While the New York Times and most other papers in the United States refuse to run the cartoons that have inflamed radical Muslims–and I say “radical” because I’d like to think that the majority of Muslims would actually, y’know, follow the Prophet’s teaching and react to criticism with patience rather than violence–the University of Illinois student newspaper, “The Daily Illini,” ran an assortment of them.
And why not? A dozen pictures that would have been here today, gone tomorrow if radicals hadn’t made them a cause celebre have become a major news item. So the newspaper ran some of them.
The result? Angry protests from students and the newspaper editor has been relieved of duty. World reaction in microcosm.
The most laughable reaction is the Iranian newspaper that wants to run cartoons lampooning the Holocaust. This despite the fact that the cartoons ran in Denmark and had nothing to do with Jews, Israel, or the Holocaust. Perhaps it’s because a contest for cartoons lampooning Danish pastries doesn’t seem ripe for humor. Or perhaps Muslims have yet to encounter a problem that they can’t blame on the Jews. Most likely they consider cartoons attacking Jews to be “payback.” As far as Jews are concerned, Muslims lambasting Jews isn’t called “payback.” It’s called “SOP.”
There is nothing–I repeat, nothing–that some Iranian newspaper can run that’s going to get the average Jew to do anything other than roll his eyes and say, “Yeah, whatever.” We’re sure not going to start burning down Iranian restaurants or embassies over it.
This entire business has been revelatory. It underscores the complete Muslim disconnect between their own actions and others. Anti-semitism, anti-Americanism, insults and lambasting of others based upon race, color and creed is completely ingrained into their culture. But at the same time they demand complete respect for their beliefs from others who DO NOT SHARE THEM. They demand from others what they would not even remotely consider dispensing themselves.
And it underscores the complete chickenshit nature of governments here and abroad who seem far more eager to condemn the publishers of the cartoons than the overreactions to them. “How can someone provoke the Muslims?” people wonder. I wonder how people can NOT provoke them, or at least provoke their extremist factions who are determined to sell the idea that the world is out to get them. (Then again, if Christians can try to claim that they’re under attack in the ninety-percent Christian United States, I suppose anything is possible.)
Governments are trying to sell the notion that we must all be careful to be sensitive to the religious beliefs of others. Which is nonsense. Cartoons trashing Jews are standard in newspapers throughout the Arab world and I don’t see the U.N. making a stink about it. No, the truth is that various governments want to show respect for Muslim beliefs in the same way that one shows respect for a test tube of nitro glycerin: You don’t REALLY give a dámņ about its preachings. You just want to make sure not to shake it up so it doesn’t go off.
If the answer to free speech is more free speech, then apparently the answer to intolerance is more intolerance. Don’t say to the Arab world, “It’s a dámņëd cartoon, get a grip. And if you don’t like it, then how about cleaning up your own house by eliminating the practices that cause the world to see you as a bunch of dangerous, violent psychos, drowning out the teachings of peace and tolerance that your Prophet puts forward.” Say instead to everyone else, “Don’t get the Muslims upset because they’ll blow you up.”
What the hëll is it with extremists anyway that they use historical figures who preached the ways of peace to justify the ways of war?
PAD
• 
We need a Cowboy Pete roundup of SMALLVILLE to cleanse our palettes from all the negativity in the world.
Pretty please with cherries on top.
🙂
Bill wrote: “And it grates that the papers claim they are doing this out of respect. No they aren’t. It’s fear, pure and simple.”
And that’s a fact, Jack! It is fear of economic and physical retribution, pure and simple.
There are a lot of old-fashioned journalists out there whose teeth are gnashing because the folks in editorial are running away from this fight.
To take a page from our good and rationale friends, the Drazi, the fault in all this can be summed up in one word:
Green.
What the hëll is it with extremists anyway that they use historical figures who preached the ways of peace to justify the ways of war?
“Extremists” or “Muslim extremists”? I think one could easily make the same arguement for Christians.
The point Bill, was that we (or the military/police of the country it happens in at the the time) should open fire into the destructive terrorists.
Be alot harder for the hardcore maniacs to hide in these crowds if the crowds that harbor them are getting mowed down when caught in the act.
If I’d intended to say “Muslim extremists” in the last sentence, I would have done so. The sentence was intended to cover extremists of all stripes.
PAD
What the hëll is it with extremists anyway that they use historical figures who preached the ways of peace to justify the ways of war?
“Extremists” or “Muslim extremists”? I think one could easily make the same arguement for Christians.
Well, yaeh. That’s why he said “extremists” (although the case ww are discussing here is a problem of Muslim extremists). Hëll, radical Budbhists in Sri Lnaka have been huting people. Buddhists! That’s like being beaten by Quakers.
We need a Cowboy Pete roundup of SMALLVILLE to cleanse our palettes from all the negativity in the world.
I need som F’n Spider-Man to take my mind off the world’s negativity. According to Diamond, it’s not expected next week. Which means I’ll have to wait until March. (Though Diamond’s ‘expected’ list is always shorter than it’s actual list)
The others were pretty pointless, unless they were meant to illustrate some article or op-ed piece to which we were not privy. (Well, the one with the blackboard also had an interesting point to make – about the cartoons themselves, and about the publisher, not about Mohammed or Islam.)
Depends what the point was. In the case of the Danish paper, they were trying to pìšš øff Muslim extremists – and have publically said so.
This, from the same editor who, several years back, refused to print offensive cartoons of Jesus, because they didn’t want a backlash created among their readers. (Moral of the story: it’s fine to piss people off if it’s going to play into your stereotypes.)
Just because you can publish something doesn’t mean you should publish it. And when your goal is to piss people off, you really shouldn’t be surprised when you piss people off.
-K
“Extremists” or “Muslim extremists”? I think one could easily make the same arguement for Christians.
======
I think that is why Peter used “Extremists” vs “Muslim Extremists.”
Marvel’s website says I will get my F’n fix on 3/1…and again on 3/15. While February will have been a dark, cold month, March will be filled with F’n light and sunshine.
Maybe the light and sunshine will bring peace to the Middle East.
Hi, Jonathan (the other one):
FYI, The two of the original 12 that upset Muslims the most were the one with Muhammed wearing a bomb on his head and the one with the crack about the virgins.
There were also three other cartoons that were disseminated by Danish imams and other interested parties as if they were part of the original 12, but weren’t and were likely fakes. One definitely was. They were much more inflammatory.
There’s a real question about how much any of the resulting violence has to do with cartoons and how much has to do with general pressure being released, or even people agitating for some political advantage.
Even in terms groups of muslims that are upset about the cartoons, an important thing to remember is that many weren’t protesting the cartoons themselves but what they perceived as an obnoxious stunt designed to rile and offend a minority group they feel is already subjected to a lot of derision and abuse. Kind of like a great number of people would logically flip out if FoxNews were to run five-minute filmed anti-gay people editorials every hour for a couple of days as a “blow against political correctness” or something stupid like that. The paper did the original cartoons to make a free speech point, which they saw as striking a blow against a climate of fear. Other people see it as picking a fight.
My own view is that the stunt was asinine but as soon it became news every paper in the world should be publishing them in the interest of reporting the news accurately. As of a couple of days ago, fewer than 20 papers in North America had run any of the cartoons. I’m horribly disappointed, and I’m glad Peter feels the same way I do about this particular interest at the U of I.
The pessimist in me is banking on WWIII in the Middle East within ten years…three, if I’m being realistic. Between the Iranian nuclear program, Hamas in Palestine, the lack of civil rights in Saudi Arabia, the terrorism camps in Syria (or whatever messes occur there…details escape me), and those Bastions of Democracy, Iraq & Afghanistan, I am glad I’m too old to be drafted.
It would be a short war. Iran drops an atom bomb on Israel, counting on Allah to keep the heathen Jews from being able to respond. Allah fails to come though.
Maybe that the route we should be taking. Appeal to their belief that Islam really is the one true way. What does it therefore mean when it is obvious that the accursed unbelievers are doing so much better than the followers of the Prophet? Why has Allah abandoned his children?
Maybe–just maybe-Allah is sending a message. It’s really NOT alright to blow up busses full of schoolkids in his name! You DON’T have to kill women when they get raped! In fact, they can even be allowed to vote and drive and stuff! Allah can’t believe the garbage being done with His supposed approval so he is trying to make clear his displeasure in a way that even the dimmest could see–the rest of the world is moving forward and the Muslims World, blessed with mineral wealth beyond the dreams of Croesus, falls ever behind.
I mean, what more can he do? Let a bunch of Jews take over a small strip of desert and turn it into the only decent country in the area? Oh, wait…
Time to tell the rabble–Allah has a plan and you’re not in it.
Infidel! Die, in the name of the All-Merciful All-Holy dollar!
I’m jewish. I work with Israelis. My money’s on us. We’re outnumbered, but we are TIRED of being history’s whipping post.
Oh, in point of fact, I think they’d want to minimize irradiating any oil fields. Nukes do tend to do that to the surrounding environs.
* Looks around *
* Steps away from Bill after his last post *
* Counts to 10 *
* Stands back by Bill again *
* Reset Terror Alert: Green (and funny) *
🙂
More context on the Daily Illini (my previous post was thrown together before leaving for work):
Here’s their website: http://www.dailyillini.com. The editorial page in question doesn’t seem to be up there (the date was 2/9/06) but you can read the responses in the archives.
Here are some relevant News-Gazette articles:
http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/02/15/two_daily_illini_editors_suspendedfrom/
The article I mentioned earlier, giving the editorial context.
http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/02/10/paper_defends_decision_to_run_cartoons/
Describing the response the paper received. Note comments such as “A few Muslim students called to protest the publication of the cartoons, but were not threatening, he said.”
For context:
http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2004/12/11/official_to_relay_concern_over_di/
An article about concerns about anti-Semitism at the DI, including a cartoon about “big-nosed Jewish bankers” (for which the person responsible was suspended for a month, twice as long as the editors in the current case, BTW). A particularly noteworthy sentence:
“[Interim Chancellor] Herman said he had no interest in censoring the paper but was concerned that the students be aware of sensitivities and develop an institutional memory so that if a mistake is made, it is not repeated.” (emphasis mine)
In other words, if you read the full story, this isn’t as simple as a case of courageous journalists bringing forth important information (if they just wanted people to have a chance to see them, why not just publish a URL?) and being censored due to protests. There’s been no mention of threats or violence; it’s certainly not true in this case that “the only thing that gets response is fear of violence.” It also seems to be a case of editors taking it upon themselves to publish sensitive material without duly consulting with everyone involved, in a context of a history of questionable decisions in this regard.
Again, I supply this information in the hopes that people can make up their own minds based on more details, rather than a quick summary.
I just want to say that I find Delilah and Family Circus grossly offensive on the grounds that they both suck.
Oh, and it’s true that if we could get the insane theocratic government out of the way, would could make the Iranian people out best friends in the region.
Right now, their government is just getting even more reckless. Maybe they’ll completely implode in a few years.
We can hope.
And the sad thing is, Arabs are, one on one, some of the greatest people you will ever meet, with a generosity of spirit that shames me. They will take a stranger into their home and lavish waht little they have on them. I’ve hardly ever met one I didn’t like. I wish I could say the same for the Israelis I’ve known but it’s been far more of a mixed bag.
That being said, there is absolutely no doubt which side I would be on. Arabs and persians are great people but they have some pretty sorry leaders and something seems to happen when they get in crowds.
Even then, though, there is that hospitality. IfBladestar’s fears prove correct and someone who looks like he stepped out of a Jonny Quest cartoon comes at me with one of those big F’d up curly knife blades, I expect to hear “Now I must kill you, my friend!”
كنت أمازح
Thank you Thank you Thank you!
I had been going mad reading all of these free speech warriors who remained silent or turtled.
See Brian Wood…Neil Gaiman…Cory Doctorow…Warren Ellis(City of Silence indeed)
Bill –
That’s like being beaten by Quakers.
Well, you knew there had to be a good reason for them to make the Pentagon’s terrorist organization watch list.
Kelly –
This, from the same editor who, several years back, refused to print offensive cartoons of Jesus
I thought I’d read that that was, in fact, a different editor, and he no longer works for the paper.
Tom Spurgeon –
Other people see it as picking a fight.
The problem being that these extremists see *everything* as picking a fight. Just the fact that I’m living and breathing pìššëš some of these people off, so, I don’t see why anybody should bend over to accomodate these morons. 🙂
Extremists are always the same. If you don’t share their beliefs you’re an infidel that will burn because of your sins. Doesn’t matter if it’s a christian or muslim extremists. On this particular case, people should put in their heads that there isn’t a singlr true religion. All religions are about the same God, the only thing that changes it’s His name.
What I always amazed is that we allow extremists to rant all they want, burn flags and other things and we just respect their anger against the world. Ok, it’s their right to complain. Why can’t we complain about their way of seeing things? “We need to respect their beliefs” is the “right” answer I’m sorry to say, but, that’s just dodging the problem.
But, let’s be honest: They should stop complaining about how the world is unfair to them and start to consider that maybe, just maybe, it’s them that need to change? The world might be guilty on some of their problems, but they aren’t the only guilty part in this. They have to acknowledge their guilt too.
Well, that’s my opinion. Maybe makes no sense, but, after so many intelligent and articulated opinions, I thought shouldn’t hurt if I let mine.
Maurício
Oh, by the way, I’m sorry about any grammar mistake. English is my second language and I fear I’m pretty rusty.
The problem being that these extremists see *everything* as picking a fight.
Yeah, wasn’t there a story a few months ago about some guy who complained that the chocolate swirl on his Burger king ice cream cone looked like the name for Allah?
That’s the difference between Muslims and Christians. If I found the image of Mary on one of my Mcnuggets I wouldn’t be angry at McDonald s.
The difference between Christian and Muslim extremists is that the Muslim extremists want you to burn now while the Christian extremists are happy to smile smugly with the belief that you will burn later.
That’s the difference between Muslims and Christians. If I found the image of Mary on one of my Mcnuggets I wouldn’t be angry at McDonald s.
In fact, you could probably sell it on Ebay like that cheese sandwich was last year.
It pulled in about $28,000.
You use 2 examples of pre reformation catholic church, and the actions of a group of so-called Christians who were soooo extreme, they were imprisoned in England for being religious extremists, and had to come to the new world to practice their viewpoint of religious extremism…. as critiques of Chrisitianity? You might as well say “Carl Marx was white so all white people are communists”…
Not a particularly good analogy there. Marx, to my knowledge, never used his ethnicity as a justification for a communist ethos. The three groups that were mentioned were explicitly carrying out their actions in the name of their faith. You can (and most would) argue that it’s a significant perversion of said faith, but that’s the justification that was used.
So if you want to complain that the examples used are way out of date, that’s cool. Complaining that Christianity was irrelevant to them, however, is hurting your argument a bunch.
The difference between Christian and Muslim extremists is that the Muslim extremists want you to burn now while the Christian extremists are happy to smile smugly with the belief that you will burn later.
Oh, that’s absolutely beautiful. I like it much. Mind if I use it elsewhere, Den?
TWL
Yeah sure, just give me proper credit. 🙂
Peter, once again you’ve hit the nail right on the head.
Me, I wonder how many people who otherwise wouldn’t have cared about this have sought out images of the cartoons and/or back issues of the newspapers in question precisely because of the controversy. Me, I have to admit that I wanted to see them in order to see what the fuss was about. (Though not being able to read Danish limits my ability to form an informed opinion.)
John: Yeah, you quickly lost that whole “radical” adjective and went straight to sweeping generalisations there Peter
Luigi Novi: Not necessarily. Establishing that qualifier upfront made it unnecessary to repeat it every time he used the word “Muslim” thereafter. People who come her and have read Peter’s stuff long enough understand what his intent was. Are you new here?
Baerbel Haddrell: Here in Britain Muslims were protesting as well, showing posters saying “Massacre those who insult Islam” and other ones that are no better. There was a big discussion going on if the police should have arrested them straight away because here in Britain, inciting violence is an arrestable offense.
Luigi Novi: There are similar laws here in the U.S. I believe (Lawyer visitors like David Bjorlin can correct me if I’m wrong) criminal solicitation is one.
Peter Sutton: 1 is it right to try and seek to offend someone knowing that what you are doing will do so?
Luigi Novi: Yes.
Peter Sutton: 2 if you have been offended do you have the right to seek punishment from the offender or make them stop what they are doing
Luigi Novi: No.
Peter Sutton: has for the second question if someone offends you are entitled to seek that stopped well it certainly appears to be the case how many stories can we all re-count of offensive shows been pulled.
Luigi Novi: Just because broadcast networks or studios kowtow to public pressure does not mean that you have an “entitlement” to censor something that offends you. To argue this is to engage in non sequitur. What you’re entitled to do is to ignore them. If I’m offended by Howard Stern, Sean Hannity, or Adam Sandler movies, am I justified in trying to get them to stop saying what they feel like saying? No, I’m not.
Peter Sutton: also not so long ago i remember a certain homo-erotic/christian artwork having to be removed from a new york gallary due to offence caused
Luigi Novi: If you’re referring to the 1999 “Sensations” exhibit at the Brooklyn Museum of Art, (Chris Ofili’s contributions to it contained Christian imagery, but I don’t know if it contained “homoerotic” imagery), it was not removed. What happened was that then-mayor Rudy Giuliani threatened to pull funding for that museum. After the city did so, a judge ordered the funding restored.
If, however, you were referring to the 1990 exhibition of Robert Maplethorpe’s “The Perfect Moment” show at the Cincinnati Contemporary Arts Center, that institution was prosecuted, but unsuccessfully.
Peter Sutton: it seems to me in the west people are more sophisticated in their censorship it’s not a case of offend us and we’ll blow you up it’s more a case of offend us and we’ll shut you down marvels fear of depicting a homo-sexual relationship with an ADULT label is another recent cowering to the argument
Luigi Novi: Maybe, but what Marvel does with its own material is its business. It did not try and stop someone else from publishing such material.
Peter Sutton: and a final question how many people who think these cartoons should be published also support the gay jesus art/plays or the gay captain America
Luigi Novi: I support both.
StarWorf: They do have a problem there. Libel laws vary from country to country, so lawsuits are iffy.
Luigi Novi: Peter Sutton didn’t say “libel.” He said “offense.” Offending someone does not constitute “libel.”
Bladestar: Proves the English are pretty stupid…
Luigi Novi: Ah, there’s that intelligent insight I’ve come to expect from you, Bladestar. Judging an entire country and its people from the actions of some in its government. I wonder if “John” saw this, given his irritation at “generalizations,” since he didn’t say anything in the posts he made that followed it. 🙂
Bladestar: The point Bill, was that we (or the military/police of the country it happens in at the the time) should open fire into the destructive terrorists. Be alot harder for the hardcore maniacs to hide in these crowds if the crowds that harbor them are getting mowed down when caught in the act.
Luigi Novi: Brilliant suggestion, Bladestar. Terrorists generally do not walk down the street in crowds that are labeled “terrorists.” So how precisely can one open fire into a crowd and know that they’ll only hit the terrorists, and not the bystanders?
Mauricio: Oh, by the way, I’m sorry about any grammar mistake. English is my second language and I fear I’m pretty rusty.
Luigi Novi: For what it’s worth, Mauricio, English is my first language, you have far fewer mistakes in your post than I’ve had in some of mine! (I never would’ve guessed otherwise that English was your second language.) 🙂
Den: The difference between Christian and Muslim extremists is that the Muslim extremists want you to burn now while the Christian extremists are happy to smile smugly with the belief that you will burn later.
Luigi Novi: Well, not really, since there are some Christian extremists who will gladly burn you now as well.
At the risk of offending (see later comment) just about everyone, I dispair of humanity ever overcoming superstition and of individuals ever being able to think for themselves and reject the herd mentality.
First of all, I think that the notion of “blasphemy” is just about the craziest concept human beings have ever dreamt up. Think about it for a moment: Does anyone out there seriously believe that an omnipotent transcendental being who created/monitors/governs the universe/multiverse/omniverse is so bored that he/she/it is interested in what microbes would consider to be microbes are saying/thinking about he/she/it?
Secondly, this notion of “being offended”. IMHO, it is impossible to offend someone if they do not chose to be offended. How can one be offended merely because someone else sees the world differently? It’s just an opinion, for crying out loud, often ephemeral and usually not based on facts. More specifically, how is it possible to offend someone who purports to be a Christian – you know, that whole foregiveness and turn the other cheek thing which, IIRC, can be found somewhere in the New Testament? It seems to me that the same strictures apply in Islam, Bahai’ism and Buddhism. I don’t know enough about Judaism, Hinduism or other faiths to know if that applies but if they don’t, it seems to be that they should.
SERIOSITY ALERT: The above are merely opinions and the standards I apply to other people’s opinions also apply to my own. Of course, since I hold them, I believe them to be correct, subject to new data becoming available.
My message to the world: LIGHTEN THE @#$%$#&^%$ UP.
P.S. PAD: Thanks for this forum and your fine and always entertaining work.
[b]It’s called “SOP.” [/b]
Sorry but what does ‘SOP’ stand for??
Sorry but what does ‘SOP’ stand for??
Standard Operating Procedure.
Hello. Just passing by because I’m into Marvel comics, but I’m from Denmark… So here’s the story behind the cartoons:
A writer called Kaare Bluitgen (he’s in a few of the cartoons wnats to make an illustrated kid’s book about Mohammed, in order to increase understanding of islam -just as there are tons of like material about christianity, buddhism etc. A few illustrators turn him down out of fear of possible violent reactions from certain groups of muslims. KB complains in his newspaper of choice: Jyllands-Posten which then invites some 50 artists to make satirical drawings on the subject (not necessarily of Mohammed), offering good money. 12 of them accept.
Now JP is definitely a right-wing newspaper, supportive of our current right-wing goverment and also to some degree the xenophobic, extremist (“christian”) Danish People’s Party (which doesn’t represent me, than you very much!) that keeps the current goverment in power. BUT: Satire is a very old tradition in Denmark, constitutionally protected since the middle of the 19th century. And I can assure you that it’s far from the first time a danish artist has made a joke about Mohammed. Nothing/nobody prominent escapes that over here. Period. You should note that KB gets “victimized” by the artists in a few of the drawings also, since the story was percieved by some as a mere publicity stunt. That was before the reaction though.
A few days ago iranian bakers decided that they could no longer sell “danish pastry” in good conscience even though they are very popular. So they are henceforth to be known as “Roses of Mohammed” in Iran. We do not particularly feel the loss, since we call them “Wienerbrød” (“Bread from Vienna”) anyway, but there are already quite a few cartoons about them – one of them proudly displaying a bearded fellow with a turban smacking his forehead, gritting his teeth.
Oh… I seem to remember a bunch of jokes from about five years ago courtesy of a US senator (from Ohio if memory serves)… it’s “Pommes Frites” in french, by the way.
Personally I don’t care one wit about religion and I’m very scared that no earthly power exist to protect common sense, logic and and the individual moral compass. I must protest against all the religious nonsense from people who have consciously discarded with all three of the above, wrecking havoc in the world I just try to live in. As Carlin commandeth: “Thou shalt keep thy religion to thyself!”
And then Rahne is one of my favourite X-characters. Duh.
Thanks!!
Great article Mr David.
This reminds me of what one of their priests (is it called ‘Imam’ in English too? If not, the word is Dutch, just so you know ^_^)
said about gays;
It’s a disease, and all gays should be dropped from the 30th floor of a building, head pointing down.
Freedom of speach he said to the judge.
And he got no nothing. Yes, amazing.
If I would have said that about Muslims, I’d be in trouble for discrimination…
Jerry Falwell represents middle-of-the-road Christians
Until they stand up and speak out against him and Robertson, they certainly do. “That’s just Pat being Pat” doesn’t count.
Well for that matter when was the last CHRISTIAN Inquisition, Crusade, etc? …(don’t hold grudges)-Unusual in an Irishman
SEE: Ireland, Northern, re: Catholics vs Protestants.
SEE: KKK, re: Cross burnings.
SEE: Inteligent Design re: imposing it on school children.
We’re sure not going to start burning down Iranian restaurants or embassies over it.
We’re not? Anyone know if you can return unused gas cans and matches?
We’re outnumbered, but we are TIRED of being history’s whipping post.
Darn tootin!
if not most Iranians are pretty disgusted with the ruling old men who are intent on making Iran one of the great civilizations of the 17th century.
If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem.
You use 2 examples of pre reformation catholic church, and the actions of a group of so-called Christians
And there’s the rub “so-called” Christians. Exactly who’s the Christian? The Catholics? The Protestents? The Episcopalians? The Baptits? Quakers? Calvanisists? 7 Day Advent Leapests?
Are the “so-called Christians” the ones that don’t believe the way you do? hmmm..who’s that remind me of…
“Luigi Novi: Brilliant suggestion, Bladestar. Terrorists generally do not walk down the street in crowds that are labeled “terrorists.” So how precisely can one open fire into a crowd and know that they’ll only hit the terrorists, and not the bystanders?”
If the “innocent bystanders” make no move to stop the whack-jobs among them, then tough šhìŧ. Aiding and abetting and all that.
“What the hëll is it with extremists anyway that they use historical figures who preached the ways of peace to justify the ways of war?”
In the Topkapi Museum in Istanbul, there are two swords used by Muhammad. They were not ceremonial and they were not used in self-defense. “Preaching the ways of peace” might apply to many religious leaders, but not to Muhammad.
“As far as these street terrorists with their protests and [/B] arson and destruction of property [/b] , stop molly-coddling these bášŧárdš and start firing into the crowd
Fire on protestors? Hello? Are you serious?”
Learn to read Bill, if they are engaging in vandalism, arson, and commiting acts of violence, they cease being protesters and become terrorists.
Dude i strongly sugest that u learn to read from a book and not from watching bush give speeches on TV. people who commit acts of vandalism & arson are usually refeared to has criminals you know the guys the police chase and sometimes catch
has for firing into the crowd well nixon did in the 60’s the British did it in the 70’s & the Chinese did in the 80’s and broadly speaking history has not looked on any of them has been a good move in fact the word that is usually used is massacre you know like the mutant masssacre of 1988
well that’s what a criminal is now what is a terrorist well wolverine once said ” terrorist is what the big army calls the little army” and yes that’s true but what a terrorist is depends who’s side your on he’s either a brave hero or an evil murdering bášŧárd sometimes both for remember for every bin larden their is always a nelson Mandela both labeled terrorists by the world community at one point or another but these days at least one of them is seen as an inspiration has for the other well let’s put it this way i’m not on his side.
According to an article in last week’s NYT Week in Review, the timeline on this shows that Egyptian officials stationed in other Arab countries began pushing this at the same time of the Egyptian ferry boat sinking and the repercussions were beginnging to be felt by the Mubarak government.
And the difference between 21st century Christianity and 21st century Islam?
The Enlightenment.
(Speaking as a Jewish woman who knows only the basics but is quite aware that there is an element in this country that seeks to take us back to pre-Enlightenment days.)
>It seems Germany is no better. My mother told me that in the school where I used to go school trips that involve over night stays in a youth hostel have been banned because Muslim parents don`t want their daughters to take place.
This is where an intelligent person, with a backbone, says simply “You do not wish to come along? Fine, we respect that and won’t force you. But, the rest of us are going. Bye.” End of problem.
>The lesson this has taught extremists of all kinds is this–if you want to be taken seriously, they must fear you. If you want to be feared, you need to spill a little blood. Better yet, a lot.
So…what do we do about this?
“Wipe them out. All of them.” So, OK, that didn’t work out all that well for Palpatine in the end. But I’m wondering how long before someone suggests it for real, only to discover the hard way their armed forces are full of the ‘enemy’?
Might be better to shut the door and then send any in one’s country to openly Islamic nations to have them in isolated from other nations, but I don’t see that happening any time soon either.
We could always try forcing the kids to go to schools where they’d be de-programmed from the more violent aspects of … but, no, that’s a non-starter.
Hmmm … we’re bloody well screwed, aren’t we?
>I wonder how many people who otherwise wouldn’t have cared about this have sought out images of the cartoons and/or back issues of the newspapers in question precisely because of the controversy.
Not to mention the controversy giving rise to more of the same. Local newspaper had the Prophet (with a camel behind him and prominent scimitar before him on the table) conferring with a couple of image consultants. Next to them is a whiteboard with “PR research: Islamism” listing “Terrorism; theocratic tyranny; subjugation of women; intolerance of criticism; persecution of moderate muslims; fear of Western culture and pictures of puglet.” The consultants are explaining to their client that “Frankly, Mr Mohammed … a few Danish cartoons are the LEAST of your image problems.” Too right.
>A few days ago iranian bakers decided that they could no longer sell “danish pastry” in good conscience even though they are very popular.
I wish I were there, so that I could openly stop buying from them.
> So they are henceforth to be known as “Roses of Mohammed” in Iran.
See what Shrub & co gave birth to when they renamed French Fries? Where will it all end?
> if they are engaging in vandalism, arson, and commiting acts of violence, they cease being protesters and become terrorists.
No, they become criminals. Or are you calling soccer and hockey fans – who have been known to commit just such violence – terrorists?
> As for firing into the crowd well nixon did in the 60’s the British did it in the 70’s & the Chinese did in the 80’s
There IS a difference. China sent TANKS in against peaceful protesters. That’s not exactly a proportional response. In the well-documented U.S. college case, you had inexperienced militia/reserves (who didn’t have the benefit of SWAT riot gear) facing people throwing rocks at them and if someone was trying to put a rock through my skull, which has been known to cause death and other inconveniences, I’d probably shoot, too.
The Rev Mr Black: IMHO, it is impossible to offend someone if they do not chose to be offended.
Luigi Novi: In cases like this, yes. Though I wouldn’t go so far as to say that it applies in all cases. Every one of us has at some point been offended by something said to us, without “choosing” to feel that emotion.
Bladestar: If the “innocent bystanders” make no move to stop the whack-jobs among them, then tough šhìŧ. Aiding and abetting and all that.
Luigi Novi: And how precisely is someone in a crowd supposed to know if there’s a terrorist in the crowd? Mind-reading?
The Rev Mr Black: IMHO, it is impossible to offend someone if they do not chose to be offended.
Luigi Novi: In cases like this, yes. Though I wouldn’t go so far as to say that it applies in all cases. Every one of us has at some point been offended by something said to us, without “choosing” to feel that emotion.
Thanks for your insight, Luigi. I think that my problem is that I am not certain that I believe that taking offense is an emotion. I see it more as a (pseudo) analytical-intellectual process. For example, in my life, I, like everyone else, learn/adopt certain belief systems which I find appropriate (and which I try to remember to challenge at regular intervals). If I take offense at someone else’s system, I have to evaluate how it differs from mine and why this is a bad thing. I always thought of being offended as a highly artificial notion, intended to demonstrate ethical/moral superiority rather than a true emotion such as anger, fear, joy, etc. Again, just an opinion.
Here is an interesting thought that just struck me (and I have the bruise to prove it.) Islam was founded in the 7th century, right? IE, about 600 AD. So that means that they are about 600 years “behind” Christianity, historically speaking. Now, if you look at Christianity 600 years ago, us Christ worshiping infidels weren’t all that peaceful, and we did have little pockets of love…like say..the Completely Unexpected Spanish Inquisition.
I am not trying in the least to exculpate terrorists. However, historically speaking, they are about on schedule. I mean, looking at the Big Three (by which I mean Islam, Christianity, and Judaism) they all went through a very long period of systemic bigotry (Leviticus anyone?) and even xenophobia. It’s just that Islam was started latest, so its just getting through its growing pains. I don’t know, maybe this entire idea is pure BS, but it makes sense to me.
I humbly submit it to the assembled Grandees of the Most High Blog of the Great PAD for their most august approval, or most severe finger wagging.
You’re welcome, Reverend, and thank you.
I must disagree that offense is not an emotion but an analytical-intellectual process. While I’m not dismissing the idea that deliberation may play some part in cultural relationships like the one we’re discussing on this board, obviously, there are times when someone says or does something to you that hurts your feelings, aren’t there? I think intellectualizing one’s emotions at such times can help alleviate the feeling (and even then, not always), which is the opposite of the idea that it causes it.
The arguments being put forward by the Muslims who called for Holocaust cartoons in respnse, or took to the streets in violence, are so specious, that they can only have been made in the lack of any intellectual or analytical process.
James Carter: Islam was founded in the 7th century, right? IE, about 600 AD. So that means that they are about 600 years “behind” Christianity, historically speaking……..Historically speaking, they are about on schedule……..It’s just that Islam was started latest, so its just getting through its growing pains.
Luigi Novi: The problem that I see with this idea is that it assumes religion to be some type of closed system in which social advancements are completely internal, and isolated from those experienced by people of other relgions. This is more likely in eras when societies were globally isolated from one another, but in this global information and global poltics age, it’s no longer the case. The various peoples who populate this planet, particularly those in the age of industry, satellite television, wide availability of books and the Internet, all all have access to the same information, and are thus have a far greater potential to grow on parallel tracks simultaneously.
Mind you, this doesn’t mean that every development in one country will be mirrored by another. If it were, the Earth would be a much freer place, and so, for that matter, would the U.S. But at the same time, I don’t think people who adhere to a certain religion are not necessarily restricted to a pre-ordained historical “schedule.”
Jerry, you seem to have completely missed, yet illustrated my point at the same time by automatically getting into a snit on behalf of Christianity.
Since my point may not have been entirely clear, I’ll be more blunt. They were examples intended to illustrate that anybody who claims that Christians are persecuted in the US of A has ZERO fûçkìņg sense of historical perspective.
-Rex Hondo-
Well for that matter when was the last CHRISTIAN Inquisition, Crusade, etc? …(don’t hold grudges)-Unusual in an Irishman
SEE: Ireland, Northern, re: Catholics vs Protestants.
Not the same thing at all. Two tribes fighting over turf. If it wasn’t about religion it would be about doo-rag colors. SEE Crips vs Bloods, Sur13 vs Latin Kings, Godzilla vs Biollante
SEE: KKK, re: Cross burnings.
Had NOTHING to do with religion, really. Class and racial terrorism. The fact they hated Catholics as well as blacks tells you more about 19th century racial politics than anything else (Irish were not always considered white, for example)
SEE: Intelligent Design re: imposing it on school children.
Ehh, well, I’m as against creationism as the next (sane) man but I wouldn’t put it in the same area code as the murders of the Inquisition, Crusades, etc. I mean, let’s keep some perspective here.
See what Shrub & co gave birth to when they renamed French Fries? Where will it all end?
Actually, this has a long and goofy history. Hamburgers were renamed “liberty sandwiches,” and sauerkraut as “liberty cabbage during WWI.
Regarding Islam–while James makes a very interesting point, I think that there is a very real and very unfortunate difference between Islam and Judeo-Christian thought. Islam looks at the time of the Prophet as the beginning of a golden age of Muslim civilization, one which was lost when the religion failed to convert the West. If they are backward it’s because they are trying to get back to that golden age. Christians and Jews have no such fondness for the Good Old Days. Yes, the Jews wanted to get their land again but they certainly did not want to live the way Moses did and I don’t know ANY Christians who long for the days of Roman subjugation. Both Jews and Christians look forward to the good times to come, not the great days gone by.
It also makes it very hard to reform Islam when it is considered dogma that the Koran is the undisputed direct word of Allah. Christians have no problem accepting that the Bible was written by men–it is the inspired word of God, not Gods word as transcribed by a secretary. The new testament has what, 4 different books written by 4 different guys, each talking about the same events, each telling a different story (which should not bother the faithful overly much since that is what really happens when 4 different people describe an event). But if a Muslim Luther came around now and started making sounds about updating Islam for modern times…well, it would probably go very badly for him.
Here’s one thing that should be done about this. The Turks have been trying to enter the EU for some time. They should be told that this will not happen, not so long as their commitment to the rights of other member nations to allow their citizens to live and think freely is so easily ignored. Further efforts to contain Iran would also be good (I give credit to the French for being pretty good lately in their assessment of the Iranian situation). It’s time for some push back. What are they gonna do? Cut off oil? They can’t afford to.
Christians have no problem accepting that the Bible was written by men–it is the inspired word of God, not Gods word as transcribed by a secretary.
Well, most of us don’t, but every group has a few who end up missing the logic train… 😛
-Rex Hondo
Why is it that after perusing CNN.com, my local newspaper’s website, and both conservative and liberal websites that the best commentary so far on this matter comes from my favorite comic book writer?
I am what you would call a concervative. If you keep writing like this, however, you are severely tempting me to start a campaign to elect YOU to office.
Excellent article, agree with completely everything you said (and you said it much better than I could).
When I was a child I thought that the world was run by grown-ups, in, you know, a grown-up type fashion. This like this – a furore over a dozen mildly amusing cartoons, threats, riots, damage – deaths too, yes? – just amaze me. How can the world run this way?
It’s a pity that extremists/power-hungry idiots can’t be made to put on a dunce hat and go sit in the corner.