out?
Now, convincing the lobbyists that they're ruining us all by changing the government's policies to match the corporation's...
Maybe there is a way to legislate the influence out? IANAPolitician, so I don't know... We can't make the legislators impartial, but maybe make it illegal to give $ to them, or for them to profit from legislation...???
And the rest of us reiterate, you're a raving nutbar.
MMMMM nutbar...
How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
Canada has a gigantic reservoir of oil-soaked tar sands, which they have the technology to exploit as cheaply as the Saudis can drill for their oil...
Of course, they'll have to pretend to the world that tar sands are hyper expensive to process, or else W will be over there in a minute...
Well, how about a rally of 700,000?
1 598589
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=
The western notion of tolerance is not true throughout the world, apparently. All it takes is a few cartoons.
Repeat this experiment!
If you disagree with me on social issues, then it's pretty clear that you are a narrow-minded bigot.
The sad part to me is that we are over there mainly because they threaten to blow stuff up. It's not human rights, it's our own security. The warlords in Africa that killed 400,000 people last year are still in power, because no one is blowing anything up. So the message we are basically sending to the rest of the third world nations is you have to blow something up first, then we'll oust the corrupt dictators in your countries and give you a chance.
You can get 15 minutes of fame, but you can go down in history for infamy.
The cartoons in question
(not that good, not that funny,
definitly not worth dying for):
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004413.htm
The Danish papers homepage (English version)
http://www.jp.dk/udland/tema:fid=11328/
The problem that muslims have with the picture is that they potrait
Muhammed which is not allowed according the Koran.
Please note the time between publishing and caos, september -> now.
It is always easier to unite AGAINST something than for...
Dane if I don't and Dane if I do...
You mean to say they are being a bunch of liars?
Well this will be fun when it gets out.
http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_
Since when do we put up with this kind of thing? Any religious group in america starts stockpiling weapons and burning buildings and we send in the ATF. Why? Because they don't have any business doing what they're doing. I don't care if its your religion. Guess what? Maybe MY beliefs (american freedoms) involve me not having to be being killed/raped/whatever by you.
You want to practice your religion? Fine. But it should involve no effort or caring on my part. And that goes double when the effort or caring has to do with me not being killed. Regardless of how PC it is, here's a newsflash: I don't *have* to like or tolerate anybody elses religion.
As far as i'm concerned, the only difference between branch dividians and muslims is A) the number of practicing followers and B) they're eagerness to actually USE the weapons they've stockpiled.
Han shot first.
Actually, Denmark employs thousands of Saudi citizens, and a boycott of their products is costing them their jobs as we speak.
As was pointed by someone else, things liek this happen in the Middle East all the time. There's currently a big budget movie in Turkey (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/02/02/turkis h.movie.ap/?section=cnn_latest) that depectis American soldiers as evil basically. I see no protests, I see no riots.
You know, come to think of it, I didn't see any riots back when there actually WAS an attack on the country and people DID die. People in this country were scared and pissed, yet there were no roving mobs beating Muslims, there were no shooting of Imams and so on.
I'm quite willing to grant the practitioners of Islam the right to define for themselves what "Islam" is, just as Rabbis define Judaism, the Church defines Roman Catholic Christianity, etc.
So, how is it that the when one of your "bad people" tells the world that Islam stands for violence there isn't a corresponding rebuttal from the mainstream of Islam?
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
It's not a minority of Muslims in the case of Iran, there's a democratically elected government there, the country has officially been a Muslim republic for nearly thirty years now. The democratic government of Iran broke diplomatic relations with Denmark, over a cartoon drawn by somemone who has nothing to do with the government of Denmark. If the radicals were a minority they would have been voted out of government long ago.
As to your (b) assertion, there is considerable debate about that. The suicide terrorists do have a religious motivation, a very strong motivation, to do their acts. Even if, according to some interpretations they are wrong, there are also other interpretations. I have read a translation of the Quran, but, since I don't know the Arab language, I have never read the original. I don't know how compelling these interpretations are in the original, but it must be a very convincing argument for the people to be ready to die for it.
the rest of the Islamic people better get these violent ones in line or we are rightfully headed for a clash of ideals here.
My thoughts exactly. I always think it's very hypocritical when some, allegedly moderate, Islamic cleric decries violence, yet does nothing more concrete about it. A truly moderate and responsible Islamic cleric should be the first to turn in to the police the radicals who do so much to create hate aginst Islam in the rest of the world.
Normally, I don't subscribe to these sorts of theories, but all of the current events in Europe, US, and in the Middle East are all too synchronized to be just coincidence. I came across an article that bears some reading...
/ 080206stagedpsyop.htm
Check out this article... food for thought...
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2006
I have read some material that suggests that the cartoons are a psy-op by US interests on the Muslim population, planned to create EU resentment to Muslim rioters to lend support for an attack on Iran by US, the UK, and other countries that want to stop Iran enriching their uranium. The theory is that the US and the UK want the war. Why not stage riots to create resentment in the EU against Muslim states? The number of supporters in the UN for an attack on Iran will increate naturally, and anyone with an interest in making money from a war will get another war...
Bah... it's all speculation, but who knows... maybe the world will invade Iran in March or April?
But you know what bothers me most about your post... I pretty much agree with it. Plus, let me extrapolate what I quote from you in my Subject, and apply it to what's happening to my country, NOW. The current direction in the US with respect to science an religion just reminds me too much of what happened in the Muslim empire some centuries ago. They've never recovered. We're just starting the downhill path.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
Back in the day, the American's had a problem with the Ku Klux Klan. They were loud, vocal, and a Christian minority. How did the American's deal with these people? They marginalized them. They made it so that appearing anywhere and declaring loyalty to the clan instantly made you an idiot as far as anyone was concerned. Until the muslim world, - or at least the countries where these people are able to generate large amounts of public support for the actions- marginalize them, I will not respect them. I will not accept the 'minority' arguments. It is up to their own people to control them. It is not enough to simply say 'well I don't support them'. The society needs to marginalize them. Until then, the moderate opinion from any of the affected countries is a moot point as far as I'm concerned and I will not play a dove in this situation.
Danish newspaper publishes cartoon of Mohammed depicted as a terrorist. By association, the cartoon implies Muslims are violent terrorists.
Muslims, agreived on two counts (1:Depicting Mohammed. 2: Disrespecting Mohammed) promptly firebomb anything from Scandinavia.
No-one else see any irony here?
b3 4phr41d 0f my 4bov3-4v3r4g3 c0mpu73r kn0wI3dg3!
MadDwarf
...the Rodney King riots.
...no, I don't think the acts which set the events off are comparable, but the relative overreaction is.
Hear me out...
==Recipie For Violent Overreaction== (serves thousands)
1) Take one marginalized group who's been given the short end of the stick for a while (in one case, Muslims feeling the heat globally for their fundamentatlist bretheren, and in the other, Black people feeling the magic of the police's "get tough on (Black) crime" policy).
2) Let simmer for several years.
3) Add an event which is indicative of this marginalization (the beating on one hand, and an open invitation/response to race baiting on the other). So far, no big deal - you get anger, you get protests, you get declarations, no big deal.
4) Top off with what appears to be a tacit acceptance of the above, in one case the aquittal, in another, newpapers lining up to join in on the race-baiting. In other words, the people start feeling like it's open season on them.
That's when things boil over.
The Danish had the additional problem of being small - the people involved know that if they did this to American embassies in response to a slight/bombing, they'd have an all-expenses paid trip to Cuba. Denmark is a country small enough to take a swing at. To continue the analogy above, rioters didn't go after judges or police stations, they went after shops, houses, and other things they could vent on that didn't involve them going after cops. Some went after stuff, some were out for vengance, others just wanted to smash things.
This is all just a long build up of anger combined with the first accessible target to come along. North America (mostly the US) had it in '92, and those riots had as much to do with Rodney King as these have to those cartoons.
Sure, freedom of speech is great, but it comes with a lot of responsibility --- a responsibility Jyllands-Posten (the paper that originally published the drawings) apparently can't handle. I think I'm pretty much your average christian-by-culture/atheist-by-belief dane and I understand why the muslims are so pissed! These drawings show nothing but disrespect for the entire muslim community, both here and in the rest of the world.
Jyllands-Posten even refused to print some drawings joking with Jesus back in december, 'cause as the editor said, it would offend the readers...(!) (The drawings were something like "rising from the dead doing a double somersault" and stuff - pretty hilarious actually.) How's that for hypocrisy?
Now, I don't think the government should start apologising on behalf of the paper, neither should they start censoring the danish papers in any way --- the danish papers should simply learn a thing or two about respect for others and their religion(s).
Jyllands-Posten has even been rumoured (e.g. on CNN) to want to print the Iranian holocaust-drawings, but the editor in chief (is that what it's called?) has disputed that. Hopefully he won't change his mind.
The Muhammad drawings were stupid and absolutely needlesly provocative --- it has nothing to do with freedom of speech and it never had.
Freedom of speech != duty to speak.
"Live free or don't."
"You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil who is standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours. You want to claim this land as the 'land of the free'? Then the symbol of your country cannot just be a flag. The symbol also has to be one of its citizens exercising his right to burn that flag in protest. Now show me that, defend that"
It's game over for all of us, man.
Wife? This is /. you insensitive clod!
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
That, or the parent is very subtle sarcasm.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
If good and evil are subjective...then why should be even bother with trying to see both sides? Why bother trying to make peace? If there's no such thing as an objective good to strive for and follow then why the fuck don't we just kill 'em all? As long as we can justify it with our subjective morality, we're not doing anything wrong!...If there is no such thing as objective good and evil then there is no reason to change our viewpoint. There is no reason to make peace. There is no purpose in it because there is no goal to achieve, no standard to follow. You say we shouldn't label people as evil in the name of trying to achieve peace. Is peace objectively good? Or is that your own subjective opinion of the way things should be? By your arguments, it could only be the latter. In that case, your argument is completely pointless. More people in this country clearly have the subjective opinion that the "war" we're in is morally justified. Why should they follow your subjective opinion of what is good over the one they currently have? By your logic, the only thing for our country to do then is to continue the fighting, not make peace. I think you simultaneously got, and missed, my point.
I'm saying the labels don't apply to other groups, and you can't reach a peaceful situation as long as you keep labelling somebody by your personal values.
Why don't you just kill them all, since values are subjective? Because your subjective values - the ones you revere - probably don't allow for that.
Where in my logic did I say everybody should just keep fighting? Smells suspiciously like a straw man.
I'm saying that if you want to find an end to the fighting, you have to stop vilifying the enemy, and start searching for some mutually agreeable reasons to stop fighting - and be willing to accept the fact that the group you are encountering friction with does not think the way you do. Compromise in the name of sharing the planet.
You just compared Hitler to a cartoon.
OK, Muslims are forbiden to make pictures of Mohammed, this is their rule not ours. They cannot expect us to respect their rules and regulations; the same goes for us, we dont expect that UK or French law be enforced in Saudi Arabia. I am an atheist,and I dont live in a Muslim country, then I can make cartoons or paintings of whomever a want, Catholic God, Baptist God, all Buddhas, even Mohhamed or Allah, it is my right,I dont do anything illegal, nobody can stop me.
Islamic laws DO NOT APPLY to Denmark, what do they want?
Would all this stuff be sparked by something else, sometime in the near future? And, on another note, I wonder how many of the protestors have actualy seen the images, reminds me of the Jerry Springer show thing, most of the protestors hadn't actualy seen the pantomine. Then again, in some countries blasphemey is punishable by death.
The main problem is the fundamentalist "zealots" are actually following the words of their religion to the letter. The moderates we house in the states are doing the same thing moderate Christians and Jews do, which is ignore a significant portion of their holy texts in order to get by in the modern world.
Islam, in specific, is the worst culprit out there right now primarily because of its relative youth. But it is, at heart, a martyr driven death cult. And that's a problem in living with the rest of us, particularly when you're dealing with a religion that classifies the world as Islam or Infidel.
Liberalism is all fine and dandy when it's not kill or be killed, but at this point I think the Islamic populace is showing their true colors.
Finally, the reaction to these cartoons was fomented by a tour of the offending cartoons (as I stated in the GP) that also included cartoons that were simply never published. This was a calculated move, probably related to placing political pressure on Denmark as it's now a member of the UN Atomic Council. Or whatever it's called.
You better watch out, there may be dogs about . .
Yes, but why give Islam some special status here. I see contempt for the Christianity in many publications including evening sitcoms. This is offensive to Christians. So in your view should Editors, Presidents, Prime Ministers start off every morning apologizing for freedom of thought and expression that may have occured in the prior day.
If you kick a hornets' nest, you'll get stung.
So we should make our freedom's subject to the fear of reprisals. The Hamas leader said that if someone would have been successful in acting on the Ayatollah's fatah to kill the Novelist S. Rushdie then these cartoon would not happen.
Whatever one may think of the moslem world, this is simply not an honourable way to behave.
And burning embassies and issueing death threats to cartoonist for lines on a piece of paper is? Actually the death and kidnapping threats extended to any citizen from the countries that published these cartoons regardless of affiliation.
I sure hope you do not represent the average Danish thinking.
Creates a postulate that I am wrong about statement that Intelligent Design people (and fundamentalists, in general) have a problem with higher-order reasoning.
Responds by using the fallacy of "I do not see it; therefore, it cannot be true." This is a double-negative logic. In the same vein of, "Your honor, I can show you one hundred people who did not see me steal that watch!"
Now, we're taking the extreme interpretation from our previously absurd response. Intelligent Design is well documented because it makes statements of truth about our universe without being verifiable in fact. If Intelligent Design's contributors had any real sense, they would recognize that it is possible to construct a testable theory. What I.D. is really attempting to claim is that there is a level of entropy such that there cannot be the expectation of a coherent ecological system developing. What science is about is finding and testing such a value. What I.D. is about is pushing what people easily recognize is a poorly cloaked religious agenda.
Finally, we retaliate by the scarecrow fallacy, "You sound like a bad person; thus, you must be a bad person." Your whole response has been negative and circular; hence, no understanding of higher-order, self-referential logic. You, sir, are an idiot.
Bel, the mostly sane.. "Of course I can't see anything! I'm standing on the shoulders of idiots." -- Me
Don't know from where this came, but that is what this is. Both sides are being manipulated in an incredibly cynical way.
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
There are on the order of 1 billion Muslims, worldwide. 500,000 demonstrators is only five 100ths of one percent. I think we can safely call that a minority.
If you look at, say, the anti-Iraq war demonstrations here in the US back in February of 2002, you'll see 475,000 demonstrators (this is taking the lowball estimates -- the number could have been as high as 750,000 nationwide). Considering there are 260 million Americans, that's a more than three times higher turnout. And these demonstrations were widely ridiculed as being a tiny minority composed mostly of "fringe elements" and "refugees from the 60s".
Also, keep in mind, that some of the biggest demonstations are in places like Syria and Iran, where participating in "spontaneous demonstrations" is often mandatory.
Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachtani?
www.fogbound.net
I'm sorry but that cartoon *is* making sense if people are killing each other over freedom of expression. I wish I owned a newspaper so I could reprint it.
Believe me, if I started murdering people, there would be none of you left.
Someone does not allow Christian images at Christmas time, but in-turn do allow jewish, and muslim images at their respective holidays. And that is not a problem.
**Shakes Head**
Religious Freedom, only applies if you are not a Christian.
Self proclaimed wannabe geek. You know how it is. Most of us who read this stuff probably fit in that category.
But no. Everyone just wants to vent about how stupid religious extremists are. And, hey, I understand- religious extremists have been screwing up the world for, oh, as long as anyone has history to guide us, but... that doesn't make it news, or interesting.
Anyone want to talk about how to make websites more difficult to take over, or how these ones were taken over? Or is that just not interesting?
Compare and contrast Muslim and Christian reactions to insults against their religion.
In 1989, Salman Rushdie released "Satanic Verses" and Martin Scorcese released "Last Temptation of Christ". Guess which person received death threats and had to go into hiding.
One religion engages in violence, attacks embassies, riots in the streets, beheads foreigners, and straps bombs to their children. The other peacefully urges boycotts through newsletters. Guess which one is which.
If that Danish cartoon had been of the Pope, Rome would not be rioting. If it had been of Joseph Smith, Salt Lake City would not be rioting.
Yes, there is plenty of violence in Christianity's past. The difference is that we are now in the present. Christianity has given up violence, and when it does happen in Christ's name, it is thoroughly condemned. But Islam as a whole has returned to the violent eighth century.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Sure, christians seem to speak more calmly and they don't have unruly beards. However, they certainly aren't above promoting disproportionate violence in response to insults or injury. They just phrase it better - or so it seems to other christians.
Without going into modern day politics - consider that the nazis were(/are) christians.
When I think of the Saudis I remember how they only got upset about terror when Al Qaeda struck in Saudi Arabia, and actually killed some Arabs. When it was just crusaders, Jews and other infidels getting hurt/killed, they acquiesced. So let's see the moderate muslims come out and try to bring some peace and understanding. I'd expect more of them to speak up if it is hitting them in the pocketbook.
http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_
The (not-so) funny thing is that your actually mistaken; in many of these places, the radicals are the MAJORITY, or at least hold all the political and economic power.
Take your pick:
Iran
Saudi Arabia
Palestinian Territories
Islamic portions of Iraq
Taliban Afghanistan
Although the moderates were probably the majority in these states, the extremists hold all the cards, and in some cases (the islamic areas of Iraq) they actually are in the majority!
It's a far more difficult problem. Marginilization doesn't work when these people are living large, and run the arm. The only real solution is armed conflict, but the U.S. is not permitted to be involved for political reasons.
Really, its a rather hopeless situation. And I'm not saying this as a "red-neck" American; I'm a dispossed Iranian. The simple fact of the matter is that the Iranian Revolutionary Government, or the Islamic House of Saud, and the various high-powered radical cleric in the middle east aren't going anywhere, and won't loose any power without violent upheaval.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
Thanks
It's just like Jon Stewart says. The moderate is quiet primarily because you don't see moderate protestors out on the streets, chanting "USE COMMON SENSE! FOR SHAME, THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE DOING BEFORE YOU DO IT!"
/* however, I really do think that a large portion of muslims living in islamic countries do believe in this sort of protest. the funny thing is that most of these people who are protesting have never seen the cartoons. and the real funny thing is that many of the protestors in the most extremist groups can't actually read the papers in arabic, much less the ones printed in european languages. you're really dealing with an ignorant, uneducated minority group in that case, and that population of people isn't going to stop burning shit */
What kind of protest would that be?
I can't believe that slashdot would do something as incendiary as calling me as referring to white people as crackers. I think we need to form a riot and burn some stuff down.
Best Trivia answer ever... Name the largest aquatic man eater... Contestant: Tsunami
The peaceful Muslims are afraid to say anything in fear that they will go to hell. If you've ever tried reading the Quran you know what I'm talking about. Even the guys who know it by heart don't know if they're going to paradise. Most Muslims pray five times a day, fast during Ramadan, make pilgrimage, and then lie awake at night wondering if they're good enough. The last thing they want to do is blow all their penitence by criticizing their god's holy warriors. They are not sure if these extremists speak for their god. If the extremists do speak for their god, it would be eternal suicide to criticize them. So they keep their mouths shut. The notion that their god might be a false god sending lying imams and hypocritical mercenaries their way is resisted in the manner of the Tolstoy effect. All the work they have invested in attaining paradise, some shameful deeds of which violate the conscience, would be realized to be utterly worthless and in fact crippling to their lives. This notion is too painful to accept and that's why it is resisted. Thus members of the religion of peace have neither inner peace nor outer peace.
The above only applies to true believer Muslims. But hypocrites are afraid to say anything for fear they will wind up at the wrong end of a Kalashnikov. They have no faith in their god whatsoever, thus they have no incentive to speak out and plenty of incentive not to. And so no Muslims speak out against true crimes.
On the other hand, criticising other people's faults is considered a good deed according to this worldview. Criticising people who cannot fight back is easy to do and costs you nothing. So both hypocrites and true believer Muslims will criticise governments concerning the headscarf fiasco, cartoons, etc. Where were these rioters when these drawings were made, hmm? Nowhere, because it was not yet fashionable to whinge about drawings.
Eventually, inconsistencies in this life of fear cause people either to descend into hypocrisy or to chuck their religion. This is true of any religion where a man's good works are his way to peace, because he can never be sure he has done enough of them. It's tragic that this person never finds out his true religion was humanism (which he failed to fully take advantage of through descent into animalistic debauchery). And there is no peace there either.
The world knows no peace, so any religion that could bring peace would have to come from outside this world; it could not be invented by men of this world, because they don't know peace. Instead what they know is worry that their needs won't be met. Therefore, in order to have peace, you must be sure that everything will be all right because some being from outside this world who knows peace has met your need.
Yes, the Dutch and European papers have the free speech right to publish this cartoon, and I would vigorously defend that right, just as Salamon Rushdie was rightly defended against fatwas, etc. But we also have to ask are they using their freedom wisely? Racist, sacrilegious, cartoons help no one, whether it's intentional desecrations of Islam or anti-Semitic cartoons published in the Arab world BOTH should be morally condemned. Not censored by the government, but condemned as unworthy in a world that is capable of producing figures like Martin Luther King and Ghandi. Having the freedom to publish sacrilegious cartoons and saying it's a good idea or helpful to the world are very different things. We must simultaneously defend the right of the people publishing the cartoons while questioning their motives. Qui bono?
Know that the neo-cons are using this incident to inflame passions against Muslims in a build up to an attack upon on Iran. Think before you condemn all Muslims or their governments for the destructive acts of a few. If you do that you are playing into the hands of neo-cons who are counting on western hatred of Muslims to justify their imperialist plans to make over the middle east, most likely to prevent any country from trading oil in Euros, and to "defend" Israel who has angered the Arab world by violating international law by illegally expanding it's 1967 green line borders into the Palestinian territories.
Demonization of an entire people based on their religion is always a bad idea, did the holocaust teach us nothing?
Tired of all the isms, don't exploit people as an employer, or a government, mmmmK?
I get the point that you are trying to make, but I can't help but notice in almost all of the examples you cite, it is GOD who is doing all the smiting and death dealing, not hebrews and cristians. In the examples cited above in the Koran, all the examples involve the reader taking action and killing enemies of the faith.
If these are really accurate samplings of the respective texts, it would seem pretty clear why the Islamic faith seems to have such a violent face to it. There is a big difference in reading about how your god is going to punish the faithless, and being told it is your duty.
(Intelligent musings aside, and straight into offensive blasphmey) Perhaps Allah isn't powerful enough to smite the unbelievers himself. Has to recrute people to do it for him. If he were all badass like the cristian god in the old testament, he would just zap people with bolts from the blue.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
funny to see that all comments on the topic so far have being: "these people shouldn't retaliate to humour with violence" or "now we can see how 'really' peacefull islam is" or "we have freedom of speech and we must not give it up", but the parent comment that excercises the freedom of speech is moderated as a Flamebait.
Hypocrites.
You can't handle the truth.
I believe this whole response is orchestrated. These cartoons were originally published in September of '05. Yet, to watch the news you'd think this happened last week and that this is all spontaneous. Someone is able to disseminate propaganda very quickly through the Muslim world.
for this story, so we have a 'legitmate' excuse to bring the cartoon story to /.
As stated by my favorite comedian Carlos Mancia, the reason some Muslims get violent over things is because they don't have enough humor in there society. When i see a cartoon making fun of fat people i don't get offended because I am fat, I laugh. If i see a cartoon trying to display a political message or a satire of something I try and figure out what it means. Getting offended by something just shows that one has not taken the time to see what the message is behind it and responding to it in a reasonable manner, like laughing at it.
I suspect that even a little investigation by anybody interested will produce the conclusion that most people born or raised in that part of the world are nuts, by Western standards. Hell, the Israelis, the Palestinians, Iraqis, Muslims . . . pick a group. There are plenty, of Muslims here in the United States, the vast majority of which seem to justify the assertion that Islam is a perfectly valid religeon with many positive attributes.
Conversely, there are plenty of Jews in the Middle East who (IMHO) could benefit from a chlorpromazine drip, and maybe some lithium on the side.
It's not the religeon which makes the terrorist; it's the upbringing, social values and life experience which make the terrorist. Fighting and killing have always been an integral element of life in that part of the world. For being such different religeons, Judaism Christianity and Islam all seem to have settled on that same area as being "G*d's little acre". Boy, I'm glad to live in this unblessed, G*d-forsaken area we here like to call the United States of America. Nothing sacred here to fight over!
(Asterisks inserted in place of the letter "o" above to prevent upsetting anybody - some religeons object to using God's name in print. BTW, I doubt that's his real name ;^)
It's somewhat funny that the responses on /. make no mention of the fact that those thousands of sites ought to have secured their systems in the first place instead of allowing anyone who so desires to replace the content. Of course, the social dynamics involved in the situation are interesting (more important, actually) anyways.
Israel plans to build 'museum of tolerance' on Muslim graves
By Donald Macintyre in Jerusalem
Published: 09 February 2006
Skeletons are being removed from the site of an ancient Muslim cemetery in Jerusalem to make way for a $150m (£86m) "museum of tolerance" being built for the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Centre.
Palestinians have launched a legal battle to stop the work at what was the city's main Muslim cemetery. The work is to prepare for the construction of a museum which seeks the promotion of "unity and respect among Jews and between people of all faiths".
Israeli archaeologists and developers have continued excavating the remains of people buried at the site - which was a cemetery for at least 1,000 years - despite a temporary ban on work granted by the Islamic Court, a division of Israel's justice system. Police have been taking legal advice on whether the order is legally binding. The Israeli High Court is to hear a separate case brought by the Al Aqsa Association of the Islamic Movement in Israel next week.
The project, which a spokesman said had been conceived in partnership with the Jerusalem municipality and the Israeli government, was launched at a ceremony in 2004 by a cast of dignitaries ranging from Ehud Olmert, who is currently the acting Prime Minister, to the governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger.
The Israeli branch of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre declined to comment yesterday and has had no role in the project.
Durragham Saif, the lawyer who brought the Islamic Court petition on behalf of three Palestinian families, Al Dijani, Nusseibeh and Bader Elzain, all of whom have members buried at the cemetery, said: "It's unbelievable, it's immoral. You cannot build a museum of tolerance on the graves of other people. Imagine this kind of thing in the [United] States or England. And this is the Middle East where events are sensitive. If this goes ahead in this way it is going to cause the opposite thing to tolerance."
Mr Saif said he had written to the Israeli State Attorney, Menachem Mazuz, seeking police enforcement of the original order. He said on a visit to the site he had entered three out of five tents where excavations were being carried out. "I was shocked to see open graves and tens of whole skeletons there," he said.
Ikrema Sabri, the Mufti of Jerusalem, demanded a halt to the excavations and said the Muslim religious authorities had not been consulted on the dig. Saying that the cemetery was in use for 15 centuries and that friends of the Prophet Mohamed were buried there, the Mufti declared: "There should be a complete cessation of work on the cemetery because it is sacred for Muslims."
Under Israel's "absentee property" law the cemetery was taken over by the Custodian of Absentee Property after the 1948 war. Mr Saif said the Custodian had no right to sell the cemetery to the Jerusalem municipality in 1992. While parties to the work are resting part of their case on what they say was an 1894 ruling by the then Sharia court that the sanctity of a cemetery could be lifted, Mr Sabri said that ruling meant that only a Muslim could make such a decision.
Osnat Goaz, a spokeswoman for the Israel Antiquities Authority, which is carrying out the excavations, said it was common in Jerusalem to build on cemeteries. Adding that in such cases the bones were reburied, she said: "Israel is more crowded with ancient artefacts than any other country in the world. If we didn't build on former cemeteries, we would never build."
Skeletons are being removed from the site of an ancient Muslim cemetery in Jerusalem to make way for a $150m (£86m) "museum of tolerance" being built for the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Centre.
Palestinians have launched a legal battle to stop the work at what was the city's main Muslim cemetery. The work is to prepare for the construction of a museum which seeks the promotion
"Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
http://skender.be/supportdenmark/MohammedDrawings. jpgm med_alle.jpgp gt uren/s _Posten.htmll ands-Posten_Muhammad_drawings.jpg
http://www.antibuerokratieteam.de/wp-content/moha
http://www.stefan-herre.de/mohammed_karikaturen.j
http://www.welt.de/z/photos/index.php/item/karika
http://www.di2.nu/files/Muhammed_Cartoons_Jylland
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Gallery/28.htm
http://www.michellemalkin.com/archives/004413.htm
http://face-of-muhammed.blogspot.com/
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b0/Jyl
And some more links (page in Swedish):
http://www.flashback.se/showarticle.php?id=58
Our prime minister has been strong, but he was let down by opposition parties, Blair, Bush, Chirac, the EU and many others, who otherwise love to praise themselves for defending freedom. The American ambassador in Denmark said: "Noone defends freedom of speech more than we do." We called 'Bullshit', and that became clearer as it became known just how much diplomatic work it took to get some statement of support from George Bush. Blair is worse. These are the people who talked us into the Iraq war. We had expected they'd immediately help us in a pinch because of that. Possibly Denmark should pull out now.
Yes, they're vandalizing web sites - friend of mine had his defaced. DDoS'ing major newspapers, too. That's peanuts compared to the real attack that went on in the sphere of politics. The only thing that saved us from losing our freedom of press was when other European newspapers started reprinting the cartoons, and the islamists became confused about which flag to burn today.
US and UK press are subverted by the government - *NO* major media dared to print the cartoons! UK/US coverage has generally been very thing. Pravda (yes, the old Russian newspaper!) clearly did better, also appropriately naming the riots 'progroms'. Until of course Putin stepped in and told us that he didn't like the free press that much. Support from ordinary Americans has been good, with 'Buy Danish' campaigns to counter the boycott, and lots of support for the 'Rigth to insult' (yes :) and in general be free citizens.
The worst is over. Time to rebuild those web sites and the embassies they torched. I've reported the instigators of this crisis to the police for treason. We'll remember those who stood up for freedom. But I'm predicting more culture clashes like this in the future.
Cherish freedom. Others put their lives on the line to gain it before us. Our day may come before we know it.
I'm in a Unix state of mind.
Look at your "grey" cases: It's wrong to steal a stereo. -> because you wouldn't want anyone else stealing yours. It's not really wrong to steal bread when your child is starving -> because in the conflict between the owner of the bread and your child, you side with your child. Of course, this wouldn't be a problem if the owner of the bread followed the ethic and /gave you the bread to begin with/.
It's wrong to cheat on your fiance... -> because you wouldn't want to be cheated on.
unless he's a jerk and you're on board the Titanic and you meet a guy you dig - then it's romantic. -> hah.
It's wrong to kill. -> because you generally don't want to die.
But it's not wrong to kill to defend your family. -> because, as in the child example, you side with your family. Of course, this wouldn't be a problem if the person trying to kill you followed the ethic...
In each of the cases where who you side with changes the viewpoint, we're back to moral subjectivity.
I respectfully disagree with your assumption that there is an absolute "good".
Neo-cons use Denmark as their latest tool to bring about the "Clash of Civilizations."
Denmark is at the center of the ongoing neo-con plot to bring about a bloody military confrontation between the West and Islam. This "Clash of Civilizations" is a hallmark of the neo-con philosophy and is most exemplified in the writings of Prof. Samuel Huntington and Daniel Pipes.
This follows a pattern of neo-con activity designed to ratchet up tensions. The latest example was the rapid spread of arson across France and Belgium involving neo-Nazis, skinheads, and false flag agents that was blamed entirely on Muslims upset about the deaths of two Muslim youths in a northern Paris suburb. French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy stoked the flames with his rhetoric about Muslim "scum" just as Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen defended the publication of cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed in an offensive manner in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten as a freedom of speech issue.
Rasmussen, who is one of George W. Bush's leading supporters in the war in Iraq (Denmark has sent several hundreds troops), governs with the support of the neo-fascist, xenophobic, and inappropriately-named Danish "People's Party." After riots in Arhus, Denmark (at the same time as the arson attacks spread across France, Belgium, and a few German cities), other newspapers in the West began publishing the same cartoons. Danish embassies in Damascus and Beirut have now been set on fire and tensions (and terrorist alerts) have been raised in many countries where the cartoons have been republished. Coffee mugs, T-shirts, and key chains are now being sold on the Internet depicting the offensive images. Cui bono? Who benefits? These tactics, of course, are very convenient for the neo-cons.
Neo-con media outlets such as The New York Sun, Fox News, and others are having a field day with the Muslim riots that have spread around the world in protest over the cartoons just as they had with the French "Muslim" arson attacks. Two New Zealand papers -- The Dominion Post in Wellington and The Press in Christchurch, have published their own controversial cartoons of Mohammed. The papers are owned by Australia's Fairfax Group, which also owns Melbourne's Age, and which was once financially connected to indicted neo-con Lord Conrad Black's scandal-ridden Hollinger publishing empire, which also includes arch neo-con Richard Perle. The Fairfax Group generally adheres to the neo-con corporatist party line.
The neo-cons ignore and even relish in the offensive nature of the inflammatory cartoons depicting Mohammed as a bomb throwing terrorist and pedophile. Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell have made similar comments about the Prophet that Muslims consider blasphemous. What would the neo-cons say if newspapers published cartoons showing a shady looking Moses stealing gold and silver artifacts from the Pharaoh's palace before high tailing it across the Red Sea in the middle of the night? Or a wine-drunk Jesus cavorting with prostitutes in the red light district of Jerusalem? There is no doubt that rabbis and evangelical preachers would be calling for the heads of the offending cartoonists and editors. They've done so for far less.
Moses: "I grabbed ten of the Pharaoh's best urns. I have a list here." Jesus: "I've got the wine. Where are the Jerusalem girls?" See why Muslims are so outraged by unflattering cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed? The neo-cons relish in constant religious warfare, which they have now re-coined "the Long War."
With so many hotheads in the three Abrahamic tradition religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam), such inflammatory speech is like yelling fire in a crowded movie theater. The Danish Prime Minister is wrong when he states that the offensive cartoons are protected speech. He would certainly not defend someone who yelled fire in a crowded Copenhagen theater. And struggling Danish farmers, bakers, and fishermen will now pay the price for the boycott of Danish exports by Muslim countries.
"Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Not once did TFA use the word cracker, although the post never once used the word hacker.
Vote for Pedro
The only reason that these kooks are rioting over this is because they don't have sports teams that win championships.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
The conceptual problem lies in the underlying view of Muslims and Arabs in the West. These ideas are very old in Europe, going back to fears of invasion hundreds of years ago (which, in turn, was partly based on guilt regarding the Crusades). In the United States, the anti-Muslim view coincided with the desire to exploit Middle Eastern oil resources. It was necessary to develop a negative view of people living over the oil in order to do the things necessary to take it. Since the beginning of Israeli colonialism with the settler movement, there has been an acceleration of the idea that Muslims and Arabs are violent, irrational creatures, not worthy of being considered as human beings. Of course, all these negative ideas went into turbo-drive after September 11, and now form an essential part of the American - and to a somewhat lesser extent, European - Weltgeist.
If you want to try to cure yourself of the problem and remove the cultural blinders, you have to do a Nigger Thought Experiment. If you prefer, you can do a Kike Thought Experiment. Instead of the Danish cartoons, image a big-lipped, bug-eyed 'nigger' eating a giant watermelon. Or perhaps you'd prefer a cloaked, hook-nosed 'kike' with a giant bag of gold 'jewing' some gentile out of his money? Would you be defending the right of the papers to publish such cartoons based on the 'enlightenment values' of the West? Would you be so proud of your precious 'free speech'?
Needless to say, the argument will be raised that this is 'different'. Well, it's not, and the inability to see that it is not just proves my point. The general unstated (usually) but all-pervasive assumption in the West is that Muslims are sub-human. It's in the air we breathe. It is such an important underlying assumption that people don't even realize that they are making it, leading to the kind of nonsense analysis we are seeing regarding the Danish cartoons. Without this assumption, we would be psychologically unable to treat Muslims the way we do. Here is a small list of some of the things we do to Muslims, without even a hint that there might be some moral issues involved:
I could go on and on, but you get the id
"Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Let's take a step back and see exactly what is religion. Religion is a group of people who share common beliefs and philosophies. Religion is an assortment of historical anecdotes and teachings that demonstrate guidelines for a certain way of life. The concept is no different than a nation's leader putting forth his ideals in the hopes of being followed and supported. The implementation however, is very touchy: these writings and doctrines are often many centuries old, perhaps millenia. These people have died a long time ago, our world has changed significantly since those times. Why do some people take these ancient words for law, more ridigly than the words and actions of living beings ? Were people smarter back in the dark ages ? I highly doubt it.
The Koran, the Bible, the Torah.. all these pieces of ancient literature were written by mortal men and women like you and I. Their mystic charm and lure comes from their easily regurgitated answers, and the sheer breadth of these tomes such that just about anyone can find a passage they relate to. That doesn't mean it should be taken as the absolute truth against which everyone should be judged and measured. Terence McKenna famously said "If the truth can be told so as to be understood, it will be believed." Religion is appealing because it is a form of mental entertainment, but not like movies or books, because religion is something you can participate in, something that offers an illusion of power to those who have none, as well as offering a broad shield for their misguided acts.
In the end, religion is a business, very unique and misunderstood by common folk. Think of it as a government that spans continents, currencies and languages. Each religion has a massive number of followers, many who will defend their organisation with their own lives without financial compensation, and while the head doesn't exert individual control over its members, the entire group self-regulates through peer pressure and mob tactics, as well as the innate human desire to "belong". I, for one, am dead scared of religion. If a simple cartoon is enough to warrant such hatred and destruction, we as a society are doomed.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Things have gone way beyond that. There's a 1998 play, Corpus Christi, by Terrence McNally. It portrays Jesus as having a homosexual relationship with Judas. The play has run in London, New York, and Austin, Texas, plus some college productions. Protests by Catholic and Christian groups yielded picketing and angry letters. Nothing violent.
An Islamic group, the "Defenders of the Messenger Jesus", issued a fatwa calling for the death of the playwright. "Whoever insults any messenger of God must be killed." Now that's a nut group. Fortunately, they seem to be an ineffective nut group; the playwright is still alive and has had four new plays on Broadway since, including "Ragtime", "The Full Monty", and "Chita Rivera", now playing.
Here's a review of Corpus Christi. It's not McNally's best work; it's more like an experiment he did between doing big-budget musicals.
Does someone have a good list of Danish products so that one can counter the boycott? Saudia Arabia, Iran, Libya and others have announced a boycott of Danish products. This just fuels the extremist in their mission and attempts to intimidate. There should be support for the Danes in this affair.
>they ended up with the distinction of being the only religious group to have war declared against them by the U.S. Government.
what about the Branch Davidians?
my password really is 'stinkypants'
Seems like no hypocrite westerner dare to speak about this? Remember, both peace loving danish and dutch people have armies in muslim lands helping imperial armies of west (for example Iraq) . This double standart is very old western game. American army killed more innocent people in iraq than terrorist al-qaida ever could. Actually America had at least 50 big army interventions around world in last 50 years, not to mention french, british etc interventions around the world. Now these people are trying to teach us human rights and freedom by killing and humiliating us. After living in west more than 5 years i realized that West is actually ignorant, illiterate, untaught. I wonder how many of you really lived in a muslim country more than 2 weeks? btw just you know, i am as ateist as one can get, so you do not waste your precious times with stereotyping me.
Ignorance.
The poster was talking about Aisha.
the cartoon depicted muslims as being violent and they responded in exactly that way. no wonder normal people create cartoons ect about it. as for it being idoltary ect.. thats just insane and fanatic.
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/vidino20060
Money quote:
Excellent timeline. What it misses though is that the original article in Jyllandsposten was posted in response to an incident where the danish writer Kåre Bluitgen couldn't find an illustrator for his childrens book about Muhammed. The illustrators Mr. Bluitgen had contacted politely declined citing fear of personal safety.
At the time I saw the article as a provocation - but in my opinion the provocation was not directed against muslims or the arabic world - it was directed against the danes giving in to the atmosfere of threats and violence apparently originating from orthodox muslims. Fear and self-censorship is very slippery slope indeed.
It aches my heart to see how it all is blown totally out of proportions - how extremes on both sides is provoking each other and how every voice of moderation and reason was ignored. The seamingly calm waters had a strong undercurrent.
Seriously though, you know something's fishy when all of a sudden thousands of danish flags are being burned in front of the media, in their "rallies" and so forth. Where the hell did all the flags come from? In the middle of winter, in Iran!?! The world cup isn't even on for another 4 months!
This is an organised political ruse, probably to turn the people that are rioting from overthrowing their own governement through malcontent of the government's incompetence. Hundreds died in Mecca due to a stampede. 1000 people died in a ferry accident in Egypt last week. Corruption is rampent. What better way to quell a brewing rebellion that to offer up a tasty target for all that is wrong in your life?
Christains hate "The Life of Brian" ...and the Jerry Springer Musical because it shows Jesus as a nappy wearing gay-bow.
And look at all of the innocent people who died when the Christian suicide bombers got their revenge, and when they burnt down Hollywood!
Oh no... wait a minute, they didn't.
Christians complained, but nobody got hurt - and these things you bring up are much worse than a measly cartoon. You're obviously anti-religion, and you're so desperate to rid the world of religion that you're comparing apples to oranges.
What the Muslim terrorists are doing is comparable to football hooligans - people who don't really give a damn about football, but who just want to kill or maim somebody for kicks. Is the Government considering banning sport? I don't think so.
Also, if there is to be a bill against religious hate, that prevents people from doing anything that offends somebody from a religion. If it is established, here's what I'm going to do:
1) Create my own religion, 'w00tnessism'.
2) Claim that my religion regards swearing as abomination, and that such people should die.
3) Thereby prevent everybody from swearing!
4) Claim that my religion also finds television an abomination.
5) Thereby get rid of TV!
Well, if the Muslims are sucessfully preventing people from making jokes, I've got a damn good chance... don't you think?
Successful religions usually have gone through a violent phase or phases. The most violent religion, historically, is Christianity, basically because it's the most successful religion so far. This is the reason that most rapists and murderers in the USA are Christians, incidentally - it's not that Christianity is currently promoting rape and murder (despite the Bible passages others are sure to quote) but rather the simple statistical facts that most criminals come from low-income backgrounds, and most low-income citizens of the USA are Christians. If the conquistadors hadn't put an end to the worship of Huitzilopochtli, Aztecs might hold the record for religiously inspired butchery instead of Christians.
Historically there have been Islamic states that were extremely tolerant and peaceful. It's unfortunate that Islamic tolerance still hasn't recovered from the effects of the Crusades.
Interfering in middle-eastern power struggles (kuwait/iraq, iran/iraq, palestine/israel) might be pragmatic for strategic reasons, but it sure isn't going to help promote tolerance among Muslims. Attacking Islamic countries for trumped-up fake reasons probably doesn't help either. Decrying the Koran for the same sorts of exhortations of violence as are contained in the holy writings of most major religions is disengenous.
Christianity, Judaism and Islam all have the same roots (Abraham) so you would expect them to have the same kind of teachings. Try a non Abrahamic religion like Hinduism?
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
What the hell is wrong with you? Everybody knows that God's real name is Dave! I talk to him every day in his study at our compound and he's constantly dismayed at how few people know of his glory and majesty.
Dave is generally a pretty peacable guy, but don't ever draw a cartoon of him eating Twinkies. Twinkies are sacred and to be worshipped with never-ending fervor and all zingers are to be stomped into a cakey creamy mess upon sight.
"Christ what a design! I could eat a handful of iron filings and PUKE a better emergency pump than that!"
Ghandi's right about the pattern. "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."
Seems like we've moved to fighting them or even apologizing for our free speech which sounds a lot like the winning part. (Which as a non-muslim, I'd like to avoid.) Can we just go back to step two, here?
The Islamic world should (and the majority of them probably do) find this whole insanity on the part of a small number of people truely EMBARASSING.
The rest of the world puts up with commentary, no matter how bad, how rude, how poorly drawn. Only within their own country do even dictators squelch the media. These acts of violence, and even the peacable protests are strong evidence that aspects of the Islamic world have a lot of growing up to do.
Step one, ignoring them, doesn't seem helpful, but step two seems like the way to go. Getting upset, taking them seriously, vilifying them, being worried about their abilty to boycott, burn, blow up, etc. is step three territory, and begs condition four. We hear and see all these news organizations puffing up a few bozos into a huge crowd of angry Muslims. Can we please step back and notice that these are a few spoiled children?
Denmark should respond with some more cartoons. Hey, this time, do you think they might make them actually funny?
BTW you sound like my cousin - she's not jewish but she IS almost a vegetarian, with the exception of bacon, ham, and breakfast sausage...
Must be mind-altering additives in them.
"Christ what a design! I could eat a handful of iron filings and PUKE a better emergency pump than that!"
Or insightful, depending on whether you prefer the first or second line.
The "Islam is evil" yammering of the propagandized masses is so tedious.
I guess most people will never learn to think for themselves.
When it comes to Jewish extremists, most of them were born and raised in the Western world - places like New York City. What they do have in common with the other extremists is a sense that they are being persecuted and that the only way to be safe is to set up an ethnic homeland that protects people of their culture.
2. West tries to defend their democratic freedom, muslims try to defend their religious freedoms. Ask yourself, are you really free. Every person on this planet is a slave in hands of their leaders (political, religious). They make the decisions. Not you. If they choose it will be war.
3. So, what we gonna do with this incident? Both sides need to ignore it. Without that, we will always have shity world. Every 50 years with two different world sides.
1. War is peace
2. Freedom is slavery
3. Ignorance is strength
We need to take a look at the Muslim shaykhs and clerics and the governments who often tell them what to say in their sermons. Getting people whipped up into a frenzy over a freaking cartoon -- one that otherwise would not have circulated beyond Denmark -- is a great way to distract attention from what they really should be in a frenzy about: the corruption of the family dynasties that rule many of these countries, the widespread poverty alongside the decadent wealth of certain families, the refusal of these governments to do anything to diversify their economies, the blatant hypocrisy regarding Muslim laws of behavior by many of the same leaders, etc. Of course, the media did a lot to help these demagogues spread the word, and once the protests started spreading, further media coverage is a self-fulfilling prophesy. But we can't ignore that this "crisis" was manipulated from the very beginning by self-serving forces.
The 12 cartoons that were posted were 'not' that bad. What was bad was muslim clerics from Denmark going to the middle-east and distributing pictures of mohammed and allah as pigs. Most of the people rioting think that is what was posted in the west. From their point of view we are totally winding them up. It is a matter of a few nut cases giving the common(see stupid) people the wrong information.
So sad that people react without thinking.
Well I don't think oblique references really count* - My Godwin-O-Meter barely twitched, so let's keep this thread going. C'mon! Someone step up to the plate and bring on the Nazi/SS/Hitler name calling!
I would have thought some sputtering geek would have his (or her) panties in a bunch by now. Damn it! Where's the outrage? The poorly constructed sentences written by pounding rage-clenched fists on the keyboard?
I am so disappointed...
* - However, I don't think the GP was referring to what you think he was.
"This calls for a very special blend of psychology and extreme violence" - Vyvyan "The Young Ones"
It seems to me that after a few years in the holey land, however, these same sane, well-adjusted people often become, let us say, nucking futs!. I've personally met two examples of this phenomenon in my life - too small for a good sample set, nonetheless I have 100% correlation with the prime hypothesis in this case. I know that 1-a is WAY too large to consider this a valid test, but . . .
YMMV.
Indeed. An Iranian friend of mine thinks that the election of Ahmedinejad as President is a good thing precisely because he bluntly says what the majority in Iran think.
Actually, it's Eric Rudolph
Soylent Green is peoplicious!
Unlike other "prophetic" figures for whom there is little or no written history, Mohammed's actions are recorded in written histories that date to his time. I invite you to Google for information on the history of Mohammed: see how bloody his hands were. Then come back and give us your informed update.
If you think of Mohammed as some kind of otherworldly "prophet", or as a purely religious leader or as a man with his head in the clouds, then you are seriously misled. He did much more than preach to spread his ideas: he was a military leader and conqueror as well.
an old joke, perhaps, but quite pertinent....
A Danish film maker did make a film which was critical of how Moslems treat women. He was killed in the streets of Amsterdam by an irate Moslem.
Did you mean Eric Rudolph I am guessing?
A relative of mine was in France during the height of those riots. The news was far, far more dramatic in covering them here in Minnesota than it was in Tours, France, where my relation was playing in a series of cultural events. She didn't much notice the riots, and she was watching the French news outlets to be sure she was safe to travel back through Paris. (No problems with the travel, either.)
Television news is extremely misleading and demeaning. Maybe the French were downplaying events -- though I've stayed in Paris for a time and found the local shows all too willing to blow events out of proportion. Generally speaking, modern TV news plays to stereotypes and the lowest, most squalid sides of human nature.
Those bright studios throw off more heat than light.
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
First of all, "hate speech" isn't a crime. At least, not yet in the US, that I'm aware of. There are some Universities that have tried to effectively criminalize it through their own disciplinary systems, and there are laws (which I don't support) which makes crimes more severe depending on the political and social leanings of the perpetrator, but nothing that outright prohibts you from saying something 'hateful.' The closest we get are the prohibitions on child pornography, and that's banned not necessarily because of the obscene-ness, but because it's indirectly seen as supporting child abuse. The other main form of prohibited (political) speech is when it directly calls for or incites violence, and before anyone starts, these cartoons weren't even close to any reasonable standard for "inciting violence."
Now, I'm not sure how many people have actually seen the cartoons in question, but I think they're pretty mild -- you can see a lot more offensive things on South Park (who has, incidentally, featured the Prophet, although I've never seen the episode and can't substantiate it).
You can browse them to your heart's content here.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
the average Danish thinking
1. Since when do pastries think? 2. Why is he a pastry? 3. If he is a pastry, why is he thinking this? 4. ??? 5. Profit! 6. Wait... Wrong kind of list.
Note the use of "non-believers", I do not think Christians and Jews fit into that category. The God of Islam, Christianity, and Judaism is the *same* God. IIRC Christians and Jews are classified as people of the book (old Testament?), and are allowed to live in Muslim lands subject to some conditions. Unarmed and paying taxes come to mind, but then they are allowed to enforce their own laws among their own people and the Islamic government is required to protect them.
I'm also a Danish citizen, and when I read things like the GP, I wonder if he and I myself have been living in the same country.
A recent survey among Danes shows that a clear majority of around three quarters don't want our prime minister to apologize and/or give in to the demands of the Muslim nations.
As for the claims about a hetz in Denmark against Muslims in particular, then I'm mystified. I don't know what the GP is talking about. Since I don't read (much in) the newspaper in question, Jyllands-Posten, I guess that they could in theory have been running a hetz against certain groups of the population, the Muslims in particular, without me knowing.
Yet if such a hetz has been out there, then it has failed to reflect in the contents of the national TV channels and other news media I have been following. That includes international media as well. Nor has the subject been raised when talking to family, friends, colleagues and acquaintances.
We have a right wing party (by Danish standards) which is continually making noises about limiting immigration and whatnot, but they are nothing new. They do support our present government with their votes in parliament though.
A few web links to prove his point would have been helpful.
Disclaimer: I'm a left wing liberal by Danish standards, so I have every reason to help cover up any such hetz, should it exist.
Oh wait...
An Egyptian newspaper published these cartoons in October last year without a peep.
I think they were being allegorical and really telling you that if another part of your body was causing you to sin... well, work the rest out for yourself.
At any rate, it wasn't a totally literal command; what it means is that if your body is telling you to do something that you know you shouldn't (all these base desires that we, as humans, have), tell your body to stuff it. It's better to be uncomfortable, than live in sin.
There's no expectation that anyone is going to gouge out their eyes.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Not to nit-pick but it was the leader of Hezbollah, not Hamas that said the fatwah against Rushdie would have prevented this.
6 %5C02%5C03%5Cstory_3-2-2006_pg7_46
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=200
This whole thing has been planned and staged by cetain Dainish Imans, with the support of Syria and other governments. These are not spontainious responses to the cartoons which were published back in September. The point of the article were they were originally published, by the way, was to point out self-censorship in western news media.
The Imans behind this appearantly felt the that the original collection of cartoons might not be offensive enough, so they "added" a few of their own, including a bad copy of a man in a pig calling contest (he was made up as a pig).
The American news media is pretty much avoiding covering this story in any detail, it's the blogosphere where the coverage is at.
You are being gamed to support endless war.
Funnily enough, I even know that, realise it, am 100% aware of it. I even know (and this is not very well publicised in the media coverage) that the very creation of these cartoons was a deliberate "social experiment" by a right-wing Danish publication designed to show that "western ideals" are at odds with the ideals of the Muslim immigrant populations and to polarise people on the issue. From http://www.afrol.com/articles/17949:
"The editor of the conservative daily had asked Danish cartoonist to draw Mohammed with the intention of "testing" what kind of reactions this would provoke. He wanted to find out whether the rather large number of Muslim immigrants to Denmark were influencing the limits of freedom of expression in the Nordic kingdom.
This "test" caused immediate reactions, with Danish Muslims demonstrating in front of the daily. The editor even received several death threats. 'Jyllands-Posten had achieved what it seemingly wanted - to demonstrate that there exists a conflict between liberal Danish cultural values and the values of the immigrant society."
But my own "ideology" (if you will, although putting it that way reeks of moral relativism) is an incredibly strong belief in the importance of freedom of speech in maintaining a healthy society. I didn't even know I felt so strongly about it until this incident. Here in South Africa we watched thousands of people suffer and die even very recently to give us this freedom. And we need to keep it or our society will slip back into a state of horror. Yet now I watch some of those very same people who fought for it already ready to give it up just to placate some violent killers. If (and I mean if) it really is the case that freedom of speech is at odds with a certain group of people, and there is no peaceful middle ground, then I find I have no choice but to fight it. The inevitable consequences of allowing free speech to be given up will be too horrible to even contemplate.
Here I am, my view polarised by a group of people I know was trying to manipulate and polarise my view. And yet my reasoning stands, my feelings on the issue stand, I can't ignore it.
you hit the nail on one thing.
Depicting the profet is forbidden to muslims. I don't think any on the newspaper is muslim.
Sorry it's not very good. I was never very good at drawing. Feel free to redistribute this as Creative Commons, although for obvious reasons I'd prefer if you didn't tack my name/user id onto it..... http://img437.imageshack.us/img437/180/finishedmoh ammed5rp.jpg
The truth shall always be free: Boris Floricic is Tron.
Defacing a web site is an attack on free speech. No one has the right to break into someone else's server and change
the content being distributed. No surprise that these criminals have no respect for free speech though,
considering it is not something valued in Muslim culture.
See here
Vote for Pedro
Thats funny you know. I think a M$ salesman has more info about kernel development. And most your facts are like a VB noob trying to argue Linus arguments in linux kernel mailing list.
To feel what muslims feels. Just imagine.
That SCO case gonna bad because some monkey court. After that, all Corporate support for linux was droped. Major distro makers was declare bankrupt and top 20 linux kernel developer was killed because some unexplanable disasters(Including Linus even his family). BSD begin threatened by some very very old copright issues from AT&T. All major OSS companys start to close their doors or sources. After than that some Open Soruce zealots start to ddos ing entire world. Because of this FBI/USA Congress Outlawing Linux and GNU licence and arresting Stallman for cyber terrorism. Microsoft and others start to harvestering open soured programs. Then making arguments how Open Sourcerers are bad programmers, how they are unamerican, how they are cancer of economy yada yada yada...
Please my dear Slashdotters. This is not your job, most of you even don't talk any of that muslims. You just see some managed news about that.
I'm Turkish, I believe in caricaturism we have above avarage standarts. These cartoons not good, neither funny. They are just someting else to ignite Muslim people. Of course there was some works for rejecting Turkeys EU membership. These are wery hard times for Muslims and especially Arabs.
More than 100 years they are dying because of western politics.
Once upon time they are wery happy people. And they betrayed Ottoman Empire.
Of course Allah has own Justice...
Please don't make stupid argumenst and burn your damned oil. You know people dying for it...
[My english is better than most other people's Turkish, so please point out mistakes politely. Thank you.]
What a great way to prove the cartoon wrong!
"Hunny, this cartoon is saying that all Muslims are terrorists!"
"How dare they say that, we are not all terrorists, how insensitive of them! Now let's go light the neighbors on fire, that'll show em!"
Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
Buy Danish products. Support free speech.
for fucks sake, it's just a cartoon. Have a laugh about it, don't get so bend out of shape about it.
So *what* if it's against a friggin religion (could we get rid of all of those please?), it' not something to start killing people over and burning down buildings and shit.
*GROW UP*!!!
I don't quite get it, one danish newspaper acts independently and prints something offencive, yet everyone in the country and the goverment get the blame, there effigys burnt, there national flag burnt, there embasys attaked.
Anyone spot the in-equality here, we get blown up by a few muslims acting independently, If we were to act in the same way, we'd have bunings of the kuran in the center of London.
I'm fairly sure everyone in the world just wants to live there life how they want to live it. The only conclusion you can draw is people want to hate eachother, and if that's the case... where can I get off this planet?
Disclaimer: Norwegian here (so this is a reply from a somewhat norwegian perspective) & I've posted about the cartoons before on Slashdot (http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=176319&cid=14 646689). Also I do support freedom of speech even if I often get offended by it myself (I consider flagburning a part of freedom of speech). Hell I've long ago gotten used to offensive stuff and ridicule: it's a natural price for having opinons that go against the flow. I'm not too fond of organized religion, I'm anti-nazi, anti-socialism/communism, pro-Bush, pro-Iraq war, pro-individualism, pro-transparency, pro-F/OSS and in the opinion of some by implication pro-schizophrenia lol :) Oh yeah and I don't fear the puzzle palace...
As others have pointed out they're not silent in the west, and a lot of them are fed up with having to distance themselves from fruitloops calling themselves muslims in other parts of the world. Anyone can get fed up if they always have to defend actions they have nothing to do with but which others link them to by some common denominator. That being said one can't exactly fault people for asking either; it's part of getting to know someone to ask about their opinons isn't it?
But take a look at those few non-cleric muslims who have spoken in favour of freedom of speech concerning the cartoons in the middle east. In slightly more relaxed countries like Egypt and Jordan they've been sued and harassed. It is no wonder that the silent majority (at least I hope it's a majority) "down there" are afraid of voicing opinion that run counter to an extremist interpretation of Islam. It's even more understandable if it's something they don't give much tought; almost all muslims in those countries live in extremely homogenized countries where almost everybody is a muslim, that's not an environment conducive to thinking about freedom of expression of those that think differently.
Speaking up in a place like Syria or Iran is tantamount to germans voicing criticism against the treatment of jews in 1940: you've got to be extremely brave to do it and you've got to expect very bad consequences of doing so. I wish they would speak up but I can't but sympathize that they don't; it so much simpler to just go with the flow and if necessary blame Israel, the US, or the EU, or Denmark, or Norway, or *insert scapegoat de jour here* for everything one doesn't like from time immemorial. Yes some people do the same here in the west; stupidity knows no boundaries of culture, gender, or ideology.
There's a lot of info that's not getting attention either in the west or in muslim countries:
- some pretty hefty misunderstandings by danish imams and muslims (however the situation is different in Denmark than in Norway, from my perspective I would say that the communities in Denmark are much more disjointed). Some danish imams when talking about the matter to fellow believers in the muslim world managed to mix up the issue with completely non-relevant pictures and impressions exaggerating their "victimization". Some of those issues didn't have the least to do with anything about Islam (or at least the prophet Mohammed) and to such a level that one can wonder if they had ulterior motives -- it's either that or they have almost no understanding of the country and continent they're living in.
- the rumour mill in the arab world, but elsewhere as well, ran completely out of control: there's a lot of misinformation out there that's 100% false and exaggerated
- a severe lack of knowledge about how important the concept of freedom of expression is in the west, what the background and philosophy is, what it actually means. There's a need for an introduction to Voltaire
- a severe lack of knowledge about how the relation between free press and the state is in western democracies
- a severe lack of understanding about the fact that in the west you are not (as an individual or as a state) expected
this comment is provided "as is" and without any express or implied legibility or congruity [...]
Many people, here and elsewhere, are decrying the violence (inherent or simply highlighted by the western media) of Islam. Islam is roughly 600 years younger than Christianity - what were the Christians doing 600 years ago? Killing Muslims in The Crusades!
/.ers more than most understand the concept of karma.
Surely
Mod me flamebait if you must - karma comes round!
http://www.miniclip.com/dancingbush.htm
Where do I sign up!
True Communication is impossible without Understanding. Understanding is impossible without Tolerance. Tolerance is impossible without Empathy. Empathy is impossible without Communication.
"You keep on using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
You mean to say they are being a bunch of liars?
If that was what I meant, that would have been what I said. The caricatures definitely was offensive, and the Danish PM did handle the situation very arrogantly initially by refusing to see the ambassadors, but seing as this is nowhere near the first - or the worst - instance of Mohammad drawings, the reaction is absolutely out of proportions, and I do believe it has more to do with middle eastern interior politics than with Denmark as such.
In other news...
Sales of Carlsberg plummet in Saudai Arabia
Great Dane attacked in Lahore
when they closed my college for some stupid issue as charging $2/yr instead of 2c/yr for education.
I protested against them, and I got a death threat.
You CAN'T reason with riotters. You can only fight them, or fear them.
The problem with Muslim riotters is that if you fight them, they'll gather another 1,000,000 of them and call for a Jihad.
So what's left for me to do? Fear. I think these acts of protest have done much more to incite terror, than the 9/11 bombings.
So what do I want to do? I want the people who drew and published the cartoon, to say a public apology, and maybe even get whipped in public. This way the riotters will calm down.
But why do I want to do that? Because it's right? No, in fact it's awfully wrong. So, why would I want it?
Because I fear.
FFS, that's hilarious ! Possibly the most in-context use of a Slashdot meme ever !
A Danish newspaper, who have been at the forefront of an ongoing hetz against immigrants and especially muslims,
Yeah yeah, more bullshit, several people have said that - none have been able to prove the claim.
published a number of cartoons depicting Mohammed in ways that can only have been meant to express contempt.
No, thats not a fact thats just your biased oppinion.
Further, if you have been following Danish news, you will know just how vitriolic and hatefilled the debate has been there for a very long time; and this is prominent politicians we're talking about. This has even been commented on in foreign news, with horror and disgust.
Except that is a lie - you can't house the entire world, a line must be drawn - some people are just too stupid to understand that.
Personally I think it could have been defused then and there if the newspaper or the prime minister had had the decency and backbone to simply apologize;
There was no reason for the paper to apologize and certainly not for the prime minister to get involved. he had nothing to do with this.
after all, there is such a thing as simple politeness, and no one would need to give up fundamental freedoms etc.
Politness is something you can show if you are invited to a wedding, its not something a newspaper should use as its guiding light - they could never publish anything since someone would always be hurt. They underlined the problem, that there is no longer freedom of religion in denmark, all must be forced to submit to islam.
How much would it actually have cost anybody if our PM had said something like: 'It is not Danish policy to insult people of other cultures, and I apologize for the distress these insensitive pictures have been published. However, I can not dictate what the newspapers print'? Not a thing.
Of course it would, because its not a fact these pictures were insensitive -certain crackpots thing they are, that is their right - but don't involve us in it. That is is the slippery slope to totaly religious dictatorship.
Instead there has been a load of stilted nonsense about 'freedom of speech' - what a load of crap.
If you are against freedom of speech feel free to get the hell out of denmark - go live in the jungle
Freedom is not the right to get away with whatever you do - there is a responsibility for all your actions as there should be.
If freedom means always having to submit to religious fanatics then there is no freedom.
So, to sum it up: Denmark is festering in xenophobia and inflamed rhetoric; a newspaper decides to try to cash in on stirring up the shit and behave a spoiled brat; instead of being mature and apologize, the West is spiteful.
No, to sum it up you are probably one of those imams who invent a lot of crap trying to stir up trouble. Now get lost.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
I swear, I just don't get it. First off ... I'd never be out in the streets rioting over anything ... but what I don't understand is how the heck somebody can riot ... go home at the end of the day ... watch some TV, eat some dinner, go to sleep ... wake up the next day ... then decide it's time to burn some more shit. Like, how do you slot that into your day when you're thinking about your schedule? How the heck do you get yourself all pumped up after sleeping it off for the night?
It might not be an issue about freedom of expression to you. That's fair, you have as much right to your own opinon on the subject as anyone. However you've already fallen way down a slipperly slope if you fail to recognize that to many others (including me) it actually is a matter of freedom of expression.
Freedom of expression is closely related to the right to disagree. I hope both you and I agree that everyone has a right to disagree, and if you don't agree with that I will still voice my opinon that you have that right to disagree.
Is it xenophobic to disagree? Saying so smacks of ideological propaganda imo because if we can't discuss and disagree, even if it offends, then how are anybody at all who disagree supposed to be able to live together? According to Jyllands-Posten their point was self-censorship on muslim issues and I agree that such a point is both important as well as timely; and it implies a need for debate and acceptance of disagreement. I've had good relations to plenty of muslim and immigrant coworkers, friends, aquaintances, teachers, students (I've been a teacher), and even a nice lebanese girlfriend I was with years ago, but I would not be able to have a good relation to any of them if I was xenophobic or afraid to talk, discuss, or even disagree with them if so was the case.
this comment is provided "as is" and without any express or implied legibility or congruity [...]
I forgot to add my additional sig...
--
this additional sig includes a portrait of Mohammed in support of freedom of expression, feel free to reproduce it
this comment is provided "as is" and without any express or implied legibility or congruity [...]
I've been watching this craziness over cartoons for a few days now, and I'm confused - what's the problem? From what I can tell - someone drew a cartoon that someone else thought was offensive and the person who took offense asked for an apology... The person who drew it told them to piss off, and that incited riots?
Maybe it's just me - but isn't that a bit much? Rather than rioting, why not say "hey - ya know what? There's a zillion of us in your country - we're just not going to buy anything from the company that created this cartoon. Boycott 'em." or better yet - commission an artist or two to draw a caricature of the cartoonist who drew the things in the first place. Put it up all over the place "Joe Blow is a blasphemous asshole" or some such nonsense...
But marching, chanting, and burning down buildings is just so frigging ridiculous that it boggles the mind. If I recall - isn't the Prophet in question one who professes peace and love? What the hell kind of follower tries to defend the honor of the Prophet with war and hate?
Now that I think of it, it reminds of of the whole Salmon Rushdie "Satanic Verses" thing... just completely insane and wrong.
I'm Jewish and I have friends of all faiths - including Muslim. And none of them are going nuts over this - in fact, they're all pretty embarassed by the actions that their fellow followers have undertaken. What I think we're seeing here is a limited sect of radicals who are fanned on by a bunch of nutjobs (terrorist or otherwise) and enhanced by the Media... I say "Stop covering it in the news" and ignore it. Just like that crazy guy who walks down the street screaming at people ("who look at him funny")...
and finally - I'm a nerd. Someone hacked an unprotected website *yawn* Why does this news matter to me?
Which state has that motto (With God, all things are possible)?
Being a Muslim myself, I can say that I am deeply saddened the way Islam is represented, by some Muslims themselves and then by the media in the West. Protesting against cartoons, asking for apologies would be my chosen path; burning buildings, terrorizing people would not be. Period. My religion has been hijacked by a fanatic cult, claiming themselves to be Muslims yet doing virtually everything Islam has forbidden us to do! Add to that a few influential leaders in the Muslim world who use Islam as their political bitch to further their own agendas and you have the mess that is the Muslim nation today. But that does not represent what Islam the religion is about. THIS IS NOT ISLAM! Nor does it represent the majority Muslim nation. The sad part is that most people around the world have no insight into Islam beyond what media outlets choose to write or talk about, which is nearly always something negative since that is more newsworthy. I am sick and tired of defending my religion and prophet every time CNN or ABC decides to report something negative about Muslims. They rarely seem to pick the good things that the majority of Muslims (who happen to be moderate) are engaged in... The hypocrisy is unbelievable. I don't claim to completely know every aspect of Islam but I can say that the prophet who was commanded to fight only when his own safety and life was in jeopardy, and who gave explicit instructions to his army not to harm the elderly, women and children during times of war CAN NOT be a terrorist. Period. Anyway, I suppose I can't do much to change the hearts and minds of people who have decided that Islam is the problem. But I can speak my mind when I see idiotic and uninformed accusations being hurled at my religion... Enough said.
And what would I as a private citizen have to do to "get along"?
ALL extremists should be killed!
;-)
ohh, wait...
1. Fundamental problem: Extreme Muslim leaders deal in absolutes. It's all black or white. You can not negotiate with such people.
2. Further, violence and lying are accepted within their religion as means to defend and expand their religion. It's a much more aggressive religion than other world religions.
3. They have the anti-human sharia-laws that discriminates woman and punish individuals with methods from the year 1200. Those rules are barberic, and exemplifies the lack of knowledge about the human individual and the society.
Luckily the western world had the industrial revolution before the muslim world. If not, they would have taken over and forced themselves on us. Its within their religion to take over control of areas when they are in the majority, and force sharia laws upon the rest of the population.
Further, since religion is only made up crap, it's insanly offending to a normal intelligent person that others actually believe in allah, buddah, jesus etc. But we accept it, because in a modern democracy tolerance is very important in order to be able to live together.
Most of the verses you quoted make it clear that those directives were aimed at fellow Hebrews.
Terms such as "outside the camp" and "among you" show that clearly.
This isn't advocating violence against people of other persuasions. Unlike the "radical" or "fundamental" interpretations of islam .
- Edmund Burke
The forced resignation of the fundy that he appointed at NASA should be a sign that his power his fading. In the fall the the congress is likely to be purged from the worst republican slime, at that time Bush will be in the lame duck mode and not just the town idiot.
>>> "The "moderate" {$religiousGroup} has simply chosen to ignore the basic tenets os his faith which call for hate and bigotry against those not exactly like him."
I don't think this is true if ($religiousGroup == Christians). Jesus, the central focus of the Christian faith said "love your neighbour as yourself". The Bible believing Christian's attention is drawn several times to the differences amongst men (and by that term I mean humankind) being valuable - we're all parts of one body, can an ear see, can an eye hear?
But to God the Father through Jesus Christ these differences are immaterial in his desire to have a loving relationship with us - in Him there is no slave nor free, no male nor female, no Jew nor gentile [Galatians 3:28].
Oh, and the basis of Christian life: 1) love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and mind; 2) love your neighbour as yourself.
Aren't your assumptions about the "speed" based upon the close timing of the current protests and the web vandalisms? Those cartoons were published in September. It took some time for the current protests to be arranged. If the web vandalism was organized while the street protests were organized, is the concurrent timing so surprising?
Ran across this site that's kind of relevant.. you get to use an in-browser Paint program to, well, draw pictures of Allah or whatever and post it to the board in real time! It's actually pretty spiffy.
At first thought it was just some kids playing with fire, but after looking/reading around, they make a good point. So get out there and make a stand!
www.DrawMohammad.com
peace
elf
In Middle East cartoons attack you...
Christ what a design! I could eat a handful of iron filings and PUKE a better emergency pump than that!"
Hey, credit the author. E. E. Smith, "First Lensman."
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
.. if the discussions here would make /. a target... A slashdotted slashdot would be so cool.
If I had mod points, you'd definitely be the recipient.
Here is my basic problem with Islam.
...
http://www.geocities.com/scimah/idols.htm#TAQIYYA
The claim that 'Islam encourages the development of science and technology', is a classical example of Taqiyya , ie a statement which is known to be the opposite of the truth. (The taqiyya dispensation allows, and indeed encourages Muslims to lie to Unbelievers)
TAQIYYA (sometimes spelled TAQQIYYA or TAQIYA) is the duty of Muslims to lie about the beliefs, methods and objectives of Islam to non-Muslims. [TAQIYYA_1, TAQIYYA_2, TAQIYYA_3, TAQQIYA_4 , TAQIYA_5, TAQIYYA_6].
Taqiyya (bad faith, deceit, contempt for the truth, false promises, evasion, deceptive moderation and crocodile tears for terrorist victims) negates any attempt at interfaith dialogue between Islam and other belief systems, because we infidels never know whether we're being told a pack of lies.
In Islam it's OK to lie and deceive Kafirs (infidels) because Islam is in a permanent state of war with all non-Muslims and deception is a legitimate tactic. The word or promise of a Muslim to a Kafir counts for nothing in the eyes of Allah.
So taqiyya means that the only time you can be sure that a Mullah is telling the truth is when he says he's lying!
http://answering-islam.org/Terrorism/agenda.html
There goes a saying of the prophet of Islam that 'to lie is one of the major sins and Allah will hold you accountable, with the exception of these three' (in other words, in these three situations you can lie as much as you need to and Allah will not even blink): '(1) with your women; (2) in espionage jihad when you are a minority; and (3) in maintaining peace.' Thus the end justifies the means. (References)
There are many references to this- it's not a secret.
---
So HOW can I trust ANYTHING an islamic person says? It's okay for them to lie to me.
I don't believe in the existence of gods- but I do believe christians who follow their bible feel bad and shameful to lie to other people of any belief system. I trust christians in a way I can never trust islamic followers.
Hell as many posts here have revealed- there are NUMEROUS examples of mohammad artwork- including BY islamic artists and OF his face.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
There has been so much misinformation on this topic. Let me summarize the events.
- A right wing paper in Denmark publishes these cartoon. I am not going to debae what was the intent. They certainly have the right to do it.
- Muslims in Denmark meet with the editor, send petition to Prime Minister to no avail. They then contact diplomat from Islamic countries who are again refused by Denmark Prime Minister. Prime Minister is criticized by former Danish dimplots.
- Muslims imam from Denmark then go to Middle East to raise awareness of the issue. A lot of misinformation including 3 cartoon not published in any newspapers are used. This works. Product boycotts and flag burning is done. Well, this is part of democracy. In Deomcarcy, People HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE OFFENDED AND PEACEFUL PROTEST. We might think it is over very trivial matter but it is still their right
- Problem started when protest turns into the violance. There is no excuse for it. It is not as wide spread as one gets the impression from the media. Most Muslims live in 3rd wold countries with poor law enforcment, low education, dictatorship. Equating their behavior to their religion is racist in my opinion. Would same people conclude blacks rioting in U.U ghettos do it because of their race. Threat of violance by extremist should be handled bettter by Muslims. It is like nobody is challenging gangsters in ghettos and whole religions is getting the bad name.
Comment number 1337 in this discussion.
Not previously published in egypt at all.
The cartoons were originally published in Denmark in September - four months ago, and just one month before they appeared in Egypt.
Evidence is being discovered that the crowds in the middle-east were being whipped up by three different (not part of the twelve) far more insulting images of the prophet. Now I'm not saying that the violence is therefore ok, but realise that there are individuals in both east AND west who will manipulate these situations in order to move the world closer to a catastrophic war (one that will have many, many more losers than winners).
The only way to move us ALL in the other direction is to hold firm. Don't react to their violence with our own violent (including verbally violent) acts - in fact, preferably avoid any reaction at all; and we have to recognise that speech is power - we may have freedom of speech, but that is equivalent to freedom to exercise that particular power, and with power comes responsibility. If we fail to use the power of speech responsibly we will succeed in leading us all into a war - and then it won't make any difference who was 'in the right' cause we'll all be too busy killing each other.
Yes, we have freedom of speech, but that doesn't mean we must speak (or print) whatever we damn well like.
Read this:0 04/
Denmark and Jyllands-Posten: The background to a provocation
http://www.asiantribune.com/show_article.php?id=3
This covers more ground about the background to this and makes it clear that factions of the Danish government (we're not talking about all Danes here) and supporters of neocon fanatics like Daniel Pipes are to blame for this provocation.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Yeah, and then let's take that completely in context:
Then the LORD said to Moses: 14 "Take the blasphemer outside the camp. All those who heard him are to lay their hands on his head, and the entire assembly is to stone him. 15 Say to the Israelites: 'If anyone curses his God, he will be held responsible; 16 anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him. Whether an alien or native-born, when he blasphemes the Name, he must be put to death
Obviously, the blasphemer would have to have been inside the camp, his blasphemy witnessed by those also inside the camp and the sentence carried out by the entire assembly.
The way you take verse 16 OUT OF CONTEXT makes me wonder if these radical/fundamental muslims aren't doing the same with their Koran.
I am a dane and after seeing the story at bbc I wondered why the danish media haven`t picked it up.
/. to check what the nerds have to say.
I went to Zone-h site og although they say the more or less the same as bbc - the list of defacet(sp) sites - are consist mostly of "i did it for fun" - "to prove myself" there are some "islamic political" -
I am by no means a internetsecurity guy - but this smells fishy.
So I went to
And its just mudslinging and som stories I have never herd of : angry mobs in Copenhagen ? no - not Copenhagen denmark.
There a so many misunderstandings in this in the muslim as well as in the westerne world. So it`s nessecary to double check every single story. Before jumping to conclusions
creación de una nueva religión: Un nuevo virus 1. Mi Dios es el número y yo soy su profeta. 2. Mis seguidores forman una religión que se llama "Número-adoradores" 2. Cualquier representación o caricatura de cualquier número está prohibida a partir de ahora. 3. Razón: Porque lo digo yo (porque yo lo valgo) y porque mi religión me apoya. 4. En este momento solicito una paga vitalicia al Estado, al igual que otras religiones han hecho 5. El que viole estas leyes y se atreva a representar o dibujar un número, será perseguido y condenado a muerte: será considerado un infiel para esta religión Firmado: Profeta n 2.534.321.189 Aceptarías esto?
Exactly. Do you like yours buttered?
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
Gwynner Dyer makes an intersting observation that it isn't Islam, per se, that is extremist, it is Arab Islam. The problem is likely the rut that Arab nations are in socially, economically, and politically, and have been in for centuries. This rut has arguably been held in place by the autocrats sponsored by Western nations as part of the after effects of colonialism and WW2. A group of extremists believe that this rut is due to losign favour with Allah, and the only way to make up for it is to go back to the traditional ways... Instead of looking emperically at the more likely culprit, this century anyway, of Arab leaders turning towards socialism/state control over free markets and capitalism.
The most populated Muslim countries are in the South Pacific (e.g. Indonesia, the Phillippines, etc.) -- certainly Muslims across the world are outraged by these cartoons, but the most extreme calls aren't coming from those areas, from what I can tell. It arguably is the Arab extremists that are trying to formet their rage into a broader religious struggle across nations.
-Stu
First of all I want to say that it's nice to see a muslim posting on Slashdot. I've seen buddist, christian, jewish, atheist, and agnostic faiths/posters here before and now also Islam. I knew there had to be muslim nerds out there in the big world as well :)
:)
6 466896 821926 83025
"P.S. What if I said I was typing this on vi?
P.S.S. Which I was running through emacs?"
*dons flameretardant suit* *clears throat* moderates use any editor including such as pico or mg
Jokes aside I want to emphasize how the cartoon issue is seen by many westerners (including me); as an attack on freedom of expression. I can understand that some or many muslims feel offended to various degrees but that is part and parcel of freedom of expression in most western cultures (most people are offended in one way or the other all the time but almost all accept it as the price of freedom for all views) -- hence my additional signature.
Now in my opinon most western muslims do get it and I'm not in any way suggesting they shouldn't voice their opinion and affront at what they perceive to be blasphemous; that is their right of freedom of expression right there. However muslims in general need to get comfortable with insult (intended or not) in just the same way everybody else does.
Quickly here's what I consider extreme and moderate:
extreme (few) = killing over opinion, believing violence is an approriate form of normal expression, believing everyone who disagrees are subhuman infidels or similar
moderate (many) = accepting difference, accepting disagreement, accepting freedom of expression
- Wahhaabis and Talibanis have managed to make a solid reputation for themselves as very extreme
- I've never heard of a Sufi extremist (but know that many other muslims do not like the Sufi at all)
- just these past days there has been clashes between Sunni and Shia resulting in deaths, and there has been an inter-muslim suicide bombing in Pakistan
It's hard for me (and a lot others) as a non-muslim, non-christian, non-jewish, religious person (however believeing in the god of Abraham, same as those faiths) to regard those who treaten, kill and plot violence in the name of Islam as actual muslims (have a look at the atrocities commited in Holland). To me (and I hope most christians, jews and muslims) anyone killing in the name of god is a blasphemer. But it really should not surprise anyone that many people feel reserved towards muslims (and Islam) until they get to know people on a personal level; a disproportionate amount of violence is done under the guise of Islam, however falsly and manipulative.
Other posts by me on the topic (too much to include here but it explains my opinons more widely and with a bit more depth):
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=176319&cid=14
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=176824&cid=14
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=176824&cid=14
--
this additional sig includes a portrait of Mohammed in support of freedom of expression, feel free to reproduce it
this comment is provided "as is" and without any express or implied legibility or congruity [...]
It's a little strange to me, but before this Danish cartoon incident I was siding with the 'doves', yet now I find myself siding with the hawks. Freedom of speech is at least as sacred to me as the prophet is to a muslim person. It's such a crucial part of the very foundation of our culture. People died for it. There can be no compromise on this issue. No apologetic placating.
Exactly. In going thru all the posts on the BBC Have Your Say, I saw a lot of posts from people around the world clamoring for the Danish PM to fire the newspaper editor and close down the paper.
The people who are protesting just don't grok that we have this thing called Rights, including Freedom of Speech.
I'm all for multiple religions - in fact, I've gone out of my way to make people of various religions feel comfortable when I was serving in the Canadian Armed Forces and here at the international multi-ethnic university that I love.
But, to paraphrase, They can take our Lives, but they can't take our Freedom!
Maybe it's my Scottish ancestry, or having been a minority in Canada (American, and that's not easy), or knowing how the slippery slope of religion is frequently used to repress us, but this is one fight I'm not going to back down from.
And I've been a member of Amnesty International for most of my adult life, so if it riles me up this bad, you know it's important.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Hello. I'm a Pakistani Muslim and I'm sorry, but I could not go through all of the posts. However, I did go through enough to about get he gist of the discussion going on. Well, I would say that you people do not understand Islam or Muslims at all. Please, do not compare Christianity with Islam, since in today's world, they are radically different. The Bible is not even in it's original form today. Anyway, for us Muslims, the Prophet (PBUH) is the single most important person for whom any Muslim who is even remotely in touch with his religion would be willing to die for. I remember when I saw the cartoons in an email. There was simply an explosion in my mind. However, what calmed me down was that you people do not take religion in the same way as we Muslims do. You people do it in the name of freedom of speech, which is in my opinion highly overrated. Why I do not believe in complete freedom of speech is simple. You can say whatever you want? To whomever you want? And nobody can stop you? I mean c'mon. If I start abusing my neighbour without any reason, just because I feel like it, I would be doing a wrong thing. However, in certain things, I agree freedom of speech is important. Somebody in their post stated that freedom of speech is important because people have died for it. Well, for us Muslims, it is the same with the Prophet (PBUH). We love him dearly. And we respect him with all our hearts. When someone abuses him, he is abusing every Muslim in the world. All this aside, the way the protests were carried out was wrong. However, you guys must also understand mob mentality. Who knows, maybe the protest started out peacefully. A few violent individuals on the other hand, started inciting the crowd. The rest of the mob, already angry, joined them. Or maybe it really was staged by their leaders for their own political advantages. Nevertheless you cannot take it as an indication of what Islam teaches. No. Perusal of the life history of the Prophet (PBUH) teaches us that he used to pray for the enlightenment of the people who used to abuse him and Allah. One specific incident comes to mind. The Prophet (PBUH) went to a city, I don't remember the name. Their, the people starting abusing him and Allah and instead of responding in kind, he prayed that Allah show them the right way. So if the Muslims were to truly follow his example, they would not have attacked int he manner they did. Secondly, Islam does not preach that Muslims should conquer the world and impose Islam on others. Islam is all about acceptance. Even if I were to get someone to, say accept Islam, pray five times a day, recite the Quran and so on under coercion, but their heart was not into it, it would do no good to him or me. Instead I would be answerable to that person and Allah on the Day of Judgement. I look forward to answers to this post.
it's a quote from the Big Lebowski. Just seemed fitting cuz of my handle.
You better watch out, there may be dogs about . .
This is in reference to a post by someone about something they refer to as Taqqya. I'm sorry, but that is a complete and utter lie. I've never heard of anything called taqqya, though I admit my knoeledge of Islam is by no means complete. I will definitely ask around about this concept. However, I can comfortably repudiate tha claim that it is ok for Muslims to lie. It is by no means ok. Lying is considered as a great sin and the Quran orders us not to lie to anyone. Like I said in a previous post, Islam is all about acceptance. How can Islam be truly accepted by someone if they accept it under a false pretense. I will post more once I have more knowledge of this particular subject.
...are hard to find. But they exist. They're the silent majority.
Muslims have depicted Mohammed in drawings for years, even selling cheese with is likeness. They also tell jokes over there about "the prophets" that are rather un-Muslim. This is just mock outrage frome the Middle East Rent-A-Riot company.
"There are two types of people I can't stand.... those intoloernt of other people's culture, and the damn Dutch!"
Libertas in infinitum
Well that's just it.
Islam and democracy are currently incompatiable. The head of the state, is the head of the church. THEY HAVE NO SEPERATION OF CHURCH AND STATE!
That is the problem they have.
I too am a Christian and it kills me when my fellow believers attempt to spread their faith via legislation. They don't realize that is what the Roman Catholic church did with the Pope during the mideval times and it was a disaster.
Seperation of the church and state protects the church just as much as it protects the state. Also just because the Christians hold the majority of the government today, doesn't mean that they will tomorrow. Therefore the best scenario is to have a neutral and secular government that doesn't promote or pander to any religion.
Libertas in infinitum
"There are two types of people I can't stand.... those intolorent of other people's culture, and the damn Dutch!"
Libertas in infinitum
If there's anything that this is proving, it's that the crazies are not in the minority here. 500,000 people chanting "death to america, death to israel?"
but 500,000 out of 1,000,000,000 is still clearly in the minority.
That's the problem when you're dealing with people on the orders of billions, a million or two here (the ~1/1000 moonbats) get out of hand, and if they have sufficient capital they can cause serious concequences, if not totally unset the already fragile global state of affairs.
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
In every Western nation except the US, there are huge taxes on Gasoline, to the point where it costs three or four times what it does in the US. The US is going into huge deficit in order to fight a war (of hearts & minds, and at least partially about access to oil reserves.) The president has just said that Americans are addicted to Oil.
Isnt the first thing to do is to announce a regime of taxes on Gasoline, relatively little at first to prevent a shock to the economy, but announce that they will increase, year on year over time, in order to:
a) Discourage use of Oil. This incentivises people to find other sources of energy.
b) Offsets the cost of the Iraq war, by having people who need the government service pay for it. pay back the debt. Thats a very conservative approach.
Just live. Have fun. Take care of your family. Try to make the world a better place. Keep your beliefs to yourself becuase I (and a lot of others) really don't care how devoted you are to a religion which may or may not have any truth.
I am absolutely disgusted!!!! Not to say that it was smart to publish these cartoons, but its not the danish society that did this, but one single newspaper!!! The muslims shouldnt blame the whoæe WEST for this, even though Jyllands-Posten was followed up by others later. Shame on them!!!!!!!!
I wonder what the response would be too a nuclear attack on the west? Complete annihilation of the suspected nations? Maybe the elimination of Mecca and most holly sites. Then again according to the Quran earth is just a spec in Ala's eyes. I put my faith in humanity. A meteor will destroy the Earth before everyone converts to Islam. Free you mind and get some education, and if no education is available teach yourself to read. Don't rely on other to educate you about your own holly book.