Militants Surround EU Offices in Gaza Over 'Offensive' Cartoons

[Chase]

The same French paper also made another cartoon: "The row intensified when France Soir, alongside the 12 original cartoons, printed a newly created cartoon on its front page showing Buddhist, Jewish, Muslim and Christian holy figures sitting on a cloud, with the caption "Don't worry Muhammad, we've all been caricatured here."- This was reported by the BBC.

In addition: "Publications in Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain also re-ran the Danish cartoons on Wednesday to show support for free speech."

[Ana4Stapp]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Chase)

Okay... so you're saying that there should be no separation of church and state then?

NO!!!!!!Never said that!!!! I dont want to live in a theocracy! I was trying to say to you that IF americans have extreme care about what they want to show to kids on TV and think its a legitimate thing to censore some Rolling Stones sexual lyrics --so its also legitimate to musllims to avoid that their children can see religion being offended by other people...all over the world...

[Chase]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Ana4Stapp)

NO!!!!!!Never said that!!!! I dont want to live in a theocracy! I was trying to say to you that IF americans have extreme care about what they want to show to kids on TV and think its a legitimate thing to censore some Rolling Stones sexual lyrics --so its also legitimate to musllims to avoid that their children can see religion being offended by other people...all over the world...

Here's where your argument falters: It's impossible to legislate over what the inependent European press prints about a religion. There is such thing as decency, but they aren't obligated to abide by it. What is shown on T.V. is regulated by the F.C.C. Saying "cum" isn't allowed during the Super Bowl. Oh well. If the word "cum" means so much to you... then, by all means, listen to the album version of the song via your C.D. player.

Muslims have every right to be upset. That's not what I'm disputing. By accusing Europeans of being intolerant to Islam, they're being intolerant for not respecting Europe's free speech beliefs.

[Ana4Stapp]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Chase)

Yeah... I see a problem behind it... but these Islamic extremists would still be the the racists they have always been. Blaming their intolerance for the West on these cartoons is insane. However, a paper in Spain also published the pictures in an attempt to antagonize these people. I don't believe that is right for them to do that. But then again, I don't think the Madrid train bombing was fair... or the Paris riots.

Do you realize that not all of these people against the cartoons were extremists? Not even racists... The majority is only common people who got offended by the cartoons...These people arent terrorists...but these people are hating Europe and US more and more...this is insane...America governement disaprooved the cartoons...and you know its a hard thing to me to say...but I have to agree with your hum...governement -lol--this is a responsable thing to do in this situation...

[Ana4Stapp]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Chase)

The same French paper also made another cartoon: "The row intensified when France Soir, alongside the 12 original cartoons, printed a newly created cartoon on its front page showing Buddhist, Jewish, Muslim and Christian holy figures sitting on a cloud, with the caption "Don't worry Muhammad, we've all been caricatured here."- This was reported by the BBC.

In addition: "Publications in Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain also re-ran the Danish cartoons on Wednesday to show support for free speech."

It could be funny if the situation was different...

[Ana4Stapp]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Chase)

Here's where your argument falters: It's impossible to legislate over what the inependent European press prints about a religion. There is such thing as decency, but they aren't obligated to abide by it. What is shown on T.V. is regulated by the F.C.C. Saying "cum" isn't allowed during the Super Bowl. Oh well. If the word "cum" means so much to you... then, by all means, listen to the album version of the song via your C.D. player.

Muslims have every right to be upset. That's not what I'm disputing. By accusing Europeans of being intolerant to Islam, they're being intolerant for not respecting Europe's free speech beliefs.

Its not about the law...its about common sense...newspaper (media in general) needs to have some sense of social responsability these days...


And its not because the word "cum" means so much --lol --but its a clear example of censorship American has in Bush's days...

But clarify me this simple question: FCC also regulates the images from war in Iraq??? Are they edited by TVs? Or are they allowed?

[Chase]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Ana4Stapp)

Its not about the law...its about common sense...newspaper (media in general) needs to have some sense of social responsability these days...


And its not because the word "cum" means so much --lol --but its a clear example of censorship American has in Bush's days...

But clarify me this simple question: FCC also regulates the images from war in Iraq??? Are they edited by TVs? Or are they allowed?

I agree that there needs to be some social responsibility, however, there isn't an international law forbidding this sort of behavior.

You weren't able to say "cum" during the Clinton administration either. Please, Ana... I beg of you... at least get your facts straight before making accusations.

Yes... the FCC does regulate the images from the war zones. For instance, the won't allow videos of the beheadings of humaritarian aid workers to be shown on live T.V. The won't show someone who is mutulated from a roadside bomb. They won't show the bloody consequences of suicide bombers. They wouldn't show Saddam Hussein's officials mass murdering his citizens. They showed images from the Abu Grhaib torture scandal more than showed images from 9/11. Keep in mind that was during the Bush administration.

[Chase]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Ana4Stapp)

Do you realize that not all of these people against the cartoons were extremists? Not even racists... The majority is only common people who got offended by the cartoons...These people arent terrorists...but these people are hating Europe and US more and more...this is insane...America governement disaprooved the cartoons...and you know its a hard thing to me to say...but I have to agree with your hum...governement -lol--this is a responsable thing to do in this situation...

The people stirring up the unrest of radical clerics and insane politicians (as is the case in Iran). See, this is sad though. The European media isn't bound by decency. These people protesting are being just as intolerant as the people who published these cartoons. My government disapproves of the cartoons... but you still find it hard to agree... that's sad.

I mean... like I said before. It was pretty damn disrespectful for people to blow up innocent civilians in New York, Madrid, London, Bali, Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Philippines in the name of Islam. To me, a cartoon doesn't stack up to blood and carnage. Why is it okay for people to shoot an innocent woman in the back of the head in the name of Islam (as was the case with Margaret Hassan in Iraq)? Why don't they protest against the actions of these people who make Islam appear satanic? Because they look for reason after reason to hate Europe and the rest of the West. They're being hypocritical by not protesting against the acts of Osama bin Laden... but in turn attacking a cartoon publisher. That either means... Muhammad asserts that the killing of Jews and non-Muslims is a devine act... or they're just too intimidated to actually voice out against other Muslims (the more radical sect.)

[Ana4Stapp]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Chase)

I agree that there needs to be some social responsibility, however, there isn't an international law forbidding this sort of behavior.

You weren't able to say "cum" during the Clinton administration either. Please, Ana... I beg of you... at least get your facts straight before making accusations.

Yes... the FCC does regulate the images from the war zones. For instance, the won't allow videos of the beheadings of humaritarian aid workers to be shown on live T.V. The won't show someone who is mutulated from a roadside bomb. They won't show the bloody consequences of suicide bombers. They wouldn't show Saddam Hussein's officials mass murdering his citizens. They showed images from the Abu Grhaib torture scandal more than showed images from 9/11. Keep in mind that was during the Bush administration.

Oh ...interesting...so America goes to war...but cant show the war...yeah it makes sense...

But everyone knows that America is more conservative in Bush days! Im not making useless accusations--everybody knows that its a fact!

PS: Please Chase, stop saying that I need to 'get facts' before making my comments!!! you too say alot of biased opinions ...btw Steve invited you to be a mod here ? Or do you work for FCC???

[RMadd]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Chase)

I can guarantee you if this had to do with Catholism (or other Christian denominations) you would have no problem with it. Atheists in America are constantly attacking Christianity and Judaism left and right... and are essentially waging a war on the holiday of Christmas. They are doing it in INNAPPROPRIATE times as well. Are you going to defend America's people of faith? I doubt it. People in this country deal that all the time. We're not in the streets burning things and resorting to violence like some Muslims are doing as we speak. The liberal press has the right to make political cartoons... and Europe has done nothing wrong.

So, then, by your logic, she would also not come to the defense of some extremely conservative religious folk (namely, Muslims).
Also, is it fair for you to say the secular war on Christian holidays comes at an inappropriate, yet seemingly deny that the current state of affairs in the Middle East is worth considering when the blameless European press decides to print a cartoon that could potentially inflame more than 1 billion people.
No, technically, Europe has done nothing wrong in the legal sense. But the problem is that some people seem to be looking at this issue through only lens and no other. From what I've learned about Europeans in recent courses in political science and history I've taken, many Europeans are afraid of the encroachment of Arabs/Muslims on territory that was previously held almost exclusively by white Protestants and Catholics (depending on the locale). Britain, I understand, has a fairly sizable Muslim population which has been ostracized in recent years. So while the various papers might not be breaking any domestic or international statutes, some people need to realize that the situation with Arabic-speaking, predominantly-Muslim countries is fairly problematic, and that we must act as though we're walking on eggshells when dealing with the situation. Such blatant disregard for the delicate nature of the matter is terribly ignorant and irresponsible.

[RMadd]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Chase)

The only problem I have with these cartoons... is that they're going to incite more anti-Americanism (for whatever reason)... even though the U.S. State Department has condemned them.

This is exactly what I've been talking about, the reason closer attention needs to be paid to precisely what is printed. I don't think it would've taken a brilliant political strategist to figure out, hmmmm, if we print something that would offend Muslims, and even if Western governments condemn the printing, there's a good chance the existing anti-Western sentiment will only increase.

[Chase]

Quote: (Originally Posted by RMadd)

So, then, by your logic, she would also not come to the defense of some extremely conservative religious folk (namely, Muslims).
Also, is it fair for you to say the secular war on Christian holidays comes at an inappropriate, yet seemingly deny that the current state of affairs in the Middle East is worth considering when the blameless European press decides to print a cartoon that could potentially inflame more than 1 billion people.
No, technically, Europe has done nothing wrong in the legal sense. But the problem is that some people seem to be looking at this issue through only lens and no other. From what I've learned about Europeans in recent courses in political science and history I've taken, many Europeans are afraid of the encroachment of Arabs/Muslims on territory that was previously held almost exclusively by white Protestants and Catholics (depending on the locale). Britain, I understand, has a fairly sizable Muslim population which has been ostracized in recent years. So while the various papers might not be breaking any domestic or international statutes, some people need to realize that the situation with Arabic-speaking, predominantly-Muslim countries is fairly problematic, and that we must act as though we're walking on eggshells when dealing with the situation. Such blatant disregard for the delicate nature of the matter is terribly ignorant and irresponsible.

Yes, it is ignorant and irresponsible... but it's also legal. It's sad... but true. The European media isn't bound by international law to respect all religions... that's the nature of the issue. I, like you, agree that it wasn't the smartest thing to do. However, they had every legal right to do so. We can debate the nature of the cartoon... but not the legitimacy of its legality.

[Chase]

Quote: (Originally Posted by RMadd)

This is exactly what I've been talking about, the reason closer attention needs to be paid to precisely what is printed. I don't think it would've taken a brilliant political strategist to figure out, hmmmm, if we print something that would offend Muslims, and even if Western governments condemn the printing, there's a good chance the existing anti-Western sentiment will only increase.

Then again, our own media has done a lot to add to Islamic anti-American sentiment. I.E. the flushing of the Koran down the toilet... Abu Ghraib... the U.S. Marine that shot an injured insurgent. The factuality of most of those articles or stories surrounding those issues are debatable. Yes... torture did happen in Abu Grhraib... but some sources of media aired or published some stories to make the U.S. military look like the Nazi SS.

[Ana4Stapp]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Chase)

The people stirring up the unrest of radical clerics and insane politicians (as is the case in Iran). See, this is sad though. The European media isn't bound by decency. These people protesting are being just as intolerant as the people who published these cartoons. My government disapproves of the cartoons... but you still find it hard to agree... that's sad.

Again...you misunderstood my point...unbelievable! I said I agree with your governement and also with Bush's position () which by the way, you disagreed my dear...

Quote: (Originally Posted by Chase)

I mean... like I said before. It was pretty damn disrespectful for people to blow up innocent civilians in New York, Madrid, London, Bali, Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Philippines in the name of Islam. To me, a cartoon doesn't stack up to blood and carnage. Why is it okay for people to shoot an innocent woman in the back of the head in the name of Islam (as was the case with Margaret Hassan in Iraq)? Why don't they protest against the actions of these people who make Islam appear satanic? Because they look for reason after reason to hate Europe and the rest of the West. They're being hypocritical by not protesting against the acts of Osama bin Laden... but in turn attacking a cartoon publisher. That either means... Muhammad asserts that the killing of Jews and non-Muslims is a devine act... or they're just too intimidated to actually voice out against other Muslims (the more radical sect.)

Yeah...finally we are (almost) saying the same thing...this is definitely waht I was trying to say to you: the cartoons are getting the situation even worse...its a problematic area leaded by controversial governements who put religion as the principal issue because its more easy to CONTROL people!!!! This is the reason they use religion (please Im not saying Im against the religions ) this is the reason they will hate your country and all the its represents more and more ...so why deffend carttons as the freedom of speech? It is not worth it!!!!!

[Chase]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Ana4Stapp)

Oh ...interesting...so America goes to war...but can show the war...yeah it makes sense...

But everyone knows that America is more conservative in Bush days! Im not making useless accusations--everybody knows that its a fact!

PS: Please Chase, stop saying that I need to 'get facts' before making my comments!!! you too say alot of biased opinions ...btw Steve invited you to be a mod here ? Or do you work for FCC???

Well, I don't see how airing videotapes of innocent people being decapitated and bleeding to death will sit with individuals who are watching the nightly news. I don't think the families of those victims would be too keen on watching their loved one being decapitated while a terrorist chants "God is Great!" No... America is isn't anymore conservative these days. The political and moral dynamic of America is the same. You just have polarizing figures in both political parties who are pitting Americans against each other and igniting a culture war. The media hasn't changed in since Bush has been in office. You do need facts if you're going to try to taint America as being a repressive, fascist-like state.