[quote]doogie wrote:
Weekly Standard balls up.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/697dhzzd.asp
[/quote]
And Canadian bookstores tuck their tails and run:
And the lunacy continues.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/02/14/pakistan.cartoons.ap/index.html
Seems to me that the protesting idiots who are murdering people and destroying property are determined to prove that Islam is indeed a violent religion.
I laugh at the Iranian contest being held to publish cartoons mocking the holocaust in an effort to “test… the principle of freedom.”
$1,000 says the protest from the Jewish faith won’t be nearly as violent as that of the Muslims.
Now, I realize that we are not talking about all of the Islamic world, all Muslims, etc. But can there be any doubt as to why Islam generates so much fear and misunderstanding across the free world?
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
TransvestiteBBr wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
pat36 wrote:
Just making point that religion is not the source of all violence. Non-religious people are violent too.
That’s all I wanted to say.
Good points, pat. However, the point I have been trying to make was not that religion is a source of violence, rather that it has been used throughout history as justification for the violence of superficially pious men, who under the surface were…and are…probably just as godless as the men you named.
Yea, like the religion of Carl Marx that so far has led to the death of more than 100 million people.
I think the Crusaders understood these Muslims more than we give them credit for. Unlike their “tolerant” descendents that let them back in to Europe.
First, its Karl. Not Carl.
Second, he was a political philosopher. Its not a “religion”.
Third, the crusades were ridiculous.
Fourth, you are an idiot.[/quote]
lol
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote
Fourth, you are an idiot.[/quote]
I love that. I’m still laughing.
Ha.
Israeli group announces anti-Semitic cartoons contest!
February 14th, 2006
A Danish paper publishes a cartoon that mocks Muslims.
An Iranian paper responds with a Holocaust cartoons contest -
- Now a group of Israelis announce their own anti-Semitic cartoons contest!
Amitai Sandy (29), graphic artist and publisher of Dimona Comix Publishing, from Tel-Aviv, Israel, has followed the unfolding of the ?Muhammad cartoon-gate? events in amazement, until finally he came up with the right answer to all this insanity - and so he announced today the launch of a new anti-Semitic cartoons contest - this time drawn by Jews themselves!
?We?ll show the world we can do the best, sharpest, most offensive Jew hating cartoons ever published!? said Sandy ?No Iranian will beat us on our home turf!?
The contest has been announced today on the www.boomka.org website, and the initiator accept submissions of cartoons, caricatures and short comic strips from people all over the world. The deadline is Sunday March 5, and the best works will be displayed in an Exhibition in Tel-Aviv, Israel.
Sandy is now in the process of arranging sponsorships of large organizations, and promises lucrative prizes for the winners, including of course the famous Matzo-bread baked with the blood of Christian children.
Tying this issue to the defense of liberal western culture, a la the “Danger to Western Civilization” thread:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Commentary/com-2_14_06_JT.html
February 14, 2006
Islamic Chauvinism and the Mohammed Cartoons
By Joseph Tartakovsky
Of the hundreds of riots and rallies being orchestrated around the world to protest a handful of cartoons, an especially instructive one occurred in the heart of London on February 3. As in other rallies, the slogans consisted mostly of mortal threats against insulters of Islam, but one, at least, was new: "Britain, you will pay, 7/7 on its way"- a reference to the London subway bombings on July 7 last year. Unlike many European newspapers, no English paper had chosen to reprint the cartoons in solidarity with Denmark's Jyllands-Posten. But England must pay nonetheless, because this is not about cartoons - it is about aggressive Islamic chauvinism and the West.
Islamic chauvinism explains what would otherwise be a spectacular irony: in Europe, transplanted Islamic radicals, like Palestinian-born Ahmed Abu-Laban, the Copenhagen imam whose campaigning incited the boycott against Denmark, are demanding that the countries to which they willingly fled from oppression now accept the same habits and attitudes that fetter their homelands. Religious intolerance is just one of these attitudes.
As Muslims denounce the cartoons for "stereotyping," "disrespecting faith," or "hurting feelings," charges of hypocrisy and double standards are flying against them. The government of Pakistan, for instance, summoned the envoys of nine European countries to lecture them about how freedom of speech is not a license to disparage the beliefs of others - as if Pakistani officials could possibly be unaware of the anti-Semitic imagery that poisons its presses, or the fact that Christian churches in Pakistan are regularly machine-gunned and bombed. But if you believe that Islamic rights are not the same as Christian rights, or Jewish or Hindu or Buddhist rights, then there is no hypocrisy.
Islamic chauvinism explains why Arab journalists, who continuously lament the censorship in their presses, now demand that European states punish privately owned newspapers. It explains how the Saudi ambassador to the U.S., Prince Turki al-Faisal, can tell Wolf Blitzer that matters of faith must "be handled with care and with sensitivity," when the country he represents outlaws wearing a cross or possessing a Bible. Danish Muslim leaders, who appealed abroad to bring down Islamic wrath on their adopted country, decry Denmark's coolness toward its Muslim minority - but they have not urged the thousands of Muslims now queuing up for immigration into tiny Denmark to shred their asylum applications in disgust. This is not hypocrisy. It is strategy.
These Muslims think of themselves as dutifully promulgating and defending their faith. What has been the West's defense of its own sacred principles? Many editors and politicians, like Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen, have rightly been defiant. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, on the other hand, chose to reprove the European media: "There is freedom of speech, we all respect that, but there is not any obligation to insult or to be gratuitously inflammatory." "Free Speech Go To Hell," said a London placard carried by a covered protester, suggesting Mr. Straw has some thinking to do. And it was precisely to call attention to this dangerous state of affairs that the cartoons were printed and reprinted in Europe?and now in America.
Whether the cartoons are ugly and blasphemous or brave and provocative is irrelevant. The point is that people cannot be threatened with death for publishing them. It is frightening to see offended Muslims grow so angry and violent that European governments must warn citizens against traveling in their precincts. Civilized societies do not register displeasure by surrounding European embassies, with lighter fluid and respective national flags in hand (as in Turkey, Pakistan, India, Somalia, Indonesia, etc.). And civilized governments do not stand aside as mobs attack and torch foreign missions (as in Lebanon, Iran, and Syria). But stand aside is the wrong term, for Iran and Syria are countries in which riots don't happen unless the authorities want them to happen.
The Islamic rage has by now spread well beyond Denmark: we have seen Palestinian gunmen hunt through hotels for Danes, Germans, French, and Norwegians to kidnap; we have seen Iran suspend trade ties with New Zealand because a Kiwi paper published the cartoons; we have seen fanatics in London march against their own country; everywhere there are the obligatory chants against the Zionist conspirators; and they're burning American flags, too. The problem is not with a few cartoons, but with the West itself.
A July 2005 poll showed that 6% of British Muslims thought the London suicide bombers were justified; 24% sympathized with them. An estimated two million Muslims live in Britain; 6% of that is 120,000 people; 24% is 480,000. If this is typical of other Muslim communities in Europe, we can say, thankfully, that most European Muslims do not support terrorism against the West. But even if barely one in four of Europe's 15 million Muslims sympathize with such terror, and a fraction of that fraction acts on that belief, then Europe has a big problem. Not that this was a secret: there was the Hamburg cell, Richard Reid, the schoolgirl-headscarf debate, the Paris riots, the Madrid and London bombings, and the slaying of Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh; now this. There's more on the way, too, or so the rioters and protestors promise.
But what can it mean that these terrorist supporters and sympathizers feel so free to parade their hate through Western streets - or non-Western streets, for that matter? Carsten Juste, the literally besieged editor of Jyllands-Posten, whose office is now protected by hired guard, has an answer: "My guess is that no one will draw the Prophet Mohammed in Denmark in the next generation, and therefore I must say with deep shame that they have won." But there is another possibility: depending on how things go, the next generation might remember the last few days for "The Cartoons that Ended the Phony War" between radical Islam and the West.
Joseph Tartakovsky is assistant editor of the Claremont Review of Books.
Well if you want to know what these lovely tolerant people think of us just read:
Obviously, the news, if not completely made up, is generally inaccurate. But it’s the opinions I find interesting. No voice of reason, no calling for calm. It’s all violence, hate, intolerance, etc.
Europe needs to follow the American lead and start getting its immigrants from Latin America and Asia.
UCLA law prof Eugene Volokh has a typically informative post on European censorship law:
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2006_02_12-2006_02_18.shtml#1140117468
Censorship Envy ( The Volokh Conspiracy - - ), Speech That’s Offensive to Muslims, and European Law:
One recurring argument that I’ve seen from Muslims who want the cartoons legally suppressed is that European laws prohibit other kinds of speech offensive to other groups ? for instance, Holocaust denial, which is often restricted chiefly because it’s seen as implicitly or explicitly anti-Semitic ? and that Muslims should get the same treatment. In practice, those laws don’t get used that often, and European speech is actually more free than the laws would suggest.
Nonetheless, the laws’ presence does make possible the argument I describe; and I suspect it does make many Muslims feel even more aggrieved than they would be by the cartoons themselves, since they are also now aggrieved by what they see as discriminatorily enforced laws.
Consider, just as one example among many, Norwegian Penal Code secs. 135 & 135a (noted here; thanks to Rebecca Davidson for pointing to that article, and to Jill Fukunaga of the UCLA Law Library for finding the English text of the code sections):
[i] ? 135. Any person who endangers the general peace by publicly insulting or provoking hatred of the Constitution or any public authority or by publicly stirring up one part of the population against another, or who is accessory thereto, shall be liable to fines or to detention or imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year.
? 135 a. Any person shall be liable to fines or imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years who by any utterance or other communication made publicly or otherwise disseminated among the public threatens, insults, or subjects to hatred, persecution or contempt any person or group of persons because of their creed, race, colour or national or ethnic origin. The same applies to any such offensive conduct towards a person or a group because of their homosexual bent, life-style, or inclination.
The same penalty shall apply to any person who incites or is otherwise accessory to any act mentioned in the first paragraph.[/i]
These belong to the family of restrictions on “hate speech” and “incitement to hostility” that Europeans (and some Americans) sometimes praise as a model “reasonable” alternative to America’s speech protections. But look how broad they are: If you “endanger the general peace” by “publicly stirring up one part of the population against another,” you can go to prison. If you disseminate a communication that “insult[s]” “any group of persons because of their creed,” you can go to prison.
Of course publication of the cartoons would be covered. My providing a link to the cartoons (which I’ve done in many of my previous posts, since providing such a link is in my view necessary to helping people understand the controversy: http://blog.newspaperindex.com/2005/12/10/un-to-investigate-jyllands-posten-racism/ ) would be a crime under Norwegian law: I would be an accessory to a communication that insults some Muslims because of their creed.
And of course many Muslims would feel entitled to have this law enforced to protect their sensibilities.
Many Muslims are surely offended enough by the cartoons on their own; but at least in America we can tell them to join the club ? American Christians have no legal protection from anti-Christian speech, American Jews have none from anti-Semitic speech, blacks have none from racist speech, Americans generally have none from anti-American speech.
What can Norwegians tell them, other than (1) “Sorry, the laws don’t protect you,” (2) “OK, we’ll enforce the laws to suppress this speech that insults you,” or (3) “These are bad laws, we’re glad that they’ve rarely been used, we’re sorry they were ever enacted, and we are going to repeal them right away” (my preferred suggestion, though not one likely to be implemented, and one that would still be understandably offensive to many Muslims, since the laws’ repeal would have been triggered by speech that’s offensive to Muslims)?
And the outraged protestors in Turkey take it upon themselves to stone a female reporter for the sin of not covering herself with a veil…
[quote]doogie wrote:
doogie wrote:
Weekly Standard balls up.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/697dhzzd.asp
And Canadian bookstores tuck their tails and run:
The guy who published those is a self-serving attention whore. The only result will be further endangering the lives of our troops in Afghanastan. What a fucking prick.
[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
And the outraged protestors in Turkey take it upon themselves to stone a female reporter for the sin of not covering herself with a veil…
http://www.turks.us/article.php?story=2006021221421729[/quote]
I would like to hear thoughts from Kailash. Can we now say that this has gotten just a little bit out of hand and is only serving to increase the perception that Islam is a violent religion?
[quote]CaptainLogic wrote:
The guy who published those is a self-serving attention whore. The only result will be further endangering the lives of our troops in Afghanastan. What a fucking prick.[/quote]
So the lives of combat soldiers in a war zone are put into further jeopardy not because they are combat soldiers in a war zone, but because a journalist has published an inflammatory article?
[raising one eyebrow]
I beg your pardon, Captain, but that is illogical.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
CaptainLogic wrote:
The guy who published those is a self-serving attention whore. The only result will be further endangering the lives of our troops in Afghanastan. What a fucking prick.
So the lives of combat soldiers in a war zone are put into further jeopardy not because they are combat soldiers in a war zone, but because a journalist has published an inflammatory article?
[raising one eyebrow]
I beg your pardon, Captain, but that is illogical.
[/quote]
If some psychopath reads that those cartoons were published in Canada and decides to strap explosives to himself and drive into a Cdn. vehicle, it will be that prick’s fault, indirectly.
This whole thread is illogical, it’s about people rioting over cartoons.
What I find amazing about all of this nonsense is the fact that none of those types of protests are going on here in America. Could that possibly be because last time they fucked with the bull, they got the horn? Americans are tolerant to a point. Once you past that point, your fucked. Hopefully, the Euros will wise up and do what they have to to stop the bullshit. If they wouldn’t have been so pansy-assed in the past, this may not be happening like it is. It is truely amazing that no has put this together. They showed no balls when it came to the war on terror. No wonder Islamists like Euro.
[quote]CaptainLogic wrote:
…This whole thread is illogical, it’s about people rioting over cartoons.[/quote]
If I don’t see some new Family Guys soon I will start my own riot.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
CaptainLogic wrote:
…This whole thread is illogical, it’s about people rioting over cartoons.
If I don’t see some new Family Guys soon I will start my own riot.[/quote]
Didn’t the new season end just a few weeks ago?
[quote]etaco wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
CaptainLogic wrote:
…This whole thread is illogical, it’s about people rioting over cartoons.
If I don’t see some new Family Guys soon I will start my own riot.
Didn’t the new season end just a few weeks ago?[/quote]
FUCK!!! I am going to go torch some cars.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
CaptainLogic wrote:
…This whole thread is illogical, it’s about people rioting over cartoons.
If I don’t see some new Family Guys soon I will start my own riot.[/quote]
We demand a new Futurama season. We will continue to burn various flags for no apparent reason, until we get the series back!
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
CaptainLogic wrote:
…This whole thread is illogical, it’s about people rioting over cartoons.
If I don’t see some new Family Guys soon I will start my own riot.
We demand a new Futurama season. We will continue to burn various flags for no apparent reason, until we get the series back!
[/quote]
I have given up hope for new Futuramas.