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."
But Islam is a relgion of Peace, remember?
Q: How do you know you're an ignorant shit?
A: When you can't tell the difference between extremists and true followers of a religion.
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.
"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?
"...they genuinely beleive the entire world should be forcibly conquered by their religion..."
And Christianity lacks this particular trait how?
The lunatic fringe does not think rationally about their beliefs. That's true of Muslims, Christians, Republicans, Democrats, Amiga people, OS/2 people, Linux people and pretty much any other group you care to name. In a population of a reasonably large sized city all of the same faith, I'm sure it's easy to find a few thousand people to get worked up about pretty much anything.
I'm sure most of the 1 billion or so Muslims on the planet are secure enough in their faith not to get terribly worked up about some jackass who probably knows nothing about their culture publishing a derogatory cartoon about them. Unfortunately in a population of 1 billion people, the lunatic fringe is going to be rather large.
Still, it does demonstrate the dangers of blind faith in anything, which is why my regime would ban the practise of all organized religion except the state sponsored one, which would involve Smurfs.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
First, You can't depict Mohammed in drawings, but you can name 1/4 of the f'ing Islamic population after him? Yeah... makes perfect f'ing sense.
Second, Here is my image of Mohammed:
' O
'\|/
' |
'/ \
Ooooh! Jihad on me now! Oooohhh!!! This kind of unreasonable crazy-assed behavior is why people say things like "Self-lighting glass parking lot". Personally, I'd like to just see no more demand for their natural resources. Then they can go back to 14th century behavior amongst themselves and leave the rest of the world out of it.
Coding with assembly is like playing with Legos. Coding an application in assembly is like building a car with Legos.
"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?
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?
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
This guy DOES NOT represent the majority of danes.
In fact i'd say the views presented above are typical of the danish "loony left"; liberals (in the bad sense of the word) more PC than Bill Clinton could ever dream of being (to put it into an american context)..
Personally, I think it was probably a bad move to publish the drawings, but mainly because the backlash is going to cost the danish government vast sums in lost export revenues...
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.
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
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.
There is no such thing as a moderate muslim.
The "moderate" muslim has simply chosen to ignore the basic tenets os his faith which call for hate and bigotry against those not exactly like him.
s/muslim/hindu/g.
s/muslim/christian/g.
s/muslim/judaism/g.
Blasphemer != Non-Believer. You fail it! Do better you must. Thanks for playing. :-)
Insulting the Living God, the Creator of the universe is quite alot different to simply not believing in said God. Find one scripture where killing a non-believer is commissioned. Even harder, find one in the New Testament - seeing that the New Testament is a totally new paradigm and is the current rule set (so to speak).
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).
.... Islamic invasion. From the Moorish invasions of the 9th century to the Ottaman of 17th, Muslims have been trying to conquer Europe. Coupled with the fact that core ideology of Islam is one of submitting the Infidel to Allah with Mohammed as his only true Prophet, then European fears are well founded. The Crusades were a defensive gesture, not an offensive one. They were launched in response to Byzantine Christians calls for help against the Muslims.
European fears of Islamic invasion are based on thousands of years of
I suppose you can write all this off to oraganized racism, but your evidence is lacking and amateurish. You've provided none. That 11 point list you've provided could be tripled by the things Muslims do to themselves. Does that make them co-conspirators? nd for all your blathering, you didn't address the key point. Free speech isn't something you put in quotes, as if it's a misnomer or fallacy. It's something you obviously don't appreciate or have thought much about.
Well, first of all there are some fundamental ideological differences between Islam and Christianity.
All of the violence in Christianity is contained in the Old Testament, which is Jewish. The New Testament is the only book written by Chrstians, and it is overwhelmingly postitive. Secondly, the frameworks of the two religions are completely different. In the Quran, you are read God, literally, as transmited through Mohammed via the angel Gabriel. The New Testament is much more diffuse and organic, written by a number of men over the centuries You would have a lot more theological ammunition arguing for peace with Christianity than with Islam. That's why the Islamic fundamentalist is just that, fundamental. He can crack the Quran and contradict every sura that speaks of mercy and compassion with one that calls for violence and jihad.
When people say that all religions are the same, they are incorrect. All men are the same, having the same violent and authoritarian impulses, but the ideas they embrace are as different as night and day.
Again your points are irrelevant and they don't address your earlier fallacies. Muslims introduced the rule of law, eh? Before Rome and Greece? Ok. Literacy?! Do tell. Muslims invented the book?! Running water? Gee, wonder what those Roman aquaducts are for. So on and so forth. Your claims are so patently absurd, I'm thinking you must be a Muslim.
What is different about Islam from other religions is that it is one from the ground up - it is applicable to the individual all the way up to state.
And among it's many applications is dealing with the Kaffir( or Islamic equivalent of 'nigger' ). Those rules are pretty explicit. The infidels are to be fought wherever you may find them, although a truce may be brokered if it is advantageous to Muslims. Furthermore, if the infidel is conquered, then he may be allowed to live under Islamic rule and practice his older, inferior religion, provided he pays the Muslims for protection in the form of a tax, the jizya. But at no time can infidel laws supercede Islamic ones. A muslim has more weight in testimony than a non muslim with regards to law. So on and so forth. The end game is bring the whole of the world into the fold of Islam, for that is the whole point of Islam( submission ) and one which is prophesied in the Quran.
But in the context of culture, kaffir is equivalent to nigger: "Used as a disparaging term for a member of any socially, economically, or politically deprived group of people:", via Dictionary.com. Minorities living under Muslim rule were deprived, in that they were not equal under Islamic law to Muslims. Furthermore, Islamic literature is replete with disparaging references to the infidel. Kaffir is a term of disgust, not respect.
The jizya is not comparable to the tax levied on all people in the US, regardless of their race, religion, or creed. The jizya was *not* imposed on Muslims. Certainly Muslims were taxed to varying degrees, but the fact remains that if you were a non-Muslim, you payed *extra* for protection. So 'pretty much' isn't accurate and your simply dismissing something that is fundamentally unjust. Furthermore, the comparison of the US Justice system with Sharia is again dishonest. Under US laws, if a Muslim commits a crime against a Christian, their testimonies are not weighted by their respective religions. Nor are females and males treated equally. You are right to say that laws from another culture cannot compete with the laws of the host, but if the laws of the host are patently unjust towards the other and are not weighted equally regardless of who you are or what faith you practice, then your justice system is corrupt.
And your last paragraph is merely opinion, but highlights the ironic superiority complex that a lot of muslims have. No one cares what you achievments you acomplished a 1000 years ago. What have you done for me lately? The Islamic world is overwhelmingly ignorant, illiterate, and contribues almost nothing except bombs,fanaticism, and oil to the world. America is by every measurement the richest and most influential empire to have ever existed, with the exception of the British who were as influential, but far smaller. The world speaks English, business is conducted via the dollar, communicates through the Internet, and travels the globe in the automobile and airplane. The list of documented American achievments is vast and is essentially an extension of the European achievments that preceeded it.
As long as the Islamic world harps on its past, which is certainly no greater than the Chinese, Persian, or Roman empires before it, then it will continue to decline and wallow in its ignorance.