"Islamophobic" implies an irrational fear of Islam, but I don't think that applies here. Wilders raises the question of whether the ethics expressed in the Koran is compatible with modern liberal democracies, and he concludes that it isn't (and I tend to agree with him). That's an important part of a public political debate. For example, nations might impose restrictions on immigration of Muslims or the practice of Islam, perhaps permitting only liberal or reform versions of the religion.
No. Islamophobia refers to prejudice or discrimination towards Islam and Muslims in general.
Now, you have every right to agree with Wilders. Although, somehow, I seriously doubt you have the linguistic or historical knowledge to speak of the "the ethics expressed in the Koran". I spent several months studying the book, and I see absolutely nothing in it that would be considered incompatible with "modern liberal democracies". But then again, I've seen quite a few erroneous interpretations (in my view) that don't.
With regards to the "restrictions on immigration" you want to impose, how do you go about that without essentially violating the principles of a liberal democracy? I don't know where you're from, but the principles on which the modern state of Netherlands don't allow one to discriminate based on faith. Moreover, what do you do about the millions of Muslims already there? Round them up and put them in concentration camps? Seriously, if you think the majority of Dutch people will put up for this, you're severely mistaken.
As for your "liberal or reform versions"[sic], how do you determine those? Islam, in case you didn't know, has had no central authority since Mohammed. In fact, one of the central foundations of that faith is a repudiation of the clergy or any central figure. The prophet was adamant on that. He encouraged everyone to educate themselves, read Quran and communicate with God directly. How do you "reform" something that's decentralized by definition? If you are Dutch, you have every right to lobby your government to close the doors to immigrants. I just don't see how you can legally discriminate against Muslims in that context. The only practical way would be to not let anybody in, but in that case, it is your country that will suffer. Let's face it, immigration policies weren't designed out of charity.
The "cost/benefit ratio" doesn't apply here. The criminals the OP was referring to literally blow themselves up. There is no deterring them. I do agree with the education part though. It's a sad state of affairs when the crushing majority of Muslims don't even know Arabic, let alone have access to proper schools. In that context, it becomes quite easy for all sort of gurus to fill in the gap, although the idea of a clergy was heavily opposed by the prophet Mohammed.
Don't mistake what is political for the religious. Guns are prohibited in the totality of majority-Muslim countries. And if the Palestinians or the iraqis happen to have them, it is because of the lawlessness that reigns in those places.
How do you ensure that nobody cheats on their taxes? How can you ensure that people don't discriminate against you based on your gender, race or age? How can you possibly deter someone so kooky that he/she is willing to blow him/herself up?
If you find anything that does, let me know. I'll be interested to hear your take.
I see so many of them on tv in various places of the world, behaving in such a manner,
You know what? If I never been to the US and relied on TV to give me an accurate picture of the place, I'd probably picture it as a place full of arrogant and deranged pistol-packing criminals who want to conquer the world.
I am a Muslim and I sympathize with your situation, but the fact of the matter is that people are gonna do whatever they're gonna do in this life, and no amount of vehemently Islamophobic documentaries is going to change that. You might be tempted to believe that Wilders work is reclaiming your right to "go on TV or write a column that talks about women's rights in the middle east", but it's not. All it is doing is waste your tax-money and exacerbate the divide.
P.S: I fully support Mr. Wilders right to publish his work, and would defend it till the end. The above is merely meant to point out the flaw in your logic and unrealistic expectations.
True. But I don't see any reason for you to assume what you wrote either. If you're not willing to give the benefit of the doubt to over a billion human beings, might as well bomb them back to the stone ages, destroy their countries, invade them, build bases on their soils, lock them up in open-air prisons or install dictatorial puppet regimes that serve your interests over there. Oh, wait...
Look, I converted to Islam four years ago, and I can tell you that among the hundreds of Muslim people I know, there ain't a single one who rejoices if an innocent American or Dane is killed. I believe in freedom of speech in the Voltairian sense of the word, and I'd defend this guy's right to present his documentary till the end. If Pakistanis or some other Wahabis get all riled up about it, tough tomato! But you have to stop gullibly swallowing all the sensationalistic crap the media are dissing your way, and start doing some basic research if you want to understand why some Palestinians saw 9/11 as an occasion to celebrate. If you don't travel around, learn new languages (I don't mean the ones for machines and actively seek the opinion of Muslims, you have no business speaking of Islam and much less of their majority.
The town in question is Sderot, where most inhabitants are of North African (especially Moroccan) origins. Those tend to be not so hell-bent on Zionism as European Jews because they weren't persecuted as much. I like to think that the government of a country founded on Zionism and so proud of it, would be slightly biased towards the inhabitants of Sderot.
Also, has anyone of you ever seen the damage katyushas make? Calling those things rockets or spending money to intercept them is ludicrous.
It's not a breakthrough per se, but it's something that makes me very excited. Roll-to-roll fabrication is something that will assuredly make production both cheaper and faster. I can already picture my new wallpapers...
MS is using all its weight in anticipation of the problem. The new and upcoming Eee 900 for example, has been announced by Asus France as a Windows only version.
The good news is that the French customer is very well protected and forcing a software with a PC down their throat is illegal. So essentially, what will happen is thousands of geeks demanding reimbursement of the XP licenses. That oughta hit Asus really hard, and teach them a good lesson.
I read that Asus Germany announced a similar "forced sale", but can't seem to find the article.
Not quite. I just needed a way to push the word out without seeming too much off-topic. You know, in case anyone was under the impression that Morocco's anywhere near close to a democratic regime.
I don't know if you've heard of this judicial world premiere; a 26 years old Moroccan engineer was kidnapped, tortured and thrown out in jail for creating a Facebook profile using the name of the king's brother. He was charged with "villainous activities" although the only thing he did with the account was send a smiley.
Tu quoque? This idiotic line is getting old. Yes, we get it. The US is better than the scum of the Earth that is al-Qaeda and their supporters. But for the love of God, quit justifying wars of aggression and other unconstitutional acts by see, it could be worse. It's only works with mentally challenged people.
Rebels would be one description. I still believe they terrorized the natives. Terrorism is the use of violence to intimidate a population or government into granting their demands. The American forefathers, any way you look at it, fit that description.
Because cutting off people's arms is counter to Western values. Pretty much all Muslim countries (Wahabis or not) practice that one. As are many Sharia laws for treating women.
Don't say another word. Your ignorance is showing.
Oh come on! If that wasn't true, Muslims immigrating to Canada, UK and other countries wouldn't be demanding the institution of Sharia Law, yet they are!
So what? Aren't they allowed to express their opinions and influence their country of residence by democratic means? I don't know about Canada, but British common law is very open to such things. Sikhs or Jews have been doing it for a long time, why should Muslims give up that right.
You are probably amalgamating consensual Sharia law as it appears in the Islamic tradition with the much-publicized bastardized version of the Wahabis and their croonies. If you happen to be British and don't like your laws, then I suggest you try and pass new ones. Slandering a group of people based on their faith for the sole purpose of doing so, is not the most constructive attitude.
Either these people reflect the view of the majority or the "silent majority" is sitting back and letting its nut-cases run the show. Either way you can understand why people are pissed.
No, actually I don't. I expect ignorant bigots who speak about countries they've never been to or cultures they know nothing about to have that kind of logic, but to "understand" it is something else. The kid sitting on a hill in Ba'aquba listening to Radio Taliban could say the exact same thing about the "silent majority" sitting back and letting its nut-cases run the show. Only when he/she does an effort to look for the fierce grassroots opposition to the neo-cons can he/she get out of that bigoted mindset. In other words, if you're sitting on your ass expecting information to reach you, might as well give up critical thinking.
Not a day goes by without people being killed, tortured, abducted and jailed under dictatorships. That you don't hear about it is simply because you haven't tried hard enough. I am a Muslim and have been in plenty of marches and rallies to denounce terrorism, but are yet to see any coverage of any of them in the dominant US media outlets. As a progressist, I have been oppressed and censored every time I try to change things. It's not like I can go and stage a coup because: 1) they have all the weapons (which your country probably sold them to) and there is no tolerance for gun possession. 2) I don't believe in violence.
You can show the Hitler sign on any German marketplace and publicly deny the holocaust and passer-bys will show you the finger and call the police. Then two friendly-but-serious German officer will come to handcuff you, take your name, put you in jail for two days, release you on bail until the trial.
Now imagine what happened if you publicly mocked Mohammed when there are able-bodied muslim males in the vicinity. Just. Imagine.
I'm an able-bodied (220 lbs, 6ft2, 8% bf) Muslim male, and would never resort to violence in such a situation. In many majority-Muslim countries I know very well, people will call the police on you, and you'll be taken into custody. Depending on what passport you have and the relationship your government has with them, they might release you in a matter of hours. You'll probably get beaten up by the cops, but that's more for being an arrogant prick and bothering them with all the paperwork.
If you think you're entitled to free speech anywhere you go, tough luck. Different countries have different laws, and while in Rome, do as the Romans do. I don't know where you're from, but don't expect to be treated the same way in Amsterdam than in Washington with regards to drugs. Heck, in Singapore or China you'd go away for a very very long time.
Watch the Top Gear episode where the crew toured the United States. One of the challenges was to go through a redneck populated area with "country music sucks" or "Man love rules!" painted on their cars. It quickly got physical with the locals. Same thing if you go to a black neighborhood saying "Fsck Dr. King!". You probably wouldn't get out alive. I don't now where you're from but I'm pretty sure there has to be an ignorant crowd looking to pick a fight. Maybe they're unemployed, bored, or just idiotic. True, that proportion would be higher in majority-Muslim countries, but that is because their average Joe is less likely to have an education, job or even food and shelter. Keep that in mind the next time you see reports from the Occupied Territories, Sudan or Pakistan.
Whereas the nuts in Islam seem to be the ones in charge. When you have women getting arrested and charged for sitting with another man in a Starbucks, then you have some serious issues that need to be resolved. When you have women being stoned to death for... well, does it really fucking matter what it's for? It's barbaric and ridiculous.
Can't argue with that. However, what you fail to perceive, is that those "in charge" in no way represent the will of the people. In fact, besides a couple of countries, none of the dozens of Arab countries are democratic. If the West wasn't backing up the Al-Sauds (which I assume you referred to with your Starbucks bit), they would have been toast long ago.
Take Iraq for example. Women in the country were the equal of men. Now, after a war of aggression and countless innocent deaths, their fate is essentially no better than that of the ones in Saudi Arabia. Take Kuwait; the darling of Washington. Women were allowed to vote their in 2004. Do you see nothing wrong with that? The Saudis are not even allowed to drive a car.
If you really want the situation to change in any of those places, quit supporting the tyrants. I've lived my whole life under a dictatorship in a majority-Muslim country, and I can tell you from experience that Western support is the biggest hindrance to progressists. You are mistaken what is political for religion. Amalgamating the two is a sure way to misunderstand the situation.
Huh? So you're surprised the corporate media prefer to relate angry mob stories rather than peaceful marches condemning terrorism or other such crimes committed in the name of Islam? I can tell you that I've been in many, and have never seen a mainstream Western news outlet cover any of it.
You speak of people "celebrating in the streets". Yes, that took place in the Occupied Territories, and as awful as that was, you have to remember that every bomb that destroys their homes was either "Made In USA" or financed by Americans' (hard earned?) tax money. When they saw the tragedy that was 9/11, they understandably felt avenged. I dare you to find a single other territory in which people were "celebrating in the streets".
And what exactly does "the system of government that is in place from Islam" mean? Do you expect the Pakistani or Saudi leaders (which the people overwhelmingly oppose) to go after a movement they themselves created and financed? You have a dangerously simplistic view.
Slashdot Mirror
Now, you have every right to agree with Wilders. Although, somehow, I seriously doubt you have the linguistic or historical knowledge to speak of the "the ethics expressed in the Koran". I spent several months studying the book, and I see absolutely nothing in it that would be considered incompatible with "modern liberal democracies". But then again, I've seen quite a few erroneous interpretations (in my view) that don't.
With regards to the "restrictions on immigration" you want to impose, how do you go about that without essentially violating the principles of a liberal democracy? I don't know where you're from, but the principles on which the modern state of Netherlands don't allow one to discriminate based on faith. Moreover, what do you do about the millions of Muslims already there? Round them up and put them in concentration camps? Seriously, if you think the majority of Dutch people will put up for this, you're severely mistaken.
As for your "liberal or reform versions"[sic], how do you determine those? Islam, in case you didn't know, has had no central authority since Mohammed. In fact, one of the central foundations of that faith is a repudiation of the clergy or any central figure. The prophet was adamant on that. He encouraged everyone to educate themselves, read Quran and communicate with God directly. How do you "reform" something that's decentralized by definition? If you are Dutch, you have every right to lobby your government to close the doors to immigrants. I just don't see how you can legally discriminate against Muslims in that context. The only practical way would be to not let anybody in, but in that case, it is your country that will suffer. Let's face it, immigration policies weren't designed out of charity.
The "cost/benefit ratio" doesn't apply here. The criminals the OP was referring to literally blow themselves up. There is no deterring them. I do agree with the education part though. It's a sad state of affairs when the crushing majority of Muslims don't even know Arabic, let alone have access to proper schools. In that context, it becomes quite easy for all sort of gurus to fill in the gap, although the idea of a clergy was heavily opposed by the prophet Mohammed.
Don't mistake what is political for the religious. Guns are prohibited in the totality of majority-Muslim countries. And if the Palestinians or the iraqis happen to have them, it is because of the lawlessness that reigns in those places.
How do you ensure that nobody cheats on their taxes? How can you ensure that people don't discriminate against you based on your gender, race or age? How can you possibly deter someone so kooky that he/she is willing to blow him/herself up?
If you find anything that does, let me know. I'll be interested to hear your take.
I am a Muslim and I sympathize with your situation, but the fact of the matter is that people are gonna do whatever they're gonna do in this life, and no amount of vehemently Islamophobic documentaries is going to change that. You might be tempted to believe that Wilders work is reclaiming your right to "go on TV or write a column that talks about women's rights in the middle east", but it's not. All it is doing is waste your tax-money and exacerbate the divide. P.S: I fully support Mr. Wilders right to publish his work, and would defend it till the end. The above is merely meant to point out the flaw in your logic and unrealistic expectations.
True. But I don't see any reason for you to assume what you wrote either. If you're not willing to give the benefit of the doubt to over a billion human beings, might as well bomb them back to the stone ages, destroy their countries, invade them, build bases on their soils, lock them up in open-air prisons or install dictatorial puppet regimes that serve your interests over there. Oh, wait...
Look, I converted to Islam four years ago, and I can tell you that among the hundreds of Muslim people I know, there ain't a single one who rejoices if an innocent American or Dane is killed. I believe in freedom of speech in the Voltairian sense of the word, and I'd defend this guy's right to present his documentary till the end. If Pakistanis or some other Wahabis get all riled up about it, tough tomato! But you have to stop gullibly swallowing all the sensationalistic crap the media are dissing your way, and start doing some basic research if you want to understand why some Palestinians saw 9/11 as an occasion to celebrate. If you don't travel around, learn new languages (I don't mean the ones for machines and actively seek the opinion of Muslims, you have no business speaking of Islam and much less of their majority.
The town in question is Sderot, where most inhabitants are of North African (especially Moroccan) origins. Those tend to be not so hell-bent on Zionism as European Jews because they weren't persecuted as much. I like to think that the government of a country founded on Zionism and so proud of it, would be slightly biased towards the inhabitants of Sderot.
Also, has anyone of you ever seen the damage katyushas make? Calling those things rockets or spending money to intercept them is ludicrous.
It's not a breakthrough per se, but it's something that makes me very excited. Roll-to-roll fabrication is something that will assuredly make production both cheaper and faster. I can already picture my new wallpapers...
There's a guy who was put 3 years in jail for creating a Facebook profile.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7258950.stm http://blogs.zdnet.com/threatchaos/?p=545 http://helpfouad.com/
MS is using all its weight in anticipation of the problem. The new and upcoming Eee 900 for example, has been announced by Asus France as a Windows only version.
http://www.blogeee.net/2008/03/06/le-eeepc-900-uniquement-avec-windows-xp-dapres-asus-france/
The good news is that the French customer is very well protected and forcing a software with a PC down their throat is illegal. So essentially, what will happen is thousands of geeks demanding reimbursement of the XP licenses. That oughta hit Asus really hard, and teach them a good lesson.
I read that Asus Germany announced a similar "forced sale", but can't seem to find the article.
One of them was thrown in jail for 3 years. http://blogs.zdnet.com/threatchaos/?p=545/
Oh, wait...nevermind.
Thank God it wasn't a Facebook profile. They could have ended up in jail.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/threatchaos/?p=545
You do realize that the Eee PC900 was announced today at CeBIT, don't you? http://eeesite.net/2008/03/asus-announces-next-generation-eee-pc.html/
You do realize that the Eee PC900 was announced today at CeBIT, don't you? http://eeesite.net/2008/03/asus-announces-next-generation-eee-pc.html
Not quite. I just needed a way to push the word out without seeming too much off-topic. You know, in case anyone was under the impression that Morocco's anywhere near close to a democratic regime.
I don't know if you've heard of this judicial world premiere; a 26 years old Moroccan engineer was kidnapped, tortured and thrown out in jail for creating a Facebook profile using the name of the king's brother. He was charged with "villainous activities" although the only thing he did with the account was send a smiley.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080310/lalami
http://blogs.zdnet.com/threatchaos/?p=545
Anyway, Facebook denied handing out his data to the Moroccan government, but in this so-called "terror-age", I don't buy that for a second.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120424448908501345.html?mod=technology_main_whats_news
Reading Slashdot is indeed the ??? *Rushes to patent office*
Tu quoque? This idiotic line is getting old. Yes, we get it. The US is better than the scum of the Earth that is al-Qaeda and their supporters. But for the love of God, quit justifying wars of aggression and other unconstitutional acts by see, it could be worse. It's only works with mentally challenged people.
Rebels would be one description. I still believe they terrorized the natives. Terrorism is the use of violence to intimidate a population or government into granting their demands. The American forefathers, any way you look at it, fit that description.
You are probably amalgamating consensual Sharia law as it appears in the Islamic tradition with the much-publicized bastardized version of the Wahabis and their croonies. If you happen to be British and don't like your laws, then I suggest you try and pass new ones. Slandering a group of people based on their faith for the sole purpose of doing so, is not the most constructive attitude. No, actually I don't. I expect ignorant bigots who speak about countries they've never been to or cultures they know nothing about to have that kind of logic, but to "understand" it is something else. The kid sitting on a hill in Ba'aquba listening to Radio Taliban could say the exact same thing about the "silent majority" sitting back and letting its nut-cases run the show. Only when he/she does an effort to look for the fierce grassroots opposition to the neo-cons can he/she get out of that bigoted mindset. In other words, if you're sitting on your ass expecting information to reach you, might as well give up critical thinking.
Not a day goes by without people being killed, tortured, abducted and jailed under dictatorships. That you don't hear about it is simply because you haven't tried hard enough. I am a Muslim and have been in plenty of marches and rallies to denounce terrorism, but are yet to see any coverage of any of them in the dominant US media outlets. As a progressist, I have been oppressed and censored every time I try to change things. It's not like I can go and stage a coup because: 1) they have all the weapons (which your country probably sold them to) and there is no tolerance for gun possession. 2) I don't believe in violence.
If you think you're entitled to free speech anywhere you go, tough luck. Different countries have different laws, and while in Rome, do as the Romans do. I don't know where you're from, but don't expect to be treated the same way in Amsterdam than in Washington with regards to drugs. Heck, in Singapore or China you'd go away for a very very long time.
Watch the Top Gear episode where the crew toured the United States. One of the challenges was to go through a redneck populated area with "country music sucks" or "Man love rules!" painted on their cars. It quickly got physical with the locals. Same thing if you go to a black neighborhood saying "Fsck Dr. King!". You probably wouldn't get out alive. I don't now where you're from but I'm pretty sure there has to be an ignorant crowd looking to pick a fight. Maybe they're unemployed, bored, or just idiotic. True, that proportion would be higher in majority-Muslim countries, but that is because their average Joe is less likely to have an education, job or even food and shelter. Keep that in mind the next time you see reports from the Occupied Territories, Sudan or Pakistan.
Take Iraq for example. Women in the country were the equal of men. Now, after a war of aggression and countless innocent deaths, their fate is essentially no better than that of the ones in Saudi Arabia. Take Kuwait; the darling of Washington. Women were allowed to vote their in 2004. Do you see nothing wrong with that? The Saudis are not even allowed to drive a car.
If you really want the situation to change in any of those places, quit supporting the tyrants. I've lived my whole life under a dictatorship in a majority-Muslim country, and I can tell you from experience that Western support is the biggest hindrance to progressists. You are mistaken what is political for religion. Amalgamating the two is a sure way to misunderstand the situation.
Huh? So you're surprised the corporate media prefer to relate angry mob stories rather than peaceful marches condemning terrorism or other such crimes committed in the name of Islam? I can tell you that I've been in many, and have never seen a mainstream Western news outlet cover any of it.
You speak of people "celebrating in the streets". Yes, that took place in the Occupied Territories, and as awful as that was, you have to remember that every bomb that destroys their homes was either "Made In USA" or financed by Americans' (hard earned?) tax money. When they saw the tragedy that was 9/11, they understandably felt avenged. I dare you to find a single other territory in which people were "celebrating in the streets".
And what exactly does "the system of government that is in place from Islam" mean? Do you expect the Pakistani or Saudi leaders (which the people overwhelmingly oppose) to go after a movement they themselves created and financed? You have a dangerously simplistic view.