Danish Muhammad cartoon

[Laivasse]

Earliest relevant records recall
An eastern double isle
It ended in the 2nd global war
It was the beginning of the earth sun era

The world would never be the same
Devastation, war and plague
When it was over, order never came
Kingdoms 'united' under a fallous blue flag

Cold countries lived in fear
Global conflict ever near
Although militarily inactive
The 3 largest nations plotted to ruin each other

The new land to the west, the old world in the centre
And the eastern plane: three incompatible societies

Idealogy the reason, the new and old lands fought
No blood was shed, but a weapons race procured
All eyes turned to these great powers
To maintain the balance of peace

No attention was paid to the eastern plane
Thought backwards, it was ignored

Revolution caused the old kingdom's fall and collapse
The new land declared itself the victor

But the weapons, naturally, still remained
And a northern alliance passed as law
The world saw unprecedented growth
In the east, mistrusting and scared men picked up their arms

My father is said to have seen the whole thing
The great death that was soon to come

The now delicate structure of stability soon fell
The fallen kingdom of old tried to make eastern amends
Peace may have lasted two weeks and one day
But the new land simply couldn't wait

Rows of earth suns burned, the sky turned black
No society survived the 2-day attack

 

[The Monkey]

One thing I don't understand is how they get hold of so many Danish flags to burn.

Maybe we should start burning down embassies of muslim countries and kill muslims, because that's apparently the way to act if you disagree with someone.

MY GOD, I hate Islam. In fact, I dislike most religions, but Islam seems to be the one that has failed the most to adapt to the modern world.

 

[satch919]

One thing I don't understand is how they get hold of so many Danish flags to burn.

Maybe we should start burning down embassies of muslim countries and kill muslims, because that's apparently the way to act if you disagree with someone.

MY GOD, I hate Islam. In fact, I dislike most religions, but Islam seems to be the one that has failed the most to adapt to the modern world.

The reason why I think they're burning buildings and killing people is because they're ruled by radicals. Unfortunately, the people aren't the most educated so they are easier to manipulate.

I don't care for any religion either but I think it's wrong to say that you hate Islam because it seems that they're more violent or under-developed. One could argue that Christanity and Catholicism have been equally as brutal and oppressive in the past as well as the present. The media and government has had a large hand in demonizing a religion that might otherwise be peaceful if it weren't for the West trying to convert them and their beliefs. Our imperialistic aims have outraged a culture that hold their values and beliefs very closely. If anything, we should respect that.

 

[Donut4000]

It is obvious this issue is making a lot of people very hot under the collar - both religeous and not. It is a shame that freedom of speech is being bounded about so quickly; while I agree is is very important to be able to express ideas and opinions without censorship - I think this comes with responsability. While it may be 'legal' to publish these cartoons, it is not very wise, as the nature of them will insult a lot of muslims. In this respect, these cartoons have put the ability to say something far in front of of the necessity of saying it - not very decent in my mind. That all being said - the reaction has surprissed a lot of people, and I cannot see how burning buildings, issuing death threats etc will help in any way whatsoever, given the fragile relationship that exists between the west and the Islamic states.
I truly hope this mess will cool down sooner rather than later, but looking at the blind rage in so many of the various city around the world - I don't have much hope. Religion does seem a pretty good way to start a fight eh?

 

[The Monkey]

The reason why I think they're burning buildings and killing people is because they're ruled by radicals. Unfortunately, the people aren't the most educated so they are easier to manipulate.

I don't care for any religion either but I think it's wrong to say that you hate Islam because it seems that they're more violent or under-developed. One could argue that Christanity and Catholicism have been equally as brutal and oppressive in the past as well as the present. The media and government has had a large hand in demonizing a religion that might otherwise be peaceful if it weren't for the West trying to convert them and their beliefs. Our imperialistic aims have outraged a culture that hold their values and beliefs very closely. If anything, we should respect that.

Yes, I have arab friends and we're able to get along because they don't let religion control them. But the thing about this is that most of the people, not just the radicals, think that the Danish government is responsible. I don't know what has caused this, but I guess they've been brainwashed by Islam to believe that religion goes before freedom. Throughout the history of time I believe that more lifes have been taken in the name of Christianity than in the name of Islam, such as the Crusades and the Scramble of Africa, but at the current time Islam oppress more people than Christianity.

 

[satch919]

I think there's a lot of pent-up anger conerning the Muslims. They've rejected Western ideas and motives time and time again. This cartoon may have been the spark to something bigger that hasn't materialized yet. Perhaps it is us that has created such a violent backlash; we try to push our culture on them. If they don't want modernization, fine. Let them come to us if they need the help. Let the Muslims be the ones who rule their land and community. I know, however, that this will never be the case. :|

 

[lister]

In the deleted posts, where he made a rather large number of degrogatory comments regarding Muslims.

Ok, racism isn't entirely the appropriate word - intolerance is a better one - and we are not prepared to have such things on this forum.

Fairdo's, ill stick out of the political debates that go-on, on this forum.

 

[Jandor]

I ****ing love those Danes. There's just something about them that really makes it seem as if they have their heads screwed on. First they reject the Euro and now their government is standing firm over this, and good on them.

It boils down to this - printing those cartoons may have been insensitive. However sensitivity is not something you can demand. You can politely request it, and get told to go and get stuffed and then sulk because you didn't get treated as nicely as you wanted, but you certainly haven't got any justification to go any further than that.

There are limits to freedom of speech, but this cartoon did not really come anywhere near to violating those limits. Loads of people don't seem to be understanding this and go about comparing the cartoons to racist propaganda or incitements to genocide, when it's totally different. Similarly, a cartoon that unjustly insulted my sister, assuming I had one, would be libel and I would have legal recourse to deal with it.

LISTEN: Islam is not a race. Adherence to a particular religion is a choice people make after all, and as such they are choosing to be offended. The idea that this paper shouldn't be allowed to print such stuff JUST because it is a belief that some people hold dear just drives me crazy.

People all around me say things every day that offend my way of looking at the world and make me itch with hatred. If I set fire to the houses of these people will the Muslim Council of Britain stand firm behind me? Can I murder people who say things I really hate? Come on, just give me the signal. I don't really consider the cartoons to be a 'stupid' move either - they clearly appear to have had a self-fulfilling point, so from one point of view they could be seen to be incredibly clever.

To be honest, my patience has run thin with the muslim community as a whole. I've sympathised with British muslims a lot recently due to those attempts at anti-terrorism legislation which would have seen them screwed by police. However I'm tired of everyone being scared of the muslim reaction to perfectly reasonable things. There was a documentary/opinion piece on C4 recently about the redundancy of religion as a whole and how evil it was. It was a blinkered and ignorant piece of crap, tbh, but it had a right to exist - however, it focussed mainly on Christianity and Judaism and barely touched Islam, because everyone's too shitscared and pussyfoots around. I'm sick of it.

And I'm sickened by this attack by the muslim community on freedom of speech. It doesn't MATTER how great a man Mohammed was, or how many people love him, or whatever-tf, because everyone has a right NOT TO CARE. More than that they have a right to say, without any justification, that Mohammed was a worthless turd on legs. Muslims are retards. COPE WITH OTHER PEOPLE'S OPINIONS OR GTFO.

(Got to admit this is a cool placard though)

Beautifully put.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

I think it's incredibly ignorant and disrespectful on both fronts.

No, I really don't. Truthfully, I think its more disrespectful for Islamic Facists to be displaying signs that read in clear english, "Behead those who slander Islam". I will not be held hostage by ignorance and theocracy. GO DANES!!

 

[Ome_Vince]

Gotta second that. The day we succumb to fundementalists, is the day we move back 400 years in history.
To many people, also in my family, have died 60 years ago to achieve what we have now, for us to just sacrifice it to fundementalist nutcases who think a cartoon is a reason to hate...

Newspaper cartoons are always "mocking" certain things. Politicians, countries, wars, actions and yes religions ( ALL religions...).
If the cartoon mocks : "mohammed being used for terrorism->head a bomb" and "72 virgins if you die for allah-> we ran out of virgins" i'd almost say the Islam should support these cartoons!
If they want to rid this "abuse of religion for terrorism" from their own religion, they should also mock/redicule the ones who use their profit Muhammed and Qu'ran for violance...

 

[satch919]

This article was posted on MSNBC.com and I think it has some very important points about the image of radical Muslims representing Islam.

Many moderate Muslims denounced the extremists in the demonstrations. They noted that only a small number carried hateful signs such as "Europe, your 9/11 will come." Some protesters also chanted "Bomb USA, Bomb UK" and "We want Danish blood."

Inayat Bunglawala, a spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain said in an interview that "there was no doubt" that some protesters had crossed the line to "a clear incitement to violence." He said the police acted responsibly in not arresting them immediately because it deprived the radicals of the chance to "declare themselves as martyrs in defense of the prophet."

‘Genuine sense of hurt’
He said it was a shame that extremists "exploited" the protest that was an expression of "a genuine sense of hurt and distress" caused by the cartoons. Bunglawala said a positive step to calm the violence would be for the newspapers that published the cartoons to issue a joint statement that "recognized the hurt" they caused. "While not illegal, it was an error of judgment," he said.

Asghar Bukhari, chairman of the Muslim Public Affairs Committee, called the protesters holding the offending placards "a bunch of thugs." He said in an interview that police should take action against them: "I can't believe they haven't broken the law." A real tragedy, he said, would be for non-Muslims to believe that these radicals represented most Muslims and come away thinking "these barbarians don't understand our way.
"Then, those who would like a clash of civilizations will have had their day," he said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11207606/

 

[lister]

man i know i said i wouldnt post on this sibject again but i cant help myslef, i just saw this written on the BBC site..

The man, named only as John, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that he was arrested as he handed out leaflets with the cartoons printed on them.

The Metropolitan Police said two men were arrested on suspicion of breach of the peace, but no further action was taken.

Why was he arrested but the people who showed the disgusting, violent placards left to walk the streets?

SOURCE

 

[Razor]

man i know i said i wouldnt post on this sibject again but i cant help myslef, i just saw this written on the BBC site..

The man, named only as John, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that he was arrested as he handed out leaflets with the cartoons printed on them.

The Metropolitan Police said two men were arrested on suspicion of breach of the peace, but no further action was taken.

Why was he arrested but the people who showed the disgusting, violent placards left to walk the streets?

SOURCE

Both should be arrested.

 

[No1_sonuk]

Why was he arrested but the people who showed the disgusting, violent placards left to walk the streets?

This was mentioned in another thread - It's so that they can't be screaming about their "martyrdom" as they're carted off.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

YTMND Explanation

Don't worry it's not satire or comedy or anything, it's actually a serious work that summarizes it very well through use of pictures/a timeline of the exact events that unfolded leading from last year to now.

http://danishcartoons.ytmnd.com/

 

[Steven]

The reaction from the Muslims is ridiculous, I suppose innocent people have died due to there rioting.

How selfish.

 

[Raziaar]

YTMND Explanation

Don't worry it's not satire or comedy or anything, it's actually a serious work that summarizes it very well through use of pictures/a timeline of the exact events that unfolded leading from last year to now.

http://danishcartoons.ytmnd.com/

Interesting Ytmnd.

Question... Why the **** does there have to be a group to try to help Muslim/Non-muslim relationships between each other? How come I don't see such things necessary of Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc. Crazy.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

Uh oh christians, you better get upset, i've been doing cartooning of my own via ms paint!

Sound the "oh noes" alarm, start killing people!

YTMND Explanation

Don't worry it's not satire or comedy or anything, it's actually a serious work that summarizes it very well through use of pictures/a timeline of the exact events that unfolded leading from last year to now.

http://danishcartoons.ytmnd.com/

best ytmnd i've seen

 

[Milkman]

Question... Why the **** does there have to be a group to try to help Muslim/Non-muslim relationships between each other? How come I don't see such things necessary of Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc. Crazy.

Oddly enough I was wondering the same exact thing while eating dinner yesterday.


And nice YTMND, might be the first semi-informative one I have ever seen.

 

[satch919]

Question... Why the **** does there have to be a group to try to help Muslim/Non-muslim relationships between each other? How come I don't see such things necessary of Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc. Crazy.

Maybe because you're not informed.

http://www.ccju.org/ - Center for Christian-Jewish Understanding

http://www.museumoftolerance.com/site/pp.asp?c=arLPK7PILqF&b=249627 - Museum of Tolerance (I've been their twice. Great place to learn about the Holocaust; perhaps the President of Iran should visit.)

 

[Jintor]

That was a good ymtd.

Muslims should learn about humour.

 

[Raziaar]

Maybe because you're not informed.

http://www.ccju.org/ - Center for Christian-Jewish Understanding

http://www.museumoftolerance.com/site/pp.asp?c=arLPK7PILqF&b=249627 - Museum of Tolerance (I've been their twice. Great place to learn about the Holocaust; perhaps the President of Iran should visit.)

Look. I think you misunderstand me. The Jewish world as a whole gets along with the Christian world. We're civil to each other. Same goes with the other races. You don't find the kind of extremism that you do when you have interaction between the muslim world and any other religious world.

I'm not talking about 'understanding'... i'm talking about this violence bullshit. You simply don't see it with Christians and jews. Christians can come and go to Israel as they please, touting their religion... same with Jews to major christian countries like United States.

 

[VictimOfScience]

Christians can come and go to Israel as they please, touting their religion... same with Jews to major christian countries like United States.

Ah, its true--this makes me feel better. Maybe one day we can all do this everywhere without fear of _________-inspired violence against us (fill in the blank with religious affiliation, skin color, sexual preference, etc...).

 

[gick]

Look. I think you misunderstand me. The Jewish world as a whole gets along with the Christian world. We're civil to each other. Same goes with the other races. You don't find the kind of extremism that you do when you have interaction between the muslim world and any other religious world.

I'm not talking about 'understanding'... i'm talking about this violence bullshit. You simply don't see it with Christians and jews. Christians can come and go to Israel as they please, touting their religion... same with Jews to major christian countries like United States.

'Twas not always the case. Christian countries have only stopped screwing over/expelling/massacring Jews in the past 50 years. You could argue that Islam just needs time to grow up a little, like Christian dominated countries have.

But given the situation with Israel, I cant see it happening.

 

[Raziaar]

'Twas not always the case. Christian countries have only stopped screwing over/expelling/massacring Jews in the past 50 years. You could argue that Islam just needs time to grow up a little, like Christian dominated countries have.

But given the situation with Israel, I cant see it happening.

Those countries that did that were more motivated by racism(I still consider Jewish people a race) than they were religion.

Hesh Rabkin from the sopranos puts it best, even though he is a fictional character...

"You're talking to the wrong white man, my friend. My people were the white man's ****** when yours were still painting their faces and chasing zebras."


And its true! Well, besides the whole painting faces/zebra chasing thing. Thats a little prejudiced, but still.

 

[JNightshade]

Man, I don't even know. The fact is, what matters now is that we have a crisis on our hands that could dramatically escalate. Something needs to change- and fast.

(really good YTMND by the way)

 

[satch919]

Look. I think you misunderstand me. The Jewish world as a whole gets along with the Christian world. We're civil to each other. Same goes with the other races. You don't find the kind of extremism that you do when you have interaction between the muslim world and any other religious world.

I'm not talking about 'understanding'... i'm talking about this violence bullshit. You simply don't see it with Christians and jews. Christians can come and go to Israel as they please, touting their religion... same with Jews to major christian countries like United States.

I agree with you to a certain extent.

However, there are about 1.2 billion Muslims in the world. A large majority of them don't attack the US or completely despise other cultures. What we're seeing now has been heavily influenced by the media and the various geopolitical struggles. Islam is nearly the second largest religion in America and yet you don't see American Muslims constantly attacking other people. Due to 9/11, people's focus has been on Muslims. Remember after 9/11, Americans were attacking Middle Eastern people's businesses and private property. Would it be fair to say that most Americans are violent towards Muslims? No. But if you just watched shows that televised those scenes, it might sway how you think of the world.

some info taken from the following book: John Esposito's "What Everyone Needs To Know About Islam".

 

[Jintor]

What I'm seeing, from the media (treat me as a layman here) is that in the heavily muslim states, the Danes are getting screwed over (firebombings, protests etc.) But in the more other-relious states, what's happening their? Danes don't seem to have done anything more than publish this cartoon in their paper. But a lot of Muslims have gone on a firebombing rampage or something. I know this is filtered through the media but I am not hearing a lot of Danish violence here.

 

[Laivasse]

Truth. There as been about 10x times as much racism shown towards Denmark and the Danish in the last few days than there has been 'racism' against Muslims.

Although I'll say again that the idea of 'racism' towards a belief system doesn't make sense. You can be prejudiced against it, but that's everyone's right - after all if I think christians are idiots for believing what they believe and I don't want to listen to what they have to say, then I'm free to think and say that. The media can also do that and frequently does, eg. that C4 documentary I mentioned which tried to argue religion out of existence, focussing on Christians.

I've also heard a lot from the most vocal Islamic elements about the 'hypocrisy' of the Western press. Erm...where? Surely it's the extreme Muslims who are being hypocritical, since in some of the smelly theocracies where they are protesting you don't even have freedom to practice religions other than Islam.

 

[Ome_Vince]

Agree with Laivasse here. Although i am Christian, i strongly support the fact that everybody has a right to be/think/say whatever they want with exclusions to racism, discrimination and threats ( which is the law in most free countries..).
The danes in this case violated NO laws. These protesting muslims on the other hand violated all of them..
Like i mentioned before, at least the west is trying to understand/show respect to the Islam, can we say the same from the Islamic countries towards the west -> christians, jews and atheists?...

 

[CptStern]

funny how when the danes publis a story everyone points to the newspaper as the source but when talking about the Holocaust cartoon it's almost always attributed to the Iranian government NOT the newspaper ..sounds like a double standard to me

compare these two headlines from that bastion of "fair and balanced" journalism; Fox"news"

French, German Newspapers Run Muhammad Cartoons

Sen. Schumer Reacts to Iran's Holocaust Cartoon Contest


oh and the media's job is to report the news not MAKE it ..it's not about freedom of press but rather taking responsibility for their actions ...on both sides

 

[Laivasse]

The difference is, Stern, that the Iranian govt is openly racist against jews and Israelis (the recent 'Israel should be wiped off the map' thing), and there is every likelihood this has government approval, whereas the Danish government went to lengths to distance themselves. There is also the difference in tone of a satirical religious piece coming out of a press with no particular history of prejudice or bias, to an anti-semitic piece coming from Iran.

oh and the media's job is to report the news not MAKE it ..it's not about freedom of press but rather taking responsibility for their actions ...on both sides

There is satire and opinion pieces in all western media. Sometimes they deal with difficult topics. Islam is one of them. They should still be allowed to say what they want as long as it is not hateful or an incitement.

Bit disappointed in you, Stern (not that I expect you to shed any tears over it...)

 

[Ome_Vince]

compare these two headlines from that bastion of "fair and balanced" journalism; Fox"news"

French, German Newspapers Run Muhammad Cartoons

Sen. Schumer Reacts to Iran's Holocaust Cartoon Contest

Never thought i'd say this, but Stern's got a point there...

Btw, its nice we have 2 topics about the same discussion. Perhaps we should merge these since they're both now about the Danish cartoons vs Holocaust cartoons...

 

[CptStern]

The difference is, Stern, that the Iranian govt is openly racist against jews and Israelis (the recent 'Israel should be wiped off the map' thing), and there is every likelihood this has government approval, whereas the Danish government went to lengths to distance themselves. There is also the difference in tone of a satirical religious piece coming out of a press with no particular history of prejudice or bias, to an anti-semitic piece coming from Iran.

yes but that really doesnt make a lick of difference in reporting the news ..accuracy is what's important ..otherwise you're actively engaging in bias from the get go

again I'm not disputing the history of both countries but rather the medias portrayal of both stories

There is satire and opinion pieces in all western media. Sometimes they deal with difficult topics. Islam is one of them. They should still be allowed to say what they want as long as it is not hateful or an incitement.

no one is arguing that they shouldnt be allowed to post those images ..HOWEVER they have a responsibility to their audience and with that responsibility comes certain rules of conduct ..the CBC refused to show the cartoons just as most mainstream canadian media outlets didnt ..because they felt nothing good would come of publishing them

again media has a resposibility to report the news NOT create it

Bit disappointed in you, Stern (not that I expect you to shed any tears over it...)

I'm actually confused as to why you would say that

 

[Laivasse]

I just consider this whole issue so clear cut that it confuses and angers me when people say 'there's wrong on both sides'. You always struck me as a voice of reason,and I thought it would come naturally to someone like you to recognise the largest principle at stake, which is not, IMO, hurt feelings or ruffled feathers but the freedom to state your opinion.

again media has a resposibility to report the news NOT create it

I don't think the media has any particular responsibility not to be controversial. The media reports the news - it is one thing it does. More than that though, it should say what needs to be said. This Danish cartoon may not necessarily been something that needed to be said, but as soon as you start saying "you shouldn't have printed that because you angered some people", you are threatening that freedom. The basis for the muslim reaction is something that needs to be examined, and I think it definitely comes up lacking.

As for no good possibly coming of those cartoons - depending on the context they were printed, they can be considered to have had a very pertinent point. Bomb on Mohammed's head> my interpretation; 'Islam can be an 'explosive' religion.' The reaction from some Islamic elements has borne that out, but not only that, many conscientious muslims are now examining how they fit their religion and lifestyle in with a free press.

I recognise the inconsistency in reporting the Iran/German newspapers thing, but there is a concurrence of anti-semitic opinion between the Iranian govt and its press, which means that summing the holocaust cartoons up as 'Iran's' (it's only a headline after all) is not as inaccurate as calling the Mohammed cartoons 'Denmark's'.

 

[Direwolf]

I think this has more to do with the difficulty of seperating the Iranian State from anything else in Iran. I'm sure that in many instances (possibly including this one) the government there has gotten the rap for things not their responsibility. However, its hard to ignore the fact that the Iranian government has an awful lot of say about what goes on in the Iranian media.

 

[CptStern]

I just consider this whole issue so clear cut that it confuses and angers me when people say 'there's wrong on both sides'. You always struck me as a voice of reason,and I thought it would come naturally to someone like you to recognise the largest principle at stake, which is not, IMO, hurt feelings or ruffled feathers but the freedom to state your opinion.

while I agree that freedom of speech is paramount I cant help but feel that this isnt a case of defending speech because they must have known it would create some backlash from the muslim community (I dont think anyone could have predicted how much of a backlash) and published it for the sake of the financial gain ..again i could be wrong but I feel that a bigger more encompassing pov must be taken in this particular issue because it has caused such ciontroversy and in some cases people have lost their lives. It's like when the media stopped showing footage of the planes hitting the towers due to public sentiment

I don't think the media has any particular responsibility not to be controversial. The media reports the news - it is one thing it does.

yes but they're not reporting on a particular controversy but rather creating it

More than that though, it should say what needs to be said. This Danish cartoon may not necessarily been something that needed to be said, but as soon as you start saying "you shouldn't have printed that because you angered some people", you are threatening that freedom.

yes but all media self-censors out of necessity ..US media doesnt show american war dead ..even though the ban isnt enforced. US media often wont publish news that's critical of the war (downstreet memos being an excellent example ..despite the fact that it is indisputable proof that the war was "fxed" from the very beginning)

The basis for the muslim reaction is something that needs to be examined, and I think it clearly comes up lacking.

I believe their reaction is warrented ...not the acts of vandalism, the burning of media outlets etc ..but they do have a right to be outraged just as any other group who's faith-system has been attacked.

As for no good possibly coming of those cartoons - depending on the context they were printed, they can be considered to have had a very pertinent point. Bomb on Mohammed's head> my interpretation; 'Islam can be an 'exlosive' religion.' The reaction from some Islamic elements has borne that out, but not only that, many conscientious muslims are now examining how they fit their religion and lifestyle in with a free press.

while the cartoon may be open to interpretation there is no mistaking it alludes that islam is a religion of terrorism ..also they depicted Mohammed who's image is strictly forbidden

in an interview with muslim representatives from the US, canada and the UK all of them said exactly the same thing: ..they're insulted that a depiction of their prophet was used but they're even more insulted that the cartoon implies all muslims are terrorists

I recognise the inconsistency in reporting the Iran/German nespapers thing, but there is a concurrence of anti-semitic opinion between the Iranian govt and its press, which means that summing the holocaust cartoons up as 'Iran's' (it's only a headline after all) is not as inaccurate as calling the Mohammed cartoons 'Denmark's'.

yes but it's like saying Fox"news" speaks for all americans

 

[Some_God]

Stern, there is no freedom of the press in Iran. You seem to forget these types of things.

And please break my comment up into several parts and examine them under a microscope.

 

[CptStern]

Stern, there is no freedom of the press in Iran. You seem to forget these types of things.

what does that have to do with anything?

And please break my comment up into several parts and examine them under a microscope.

keep those kinds of comments to yourself, it's completely unnecessary and does nothing to keep this thread from descending into flames

 

[Laivasse]

Many of your points highlight the need for sensitivity, but as I said somewhere else, sensitivity is not a requisite. It is something you can request, but total freedom should remain to refuse it. Perhaps that would be in very bad taste in such situations where you were, eg. offending the families of terror victims, but in the case of a religion, where people choose some arbitrary holy symbol and defend it to the death, I think it's totally fair game.

Muslims do not and should not have a monopoly on strength of feeling.

I believe their reaction is warrented ...not the acts of vandalism, the burning of media outlets etc ..but they do have a right to be outraged just as any other group who's faith-system has been attacked.

They do indeed. They should get angry at the cartoon, though, and not the fact that people are allowed to print it.

yes but they're not reporting on a particular controversy but rather creating it

By publishing a satire which represents an opinion - not necessarily an isolated one, nor an overtly hateful one. I honestly don't see all that wrong with it. I probably get more offended by the subtle brainwashing that goes in newspapers like the Sun and Daily Mail than some muslims are getting offended by this Islamic thing, but I don't expect my personal values to be extended to society as a whole.

yes but all media self-censors out of necessity ..US media doesnt show american war dead ..even though the ban isnt enforced. US media often wont publish news that's critical of the war (downstreet memos being an excellent example ..despite the fact that it is indisputable proof that the war was "fxed" from the very beginning)

If you're trying to say that the Western press think Islam is a softer target than taking on the government, then you're possibly right, but that's even more reason to encourage the media to take on issues where they're going to face opposition, with a view to getting them to go on and tackle the government over sensitive issues. 'soft target' is a bad way to describe Islam, too - most people are terrified of criticising it, just because of the strength of potential backlash. I find that galling. Even worse are the people who claim their fear of speaking out is a matter of 'cultural sensitivity' (not referring to you). By doing this sort of thing, people are perpetuating this image of Islam as a religion where you offend=you die. It's far better to get moderate muslims to speak up for Islam instead of the extremists, and challenging Islam is a way of doing this.

while the cartoon may be open to interpretation there is no mistaking it alludes that islam is a religion of terrorism ..also they depicted Mohammed who's image is strictly forbidden

in an interview with muslim representatives from the US, canada and the UK all of them said exactly the same thing: ..they're insulted that a depiction of their prophet was used but they're even more insulted that the cartoon implies all muslims are terrorists

His image is strictly forbidden...to Muslims. Denmark is not a society that operates under muslim laws and muslims should not expect it to.

There is also a fine line between pertinent and inflammatory. While it might be unreasonable to say that Islam is a 'religion of terrorism', it is wholly accurate to say that Islam is often used as a terrorist recruitment tool on impressionable young muslim men. If you choose a satirical cartoon as your medium, both messages can end up looking very much like eachother.

Even so, that's not a reason to say they shouldn't be published, or that you should automatically assume the worst possible interpretation. I do also think that many muslims are eager to be offended by read it in the most offensive way they can.

Stern, there is no freedom of the press in Iran. You seem to forget these types of things.

what does that have to do with anything?

It means that the government is naturally connected to anything that appears in the press.