Militants Surround EU Offices in Gaza Over 'Offensive' Cartoons

[Chase]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,183551,00.html

Thoughts? Islamic extremists are now confronting Europe.

[RMadd]

I hesitate to say this, but I might as well....

Thank God there's finally someone to share in the anti-Western sentiment to emanates from the Middle East!

[RMadd]

But, on a serious note, I almost couldn't believe this when I first heard about it a day or two ago. It's outrageous, and it seems like something that would almost certainly not be tolerated in most places in the U.S. We're a country built on religious freedom and, although there did exist a certain degree of anti-Arab and anti-Muslim sentiment immediately following 9/11, it seems that has largely subsided, and that most Americans would find this disgusting. Looks like we're not the only insensitive folk in the world, after all.

[RalphyS]

But, on a serious note, I almost couldn't believe this when I first heard about it a day or two ago. It's outrageous, and it seems like something that would almost certainly not be tolerated in most places in the U.S. We're a country built on religious freedom and, although there did exist a certain degree of anti-Arab and anti-Muslim sentiment immediately following 9/11, it seems that has largely subsided, and that most Americans would find this disgusting. Looks like we're not the only insensitive folk in the world, after all.

So what are you saying? The papers were wrong for publicizing the cartoons?
If that's it, I totally disagree. I support them for showing solidarity with the Danes. If there is one thing that is most common in our current Western values, it has to be the freedom of expression, which should include any freedom in outing opinion/ridicule over religions. Jesus, Buddha, Yahweh, Jehova, Zeus, Odin, Mohammed, they are no exceptions to the rule, just because some part of the world's population mey hold them in high esteem.
Especially in a case like this were insult was definitely not the target of the cartoonist.

The western world should not apologize for someone executing one of their most prized possesions, the freedom of speech and expression.

[Chase]

EXACTLY. I finally agree with you. I also was shocked seeing young Danes in the streets basically begging for Islamic forgiveness. Freedom of speech is an essential part to Western values... if they have a problem with it, oh well. No one should apologize.

[RMadd]

I'm saying it's not right to trample over the core beliefs of more than 1 billion people in the world at the cost of humoring a handful of white, secular and/or Christian Europeans who are merely scared shitless by the increasing number of Muslims moving into Europe. Very very poor taste, if you ask me.

[RalphyS]

I would agree with you, if it would have been the target of these cartoons to insult islam or the islam people, but every one should be able to take themselves and their religion not to seriously at all times.

If suddenly Mohammed is above being cartooned, who's next Dubya, because I don't know how many people voted for him and his ideas?

Shit happens, deal with it.

[RMadd]

I would agree with you, if it would have been the target of these cartoons to insult islam or the islam people, but every one should be able to take themselves and their religion not to seriously at all times. So it's okay to attack a large (veeeeeery large) group's core beliefs if it's the means to making a broader statement? I understand what you're saying about the magazine trying to take a stand on free speech, but it seems senseless why they might choose perhaps the most volatile religion as the means to that end? I also suspect that the whole truth isn't being told. Why Islam, of all groups? Why not pick on American Christians? Sure we might get a little ticked off, but we'll just sort of shrug it off as "European secularism" and go about our merry way without burning books and effigies. Why not Gandhi eating a Big Mac (if, in fact, McDonalds does use real beef)? I strongly suspect that there's no small minority of Europeans who are mortified by the prospect of a growing Muslim population in the historically almost-all-white, all-Christian continent.

If suddenly Mohammed is above being cartooned, who's next Dubya, because I don't know how many people voted for him and his ideas? So you're comparing G-Dub to the founder of one of the great religions of this world, even if only in jest??? In my mind, there's a slight (and, by "slight," I mean "pretty extraordinary") difference between the two and their impacts on world religion.

Shit happens, deal with it. It's funny: people say this alot, but then sort of ignore it when it comes down to the nitty gritty. What happens if people take that attitude dealing with Iraq? "Oh well, the U.S. wants to invade. No sense in us doing anything to try and stop them." "Well, golly, that white police officer just beat the tar out of me, a black man, with his nightstick for no reason whatsoever. Oh, heck, I won't press the issue, just move on, that's what I always say..."

[RalphyS]

So it's okay to attack a large (veeeeeery large) group's core beliefs if it's the means to making a broader statement? I understand what you're saying about the magazine trying to take a stand on free speech, but it seems senseless why they might choose perhaps the most volatile religion as the means to that end? I also suspect that the whole truth isn't being told. Why Islam, of all groups? Why not pick on American Christians? Sure we might get a little ticked off, but we'll just sort of shrug it off as "European secularism" and go about our merry way without burning books and effigies. Why not Gandhi eating a Big Mac (if, in fact, McDonalds does use real beef)? I strongly suspect that there's no small minority of Europeans who are mortified by the prospect of a growing Muslim population in the historically almost-all-white, all-Christian continent.

So you're comparing G-Dub to the founder of one of the great religions of this world, even if only in jest??? In my mind, there's a slight (and, by "slight," I mean "pretty extraordinary") difference between the two and their impacts on world religion.

It's funny: people say this alot, but then sort of ignore it when it comes down to the nitty gritty. What happens if people take that attitude dealing with Iraq? "Oh well, the U.S. wants to invade. No sense in us doing anything to try and stop them." "Well, golly, that white police officer just beat the tar out of me, a black man, with his nightstick for no reason whatsoever. Oh, heck, I won't press the issue, just move on, that's what I always say..."

Oh, the religion is volatile, and therefore we should just abide by their wishes, and try the utmost not to enrage anyone.

What did actually happen? Someone drew a character, the founder of an religion to some, no one special to others, and related in a funny matter some things that people tend to associate with that religion also in the picture? It's a drawing !!!! People want to kill people for drawing !!! I hear they are urging for Fatwa's against the cartoonists. This is exactly the thing why islam/mohammed was drawn as a terrorist, these people need to get a sense of humor. And if you don't like the paper, don't buy it.

Who is making the bad comparison's now. Comparing the fuzz over some cartoons, with invading a nation/starting a war.

I don't even care why these cartoons were published, except maybe if they were really intentionally being made to piss off people/muslims, but even than, in our western society we can make cartoons of Jesus, the basic character of the major religion of the west, therefore we can do the same to any religious character. Blasphemy is probably the most stupid law there is.

This is just Salman Rushdie all over again, muslims will just have to learn that not all people agree with their religion and criticism, sarcasm, irony on your religion of choice is something you will have to deal with, and if your religion is all that you think is is, it can stand some scrutiny.

[RMadd]

What did actually happen? Someone drew a character, the founder of an religion to some, no one special to others, and related in a funny matter some things that people tend to associate with that religion also in the picture? It's a drawing !!!! People want to kill people for drawing !!! I hear they are urging for Fatwa's against the cartoonists. This is exactly the thing why islam/mohammed was drawn as a terrorist, these people need to get a sense of humor. And if you don't like the paper, don't buy it. That's got to be one of the most ridiculous cop-outs ever. "If you don't like it, don't buy it." Yes, that's an option, but it doesn't change the fact that it was printed and reprinted across the continent. I'm not suggesting that, any and every time someone might be offended, we merely back off and not do anything to offend them. Rather, I'm saying that the paper, editors, and cartoonist(s) all need to take a good look at against whom they're planning to take a stand, that group's potential reactions to the stimuli, and, in the case of newsmedia, that group's familiarity with and understanding of the standards of Western newsmedia. It seems pretty blatantly obvious to me that Islamic culture doesn't jive with many precepts of Western society. Also, given the divisive nature of the current situation in international politics (namely, that Middle Easterners seem to tend to hate the West), I would advise against doing something that only gives extremists more reason to protest against us in whatever manner they choose.

Who is making the bad comparison's now. Comparing the fuzz over some cartoons, with invading a nation/starting a war. Well, your "tough shit" attitude seemed to indicate to me that, when you're faced with something you might not like, then don't worry about it at all.

I don't even care why these cartoons were published, except maybe if they were really intentionally being made to piss off people/muslims, but even than, in our western society we can make cartoons of Jesus, the basic character of the major religion of the west, therefore we can do the same to any religious character. Blasphemy is probably the most stupid law there is.
You yourself have already pointed out that Western culture is more understanding. That means we're not going to take caricatures of Jesus and start rioting in the streets over them. Yes, I might be slightly offended over them, but it's no reason to barricade government officials in their office for 45 minutes. In this sense, you're comparing apples and oranges. Many of the precepts governing day-to-day behavior in Islam are far different from those in Christianity. So, saying that Muslims should just deal with it because we, as Westerners, are able to is an absurdly ludicrous statement. They don't have a history of centuries of free press. For them, freedom of expression is gathering in a group on the street and burning images related to the US and Europe (flags, effigies, pictures, etc.). So, in this sense, perhaps more disturbing than anything else, the printing of these cartoons represents an insensitivity toward core Islamic beliefs and a severe inability to grasp just what that insensitivity means.

This is just Salman Rushdie all over again, muslims will just have to learn that not all people agree with their religion and criticism, sarcasm, irony on your religion of choice is something you will have to deal with, and if your religion is all that you think is is, it can stand some scrutiny. Maybe they will have to, and it will be great if they do. But, at the present, they don't. Was the cartoon published as a statement to Westerners? If so, I think most people in Europe and the U.S. already have a pretty good understanding of the intolerance of Islamic society (particularly Fundamentalist Islam) and that they need to allow a bit more. Or was it made as a statement to Muslims that they need to lighten up? If that's the case, I don't think they got the point. If you want to point something out to them, and have a prayer of a hope that they actually catch on to it, you have to speak their language, to use their means of communicating ideas. Otherwise, the ulterior motives of something like this falls on deaf ears, and is widely misinterpreted, causing an even greater uproar in Muslim cities in the Middle East.

[Lunar Shadow]

This is where I step in and say "look what religion gets you" people are offended by the smallest stupidest things. I mean I have put anti- religion things on my car such as a sticker that reads "God is just pretend" and my car has been vandalized many times. but it seems ok fine and dandy if say a Xtian put on any pro-god sticker on thier car that I have to put up with day in and day out. I have more respect than to vandalize some ones car. there is no tolerence when it comes to matters of god thats why there can't be a god because so many people say that there is just one certain god but no one can agree who or what god is. I mean come on people can you just see it that WE (i mean mankind) Created god??

[RMadd]

so you're asserting that religion is the only reason "people are offended by the smallest stupidest things"?

[Ana4Stapp]

EXACTLY. I finally agree with you. I also was shocked seeing young Danes in the streets basically begging for Islamic forgiveness. Freedom of speech is an essential part to Western values... if they have a problem with it, oh well. No one should apologize.


Really????!!! So answer me if this includes U.S. ... :rolleyes:

http://tv.msn.com/tv/article.aspx?news=214629



PS: Well ...you told me to come back...so Im here... hope you wont be sorry for that --- :D lol

[Ana4Stapp]

So it's okay to attack a large (veeeeeery large) group's core beliefs if it's the means to making a broader statement? I understand what you're saying about the magazine trying to take a stand on free speech, but it seems senseless why they might choose perhaps the most volatile religion as the means to that end? I also suspect that the whole truth isn't being told. Why Islam, of all groups? Why not pick on American Christians? Sure we might get a little ticked off, but we'll just sort of shrug it off as "European secularism" and go about our merry way without burning books and effigies. Why not Gandhi eating a Big Mac (if, in fact, McDonalds does use real beef)? I strongly suspect that there's no small minority of Europeans who are mortified by the prospect of a growing Muslim population in the historically almost-all-white, all-Christian continent.
"


You couldnt say it better, Ryan... ;)

Im not a religious person, (by the way Im almost an atheist) , always defend freedom in all means-- what definitely makes people here think that Im too much liberalist (almost true ;) ) but I have to admitt that those cartoons showed up in a inappropriate moment...did you guys realize that Iran's president is using this as an excuse to try to unite muslims against ocicdent??? Its the moment he was anxiously waiting...and we gave it to him...


In a meeting with local authors, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad condemned the cartoons and addressed the West: “Insulting the Prophet Muhammad would not promote your position,”

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10705393/

Was it necessary????

[Chase]

Really????!!! So answer me if this includes U.S. ... :rolleyes:

http://tv.msn.com/tv/article.aspx?news=214629



PS: Well ...you told me to come back...so Im here... hope you wont be sorry for that --- :D lol

There are standards as to what one can say on T.V. For instance, on pornography, foul language, and other things aren't considered appropriate for some stations. We had the problem 2 years ago of Janet Jackson exposing a breast during the Super Bowl. I'm confused as to what kind of statement you're trying to make, by the way.

If there are kids watching, it's not appropriate to show or say certain things on T.V. Watching the Super Bowl is an American, family tradition for millions of families.

If you're going to come back in here... at least make sense when trying to make America look bad.

[Chase]

You couldnt say it better, Ryan... ;)

Im not a religious person, (by the way Im almost an atheist) , always defend freedom in all means-- what definitely makes people here think that Im too much liberalist (almost true ;) ) but I have to admitt that those cartoons showed up in a inappropriate moment...did you guys realize that Iran's president is using this as an excuse to try to unite muslims against ocicdent??? Its the moment he was anxiously waiting...and we gave it to him...


In a meeting with local authors, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad condemned the cartoons and addressed the West: “Insulting the Prophet Muhammad would not promote your position,”

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10705393/

Was it necessary????

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.

[Ana4Stapp]

There are standards as to what one can say on T.V. For instance, on pornography, foul language, and other things aren't considered appropriate for some stations. We had the problem 2 years ago of Janet Jackson exposing a breast during the Super Bowl. I'm confused as to what kind of statement you're trying to make, by the way.

If there are kids watching, it's not appropriate to show or say certain things on T.V. Watching the Super Bowl is an American, family tradition for millions of families.

If you're going to come back in here... at least make sense when trying to make America look bad.

I know the Janet Jackson story...and I also know that some peopel prefer some kinda of hypocrisy...

But its funny because freedom of speech works good all over the world but not into America...its too funny!!!!!!!


My comments always make sense..but I cant say the same about yours honey...:rolleyes: ( I love your sarcasm!)

[Ana4Stapp]

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.

Oh God!!! (see?? Im not an atheist! lol) -- Its not that I am an atheist
(catholic)-Im not ---even though I have a lot of questions what I cant find the answers...and consequently I have some similarities to atheism...

Why I cant defend America's people of faith??? Why not??? YOu doubt it? Chase...you are so biased that you have no idea...:eek:

You are the one who is constatly getting pissed off when I say something here against your president --you clearly dont know how to deal with opposition to your conservative political views on amessage board---so how you expect muslims doing the same about the religon issues????
Im not deffending censorship at all.
But dont you agree that it was unecessary at least at this moment?

[Chase]

Oh God!!! (see?? Im not an atheist! lol) -- Its not that I am an atheist
(catholic)-Im not ---even though I have a lot of questions what I cant find the answers...and consequently I have some similarities to atheism...

Why I cant defend America's people of faith??? Why not??? YOu doubt it? Chase...you are so biased that you have no idea...:eek:

You are the one who is constatly getting pissed off when I say something here against your president --you clearly dont know how to deal with opposition to your conservative political views on amessage board---so how you expect muslims doing the same about the religon issues????
Im not deffending censorship at all.
But dont you agree that it was unecessary at least at this moment?

Then, what is the argument you are trying to make? Should the European media censor what is printed just to cater to Islamic extremists? This is an old part of European society, as well as American society. Okay, so you're basically saying that I go into the streets of San Diego, protest, burn shit, and scream because someone disagrees with me? Wow... I hate to break it to you love, but you're way off with my disposition. I could care less what someone believes... but when they disagree with me, they better back up their arguments and accusations with a proof. How is it unnecessary? American Christians deal with this all the time. Just because Muslims can be sensative doesn't mean that the free press should be extracted. Islamic fundamentalists have a problem with everything. They don't like the Jews, or the Christians, or the Hindus, or the atheists, or Western political thought, or Europe, or America, or Western liberalism, or Western conservatism. You can't appease them. Everything is innappropriate to them.

Do you defend Christians and Jews in America when they are attacked by left-wing atheists? Now is your chance to show that you defend all sides.

[Chase]

I know the Janet Jackson story...and I also know that some peopel prefer some kinda of hypocrisy...

But its funny because freedom of speech works good all over the world but not into America...its too funny!!!!!!!


My comments always make sense..but I cant say the same about yours honey...:rolleyes: ( I love your sarcasm!)

Apparently you have no idea as to what "free speech" means. You can't say certain things or do certain things. You can't go on T.V. and say "I will kill President Bush tonight!" Give me a break Ana, I know you're smarter than that. Again, if you're going to try to make America look like the Third Reich... at least try a little bit harder.

[Ana4Stapp]

Then, what is the argument you are trying to make? Should the European media censor what is printed just to cater to Islamic extremists? This is an old part of European society, as well as American society. Okay, so you're basically saying that I go into the streets of San Diego, protest, burn shit, and scream because someone disagrees with me? Wow... I hate to break it to you love, but you're way off with my disposition. I could care less what someone believes... but when they disagree with me, they better back up their arguments and accusations with a proof. How is it unnecessary? American Christians deal with this all the time. Just because Muslims can be sensative doesn't mean that the free press should be extracted. Islamic fundamentalists have a problem with everything. They don't like the Jews, or the Christians, or the Hindus, or the atheists, or Western political thought, or Europe, or America, or Western liberalism, or Western conservatism. You can't appease them. Everything is innappropriate to them.

Chase...even though you are very intelligent... sometimes I think you are so naive...try to see this situation under a political view...Im not talking about burning flags into the streets...its not because they dont like Europe, America, Jews, liberalism, hindus, budhist,rock, soccer...etc...its because you are dealing with a problematic area ...you cant deny it...

Let me ask you --whats Bush position???? whats the Blair position?


Do you defend Christians and Jews in America when they are attacked by left-wing atheists? Now is your chance to show that you defend all sides?

Why not? :confused:

[Ana4Stapp]

Apparently you have no idea as to what "free speech" means. You can't say certain things or do certain things. You can't go on T.V. and say "I will kill President Bush tonight!" Give me a break Ana, I know you're smarter than that. Again, if you're going to try to make America look like the Third Reich... at least try a little bit harder.

STOP!!!!!!!! Jesus ...are you okay Chase??? Nothing that you talked here this night (at least to me) make any sense...well maybe you arent so smart as you seemed...:rolleyes:

Backing to rollling stones -- american kids dont listen to Start Me Up ("you'd make a dead man cum") on radios? american kids dont watch MTV ???? american kids dont see CNN images from Iraqs war????

Also, your american "free speech" works very well on violent movies made in Holywood we see all around the world (including my country) ...oh sorry...your precaution only refers to America of course...

[Chase]

Chase...even though you are very intelligent... sometimes I think you are so naive...try to see this situation under a political view...Im not talking about burning flags into the streets...its not because they dont like Europe, America, Jews, liberalism, hindus, budhist,rock, soccer...etc...its because you are dealing with a problematic area ...you cant deny it...

Let me ask you --whats Bush position???? whats the Blair position?




Why not? :confused:

The position of Prime Minister Blair and President Bush are far different from that of Denmark or France. This issue isn't about them, it's about Denmark and France. But why should Denmark and France alter their fundamental rights to a free press because a problematic people don't like it? This uproar isn't even coming from the citizens of those two nations. Islamic extremists use everything as a reason to hate non-Muslims. The only way to make them happy is to, in genocidal fashion, kill every Jew in the Middle East. The free press has done things to slander Christianity also. But the reactions of Christians and Muslims is like night and day.

[Ana4Stapp]

The position of Prime Minister Blair and President Bush are far different from that of Denmark or France. This issue isn't about them, it's about Denmark and France. But why should Denmark and France alter their fundamental rights to a free press because a problematic people don't like it? This uproar isn't even coming from the citizens of those two nations. Islamic extremists use everything as a reason to hate non-Muslims. The only way to make them happy is to, in genocidal fashion, kill every Jew in the Middle East. The free press has done things to slander Christianity also. But the reactions of Christians and Muslims is like night and day.

And those carttons are really helping to increase this feeling...
btw, do you know that Hamshahri an iranian newspaper is putting a contest to choose the best cartoon about Holocaust???? Is this a freedom of speech?????

[Chase]

STOP!!!!!!!! Jesus ...are you okay Chase??? Nothing that you talked here this night (at least to me) make any sense...well maybe you arent so smart as you seemed...:rolleyes:

Backing to rollling stones -- american kids dont listen to Start Me Up ("you'd make a dead man cum") on radios? american kids dont watch MTV ???? american kids dont see CNN images from Iraqs war????

Also, your american "free speech" works very well on violent movies made in Holywood we see all around the world (including my country) ...oh sorry...your precaution only refers to America of course...

With all due respect, I'm not sure I know what you're trying to say. I don't understand, in all honesty. This has nothing to do with "free speech." There are standards for what is shown on television. It's always been like that. You can't say certain things. Every country has standards.

[Chase]

And those carttons are really helping to increase this feeling...
btw, do you know that Hamshahri an iranian newspaper is putting a contest to choose the best cartoon about Holocaust???? Is this a freedom of speech?????

Yes... that is freedom of speech. The Iranian government has been saying a lot of anti-Semitic things lately. If you think there is Islamic unrest because of these cartoons... you need to pay more attention. Like I said... these people are anti-European.

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.

[Ana4Stapp]

With all due respect, I'm not sure I know what you're trying to say. I don't understand, in all honesty. This has nothing to do with "free speech." There are standards for what is shown on television. It's always been like that. You can't say certain things. Every country has standards.

Im sure you are understanding what Im saying... but let me clarify this: okay...so you cant say certain things because countries have standards...okay...
so... religions also have some religious 'standards' ...even though it seems different --its the same principle Chase...;)

[Chase]

Im sure you are understanding what Im saying... but let me clarify this: okay...so you cant say certain things because countries have standards...okay...
so... religions also have some religious 'standards' ...even though it seems different --its the same principle Chase...;)

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

[Ana4Stapp]

Yes... that is freedom of speech. The Iranian government has been saying a lot of anti-Semitic things lately. If you think there is Islamic unrest because of these cartoons... you need to pay more attention. Like I said... these people are anti-European.

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.


WOW!!!!! Now you are understanding my point!!!!! I knew it you could it ...;)

now are you seeing the political problem behind it?

[Chase]

WOW!!!!! Now you are understanding my point!!!!! I knew it you could it ...;)

now are you seeing the political problem behind it?

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.

[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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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? :rolleyes:

[Chase]

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? :rolleyes:

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]

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]

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...:rolleyes:

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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 (:eek:) which by the way, you disagreed my dear...

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]

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

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.

[Chase]

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



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!!!!!

However, in my opinion... it's also not worth defending the hypocritical nature of their cricisms. If they can't condemn the people who have hijacked their own religion... how do they expect the rest of the world to view them?

You also have to remember that they most likely hate Brazilians, just as much as they hate Europeans. You come from a Catholic nation. Where do you think that puts you on the spectrum of Islamic hatred?

[Ana4Stapp]

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.

Once and for all: I NEVER said Americ was fascist state...(I think when you dont have a interesting argument to say you just repeat certain words :rolleyes: ) but I also dont see how editing a Rolling Stones song can contribute to improve lives of families in America...

[Chase]

Once and for all: I NEVER said Americ was fascist state...(I think when you dont have a interesting argument to say you just repeat certain words :rolleyes: ) but I also dont see how editing a Rolling Stones song can contribute to improve lives of families in America...

I don't know if you remember this... but Bill Clinton's vice president, Al Gore, had a wife by the name of Tipper Gore who was champion for censorship in music. In some ways... you have her to thank.

[Ana4Stapp]

I don't know if you remember this... but Bill Clinton's vice president, Al Gore, had a wife by the name of Tipper Gore who was champion for censorship in music. In some ways... you have her to thank.

No i dont remember it...:o btw what kind of music?

[Chase]

Rap to rock. Here's a link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parents_Music_Resource_Center

She got into it after hearing her 12 year old daughter playing a Prince song.

[Ana4Stapp]

Rap to rock. Here's a link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parents_Music_Resource_Center

She got into it after hearing her 12 year old daughter playing a Prince song.

WOW!!!!!!:eek: This is nonsense , ridiculous and a waste of time and The Filthy Fifteen list...:rolleyes:

Thanks for educating me in america's moral in Clintonn era...;)

[RalphyS]

I think we need to rehash the cartoon-story a bit.

Q&A: The Muhammad cartoons row (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/4677976.stm)

The Danish newspaper that originally published the cartoons commissioned them after the author of a book about Islam said he was unable to find a single person willing to provide images of the Prophet.

The newspaper's culture editor, Flemming Rose, says he did not ask the illustrators to draw satirical caricatures of Muhammad. He asked them to draw the Prophet as they saw him.

Rose has insisted that there is a long Danish tradition of biting satire with no taboos, and that Muhammad and Islam are being treated no differently to other religions.

So one Danish newspaper wanted some images of 'the Prophet' and some illustrators turned it into cartoons, satirical images in which wrong views of the general public towards islam are overemphasized for humor's sake. Everyone in western nations knows that cartoons are not truth. Some imans can not only not see the humor in it, but they write home too islamic organisations and nations, that they should protest these cartoons. Not in a civilized manor, but with the burning of flags and threats of violence. And now the illustrators and editors are being blamed for being insensitive. The muslims shout 'disrespect', but respect is something you have to earn and by reacting in such a manor to innocent drawings, that is exactly why the people in the west view islam as an intolerant religion and see most muslims as possible terrorists. Ofcourse this is not true for all muslims, but by allowing reactions like these to occur they only increase this view.

Many Muslims say that the cartoons - one of which shows Muhammad wearing a bomb-shaped turban - are extremely and deliberately offensive, expressing a growing European hostility towards and fear of Muslims. The portrayal of the Prophet Muhammad and Muslims in general as terrorists is seen as particularly offensive.

Yes, and ofcourse the appropriate moderate protest from the islamic community and out of islamic nations has changed the view of islam as an intolerant and terrorist religion altogether now. :)

In many European countries there is a strong sense of secular values being under fire from conservative Islamic traditions among immigrant communities. Many commentators see the cartoons as a response to this.

There are also issues of integration - how much should the host society compromise to accommodate immigrant populations, and how much should immigrants integrate into the society they are making home.

Exactly, must we now adapt our moral standards in the west, even our sense of humor, just because in the east they cannot handle it. We cannot let the sensibility of any religion dictate the freedom of press and speech in the west. In Rotterdam Maroccan youths were celebrating when they heard the news of 9/11, the whole of The Netherlands (and the world as far as they heard of it) was appalled, but alas there is no law against it.

In hindsight was it wise to publish these cartoons, probably not, was it wrong, no, and this is the reason why other European papers also published the cartoons, not to instigate more riots, but just to substantiate the basic right that the Danes had to publish these cartoons. Sure we can be tolerant to a point and somewhat sensitive, but we have to draw a line somewhere, as too how far we go to appease some radical opinion.

[Ana4Stapp]

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.

Exactly!!!!!! Finally... someone who sees the political damage behind it ;)

[RalphyS]

Exactly!!!!!! Finally... someone who sees the political damage behind it ;)

No, not finally, the political damage and even worse, loss of human lifes is obvious, and we all see it, but instead of blaming the newspapers or the cartoonists for being insensitive, I blame the rioters for being too sensitive.

An apology should be given if you did something wrong, not if you did something stupid (and even the stupidity of printing the cartoons is debatable imho).

The Danes and other threatened people of European nations deserve an apology for those who resort to violence and not the other way around.

[Chase]

Maybe if Islam, as a whole, starts condemning the people that hijacked their religion... Europe will take them seriously. It's funny that they have no problem with Iran's president making Hitler-esque comments... or Al Zarqawi beheading INNOCENT people in Iraq... or suicide bombers targeting OTHER MUSLIMS... but a freaking cartoon pisses them off.

I said this earlier: either the Prophet Muhammad asserts the killing of non-Muslims... or their too scared to speak up against the Islamo fascists who are destroying that religion.

They're showing their intolerance for not accepting the rights to a free press in these European nations. It probably wasn't the smartest thing for Europeans to antagonize Muslims... but they did it in a satirical sense. Jesus has been a target, Buddha has been a target, Moses has also. In the show South Park for instance, Jesus is a character and the creators have also satirized Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI. Why are the reactions in the Islamic world so different compared to those of other religions? Why are so many Muslims intolerant to Jews, Christians, and Hindus? Why is there a very large and violent sect of Islam? If Muslims don't condemn suicide bombings... can you really blame a Danish newspaper for publishing a picture of Muhammad with a turban that looks like a bomb? Is there a truth behind the satire? Does the truth hurt? Is that what this is all about?

[Ana4Stapp]

Maybe if Islam, as a whole, starts condemning the people that hijacked their religion... Europe will take them seriously. It's funny that they have no problem with Iran's president making Hitler-esque comments... or Al Zarqawi beheading INNOCENT people in Iraq... or suicide bombers targeting OTHER MUSLIMS... but a freaking cartoon pisses them off.

Yeah, but carttons are giving more and more 'reasons' to Irans president to increase the hate of occident...

Also suicide bombers think they are doing it in the name of their God...but carttons are 'against' their Gods law...why you cant see it????
Theres no logical when you are talking about rerligion...religion is the opposite of logic, Chase.

I said this earlier: either the Prophet Muhammad asserts the killing of non-Muslims... or their too scared to speak up against the Islamo fascists who are destroying that religion.

The fascists use religion to control people ...:rolleyes:

They're showing their intolerance for not accepting the rights to a free press in these European nations. It probably wasn't the smartest thing for Europeans to antagonize Muslims... but they did it in a satirical sense. Jesus has been a target, Buddha has been a target, Moses has also. In the show South Park for instance, Jesus is a character and the creators have also satirized Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI. Why are the reactions in the Islamic world so different compared to those of other religions? Why are so many Muslims intolerant to Jews, Christians, and Hindus? Why is there a very large and violent sect of Islam? If Muslims don't condemn suicide bombings... can you really blame a Danish newspaper for publishing a picture of Muhammad with a turban that looks like a bomb? Is there a truth behind the satire? Does the truth hurt? Is that what this is all about?


Its not a case of freedom of speech ----its a case about choosing PEACE or (more) WAR in a very problematic area... Why Bush said hes against cartoons? Wasnt he a president of a nation that claims for FREEDOM in all means???? Why he didnt agree with that?? Please clarify the opinion of your president...

[Chase]

Yeah, but carttons are giving more and more 'reasons' to Irans president to increase the hate of occident...

Also suicide bombers think they are doing it in the name of their God...but carttons are 'against' their Gods law...why you cant see it????
Theres no logical when you are talking about rerligion...religion is the opposite of logic, Chase.



The fascists use religion to control people ...:rolleyes:




Its not a case of freedom of speech ----its a case about choosing PEACE or (more) WAR in a very problematic area... Why Bush said hes against cartoons? Wasnt he a president of a nation that claims for FREEDOM in all means???? Why he didnt agree with that?? Please clarify the opinion of your president...

lol are you kidding me? I can see as clear as day that these people won't condemn terrorists shooting a woman in the back of head while chanting "God is great!" Yet, will in turn protest because they can't take a joke or accept Denmark's culture.

This is a case of freedom of speech... a concept that has been pretty repressed in the Islamic world. The editors of these European newspapers didn't publish these articles because they wanted to start a war... they were simply satirizing the vicious animosity that is spewing from the Islamic world. President Bush isn't against the right to free speech... he just knows that these image won't help America's image in the Middle East. Explain to me why Muslims won't condemn terrorist attacks on fellow Muslims. That is far worse than a cartoon... and you know it. This religion and culture has a lot of holes in it... and it's become clear to Europeans.

[Ana4Stapp]

No, not finally, the political damage and even worse, loss of human lifes is obvious, and we all see it, but instead of blaming the newspapers or the cartoonists for being insensitive, I blame the rioters for being too sensitive.

An apology should be given if you did something wrong, not if you did something stupid (and even the stupidity of printing the cartoons is debatable imho).

The Danes and other threatened people of European nations deserve an apology for those who resort to violence and not the other way around.

Look, Ralphy Im a person who ALWAYS defended FREEDOM in all means-- I grew up in a country that lived a long era of dictatorship...so FREEDOM is a very important thing to me and to my people...
I m a history teacher with liberal point of view --who always voted for lefts party (btw - The Workers Party!) so democracy is a word I really love. But I think that we have to "USE" democracy and all the rights with RESPONSABILITY!!!!!!!!!!
So you and Chase are saying that in the name of freedom we can do wverything we want???? EVERYTHING????

Can you imagine if those cartoons were refering to the Holocaust?? Would europeans think the same???? Oh ..jews nreed to be tolerant...ihn the name of freedom!!!!!! One thing is say " I hate Bush foreign policy and all the its represents all over the world "and other is kill George Bush and all the american people because they represent the opressor and unfair capitalism that condemned my people to the poverty" This is insane!!!!!!!!!!!

[Chase]

Look, Ralphy Im a person who ALWAYS defended FREEDOM in all means-- I grew up in a country that lived a long era of dictatorship...so FREEDOM is a very important thing to me and to my people...
I m a history teacher with liberal point of view --who always voted for lefts party (btw - The Workers Party!) so democracy is a word I really love. But I think that we have to "USE" democracy and all the rights with RESPONSABILITY!!!!!!!!!!
So you and Chase are saying that in the name of freedom we can do wverything we want???? EVERYTHING????

Can you imagine if those cartoons were refering to the Holocaust?? Would europeans think the same???? Oh ..jews nreed to be tolerant...ihn the name of freedom!!!!!! One thing is say " I hate Bush foreign policy and all the its represents all over the world "and other is kill George Bush and all the american people because they represent the opressor and unfair capitalism that condemned my people to the poverty" This is insane!!!!!!!!!!!

Muslims publish and say all sorts of racist, anti-Semitic, anti-European, anti-American bullshit all the time. Last time I checked... Europeans weren't in the streets burning effagies of Osama bin Laden and his henchman... and chanting "Death to Islam!" In all honesty... the Islamic fascists in the Middle East are probably the least diverse and least tolerant group on the planet. They're hypocritical, cowardly, and repressive. They gave Europeans this image Muhammad as a ticking time bomb.

[Ana4Stapp]

lol are you kidding me? I can see as clear as day that these people won't condemn terrorists shooting a woman in the back of head while chanting "God is great!" Yet, will in turn protest because they can't take a joke or accept Denmark's culture.

This is a case of freedom of speech... a concept that has been pretty repressed in the Islamic world. The editors of these European newspapers didn't publish these articles because they wanted to start a war... they were simply satirizing the vicious animosity that is spewing from the Islamic world. President Bush isn't against the right to free speech... he just knows that these image won't help America's image in the Middle East. Explain to me why Muslims won't condemn terrorist attacks on fellow Muslims. That is far worse than a cartoon... and you know it. This religion and culture has a lot of holes in it... and it's become clear to Europeans.

Bush is at least taking a resposible (wow I canT believe- im saying it-lol) position --because he knowS that sItuation can be even more worse and its not because "these image won't help America's image in the Middle East"-- (you are so naive, Chase!) its because it will provoke another conflict in that problematic area...think a little: muslims will be unite against ocidentals --their leader finnaly have a good reason to put US and Europe as the EVIL!!!!!!! Can yoiu imagine their strenght ???? I know you live in a superpower that has an efficent military force all around the world...you cleary have this power ---but they have the religious power!!!!!! This is waht Bush definitely wants to avoid...Its so clear , Chase...

[Ana4Stapp]

Muslims publish and say all sorts of racist, anti-Semitic, anti-European, anti-American bullshit all the time. Last time I checked... Europeans weren't in the streets burning effagies of Osama bin Laden and his henchman... and chanting "Death to Islam!" In all honesty... the Islamic fascists in the Middle East are probably the least diverse and least tolerant group on the planet. They're hypocritical, cowardly, and repressive. They gave Europeans this image Muhammad as a ticking time bomb.

Yeah...and these people celebrated the 9/11 attacks.... because they thought (and still think ) that you americans are intolerant , the invaders , the evil people ....Bush is the Evil :rolleyes:

But are you going to talk about tolerance when refering to RELIGION?? Catholic Church was tolerant in Medieval times?? Protestants are tolerant with sex issues? No, honey...no one is tolerant when refering to religion!!!!!!!

[Chase]

Bush is at least taking a resposible (wow I can believe- im saying it-lol) position --because he know that sotuation can be even more worse and its not because "these image won't help America's image in the Middle East"-- (you are so naive, Chase!) its because it will provoke another conflict in that problematic area...think a little: muslims will be unite against ocidentals --their leader finnaly have a good reason to put US and Europe as the EVIL!!!!!!! Can yoiu imagine their strenght ???? I know you live in a superpower that has an efficent military force all around the world...you cleary have this power ---but they have the religious power!!!!!! This is waht Bush definitely wants to avoid...Its so clear , Chase...

Their strength? I haven't seen strength. I've seen cowardly, hit and run attacks on innocent people. That isn't strength, that's cowardice. Ragtag Islamic extremists wouldn't stand a chance in a joint effort to destroy America and the European powers like Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the Netherland, or Russia. Not a chance... and they know it. If they were strong... they wouldn't attack a shopping mall... they would attack military installations. I'm sure there are some Muslims blaming America for this... even though America has nothing to do with the publishing of these articles. It makes Americans more of a target nevertheless. That is what President Bush has a problem with. He doesn't want to repress Europe's free press laws... because we have every right to publish the same thing.

[Chase]

Yeah...and these people celebrated the 9/11 attacks.... because they thought (and still think ) that you americans are intolerant , the invaders , the evil people ....Bush is the Evil :rolleyes:

But are you going to talk about tolerance when refering to RELIGION?? Catholic Church was tolerant in Medieval times?? Protestants are tolerant with sex issues? No, honey...no one is tolerant when refering to religion!!!!!!!

See here's the thing. Catholics aren't the same as they were during the Crusades. A lot of Muslims are though. A lot Muslims still live in the 14th Century. I'm sorry but a pedaphile priest isn't as bad as an Islamic terrorist who shoots an innocent woman in the back of the head.

[Ana4Stapp]

Their strength? I haven't seen strength. I've seen cowardly, hit and run attacks on innocent people. That isn't strength, that's cowardice. Ragtag Islamic extremists wouldn't stand a chance against a joint effort to destroy America and the European powers like Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the Netherland, or Russia. Not a chance... and they know it. If they were strong... they wouldn't attack a shopping mall... they would attack military installations. I'm sure there are some Muslims blaming America for this... even though America has nothing to do with the publishing of these articles. It makes Americans more of a target nevertheless. That is what President Bush has a problem with. He doesn't want to repress Europe's free press laws... because we have every right to publish the same thing.


You are crazy Chase? So they dont have strenght???? :eek: Hey... they attacked World Trade Center into the heart of America that by the way with all grandiosity and power (militairies, FBI, CIA) couldn do anything!!!!!! --so why not attacking a shopping mall ???? You know they can do it!!!!!! Their strenght also incluides MONEY!!!!! Yes...they had an apparatus to destroy WTC...so dont be so ingenuous ...power isnt only military force...(so why US is still fight in Iraq????)

[Ana4Stapp]

See here's the thing. Catholics aren't the same as they were during the Crusades. A lot of Muslims are though. A lot Muslims still live in the 14th Century. I'm sorry but a pedaphile priest isn't as bad as an Islamic terrorist who shoots an innocent woman in the back of the head.


WHAT??????? Maybe i got it wrong...but ...WHAT???????? :eek: :confused:

But you have one good (at least) point: to us (occidentals ) they still live in 14 century!!!!!! Maybe to them we live in un ppropriated era...so why we are right and they wrong??????

[Ana4Stapp]

I'm sure there are some Muslims blaming America for this... even though America has nothing to do with the publishing of these articles. It makes Americans more of a target nevertheless. .

Enough reason to stop defending cartoons????? :rolleyes:

[Chase]

You are crazy Chase? So they dont have strenght???? :eek: Hey... they attacked World Trade Center into the heart of America that by the way with all grandiosity and power (militairies, FBI, CIA) couldn do anything!!!!!! --so why not attacking a shopping mall ???? You know they can do it!!!!!! Their strenght also incluides MONEY!!!!! Yes...they had an apparatus to destroy WTC...so dont be so ingenuous ...power isnt only military force...(so why US is still fight in Iraq????)

If a few terrorists stood up in a plane today with razor blades... the couple Air Marshalls in the plane would shoot the bastards. Hell... they couldn't get control of the third plane because the passangers prevented them from hurting a populated area. It wasn't strength... it was just that America had its guard down. Ask Japan what happened when they attacked America and the consequences they had to deal with. America and Europe could... with ease... destroy the entire Middle East. America, Britain, France, and Germany alone could probably do it. C'mon now... this all mighty strong fighting force beheads innocent civilians... that's the face of cowardice.

[Chase]

Enough reason to stop defending cartoons????? :rolleyes:

I'm still wondering what kind of reasons will get you to stop defending the intolerance of radical Islam. Maybe another Holocaust courtesy of Iran will do the trick.

I'm defending the right to a free press... not the cartoons.

[Ana4Stapp]

If a few terrorists stood up in a plane today with razor blades... the couple Air Marshalls in the plane would shoot the bastards. Hell... they couldn't get control of the third plane because the passangers prevented them from hurting a populated area. It wasn't strength... it was just that America had its guard down. Ask Japan what happened when they attacked America and the consequences they had to deal with. America and Europe could... with ease... destroy the entire Middle East. America, Britain, France, and Germany alone could probably do it. C'mon now... this all mighty strong fighting force beheads innocent civilians... that's the face of cowardice.


What? This is the most stupid thing I saw here ! Ask famililies who lost their relatives ( we had brazilians dead in WTC too!) if they agree that they were only a few terrorists!!!!!!!
But only a few terrorists ATTACKED US and killed a LOT OF americans !!!!!!!! You said you went to the Ground Zero ! You cant say now that they were just a few terrorists ! And the third plane failed the terrorists plans maybe because on or two corageous guys or because terrorists comitted some mistake...

Hey...America is powerful but not invencible !!!!!!! Why your militaries are still in Iraq ? and waht about Afeghanistan??? Why Bush dont say militairies to invade Iran and conseqeuntly put an end in their presidents threats????

[Ana4Stapp]

I'm still wondering what kind of reasons will get you to stop defending the intolerance of radical Islam. Maybe another Holocaust courtesy of Iran will do the trick.

I'm defending the right to a free press... not the cartoons.


Chase...Chase... IM not defending the intolerance of radical Islam! I clearly dont agree with that! But Im thinking beside the freedom speech that you obviously love (and me too) ...Im thinking about avoid a new war...Im thinking about your people guy!!! Who, btw is clearly the next target to muslims...

But you seem that prefers freedom isntead of peace , what is disappointing!!!!!!! :(

[Chase]

What? This is the most stupid thing I saw here ! Ask famililies who lost their relatives ( we had brazilians dead in WTC too!) if they agree that they were only a few terrorists!!!!!!!
But only a few terrorists ATTACKED US and killed a LOT OF americans !!!!!!!! You said you went to the Ground Zero ! You cant say now that they were just a few terrorists ! And the third plane failed the terrorists plans maybe because on or two corageous guys or because terrorists comitted some mistake...

Hey...America is powerful but not invencible !!!!!!! Why your militaries are still in Iraq ? and waht about Afeghanistan??? Why Bush dont say militairies to invade Iran and conseqeuntly put an end in their presidents threats????

19 hijackers participating in the attacks. Divide them up as you may amongst three airplanes. They had funding... but the likelyhood of that same kind of attack happening is very slim. The third airplane was FULL of courageous men AND women who did everything they could to make sure that plane did not hit a city. They are heroes who screwed up the plans of the terrorists. Our planes today, usually have no less than two armed officials on the planes. I never said America is invincible... but we are powerful. Our military is still in Iraq because we are helping rebuild that nation... and I believe the military force in Afghanistan is headed by the U.N. now. We'll leave if those governments ask us to.

[Chase]

Chase...Chase... IM not defending the intolerance of radical Islam! I clearly dont agree with that! But Im thinking beside the freedom speech that you obviously love (and me too) ...Im thinking about avoid a new war...Im thinking about your people guy!!! Who, btw is clearly the next target to muslims...

But you seem that prefers freedom isntead of peace , what is disappointing!!!!!!! :(

Denmark... and the European continent is radical Islam's new target. It's pretty obvious. Denmark is a peace loving nation and you know that.

[Ana4Stapp]

19 hijackers participating in the attacks. Divide them up as you may amongst three airplanes. They had funding... but the likelyhood of that same kind of attack happening is very slim. The third airplane was FULL of courageous men AND women who did everything they could to make sure that plane did not hit a city. They are heroes who screwed up the plans of the terrorists. Our planes today, usually have no less than two armed officials on the planes. I never said America is invincible... but we are powerful. Our military is still in Iraq because we are helping rebuild that nation... and I believe the military force in Afghanistan is headed by the U.N. now. We'll leave if those governments ask us to.

Funny...seems that you are still in Iraq because in the opposite your president wants you americans to believe --things are out of control there:rolleyes: ...

Hey powerful american guy ...even though I love our intenses (?) debates in here... I need to stop it now...gtg home (im still --alone --at school) but Id like to continue it later....right? ;)

[Chase]

Funny...seems that you are still in Iraq because in the opposite your president wants you americans to believe --things are out of control there:rolleyes: ...

Hey powerful american guy ...even though I love our intenses (?) debates in here... I need to stop it now...gtg home (im still --alone --at school) but Id like to continue it later....right? ;)

I know people in Iraq... and the crap that your country makes you digest is the complete opposite of what I hear from those who are there. Things aren't as bad as the media makes it out to be. Hell... after World War II, Germany wasn't fixed over night.

[Ana4Stapp]

I know people in Iraq... and the crap that your country makes you digest is the complete opposite of what I hear from those who are there. Things aren't as bad as the media makes it out to be. Hell... after World War II, Germany wasn't fixed over night.


Let me clarify something to you Chase:
First- Im not an ignorant person who believes in every crap things media (esp TVS) tells ... I have a degree in History as you probably remember ...and Im extremely careful in taking only one side as the true...

Second - I think is very hard these days to try to believe in what only one country says-- we have INTERNET where we can find the whole story...

Third- Even though I live in the THIRD world as you wisely noticed -- I have lots of cable channels here (CNN, BBC, TV5, FOX etc...), foreign newspapers and access to internet!!!!! So is very hard to believe in only one side of the story ! Its very hard to me act in the same way you act: believing in every crap thing your country makes you digest...:rolleyes:

[Ana4Stapp]

Denmark... and the European continent is radical Islam's new target. It's pretty obvious. Denmark is a peace loving nation and you know that.


No...Denmark isnt a real target to muslims -- yes they are reacting furiously in that country because cartoons were published there-- - but the real targets are America and Europe...and you know that. ;)

[Ana4Stapp]

Look this Chase...
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/02/07/cartoon.protests/index.html

Like Ive already said to you yesterday:

An Iranian newspaper says it is going to hold a competition for cartoons on the Holocaust to test whether the West will apply the same principles of freedom of expression to the Nazi genocide against Jews as it did to the caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed, The Associated Press reports.

so your freedom of speech turned into a "global crisis" - very very intelligent thing!!!!!!! :rolleyes:

[Chase]

I know you're trying to get me to retract my opinion of a free press... but I'm afraid you're going to be unsuccessful. They have every right to print what they want. The Arab media has been presenting false stories to stir up anti-Western sentiment throughout the past decade anyway.

You used to live in a dictatorship. Did you enjoy having your rights suppressed?

[Ana4Stapp]

I know you're trying to get me to retract my opinion of a free press... but I'm afraid you're going to be unsuccessful. They have every right to print what they want. The Arab media has been presenting false stories to stir up anti-Western sentiment throughout the past decade anyway.


Oh...I forgot how stubborn you are my powerful american friend!!!!!!:rolleyes:

You used to live in a dictatorship. Did you enjoy having your rights suppressed?

Actually I was a little girl --I only remember memorizing some presidents names while I was at school...and I was a teenager when things finnaly started to get a little better... dictatorship here was from 1964 until 1985...(by the way an important note : I was born after 1964!!!! :D --just to clarify...lol)

Btw, its pretty interesting that you ask me this question...since YOUR powerful country supported the dictartoship here in the THIRD world ...very interesting...:rolleyes:

[Ana4Stapp]

See here's the thing. Catholics aren't the same as they were during the Crusades. A lot of Muslims are though. A lot Muslims still live in the 14th Century. I'm sorry but a pedaphile priest isn't as bad as an Islamic terrorist who shoots an innocent woman in the back of the head.

Im backing to this post because your statment here is still disturbing to me since I love and work with children...:(

[Chase]

Oh...I forgot how stubborn you are my powerful american friend!!!!!!:rolleyes:



Actually I was a little girl --I only remember memorizing some presidents name while I was at school...and I was a teenager things started to get a little better... dictatorship here was from 1964 until 1985...


Btw, its pretty interesting that you ask me this question...since YOUR powerful country supported the dictartoship here in the THIRD world ...very interesting...:rolleyes:

I didn't ask you about who supported who. I asked you if you enjoyed watching your fellow people have their rights suppressed.

[Chase]

Im backing to this post because your statment here is still disturbing to me since I love and work with children...:(

A molester priest is bad... a terrorist who shoots an innocent woman in the back of the head is worse. It's disturbing to me because I love and work with women.

[Ana4Stapp]

I didn't ask you about who supported who. I asked you if you enjoyed watching your fellow people have their rights suppressed.

You know...I LOVE when you just dont answer my questions here...because you DONT have the answers ...:rolleyes:

[Ana4Stapp]

A molester priest is bad... a terrorist who shoots an innocent woman in the back of the head is worse. It's disturbing to me because I love and work with women.


No its not only 'bad' is HORRIBLE, Chase !!!!! The worst thing that can happen in a childs life....:(

[Chase]

You know...I LOVE when you just dont answer my questions here...because you DONT have the answers ...:rolleyes:

You didn't ask me a question. I asked you if you enjoyed having your rights suppressed.

[Chase]

No its not only 'bad' is HORRIBLE, Chase !!!!! The worst thing that can happen in a childs life....:(

You that's worse than a terrorist putting a bullet in the back of a woman's head for no reason?!

[Ana4Stapp]

You didn't ask me a question. I asked you if you enjoyed having your rights suppressed.

Wow.. I hate to say...but yes.. i didnt ask you a question ...but Ill ask you now...:D waht do you think about the superpower-- the land of freedom supporting dictatorship in the THIRD world?????

Now you have a question here...hope I finally have your answer...
:rolleyes:

[Ana4Stapp]

You that's worse than a terrorist putting a bullet in the back of a woman's head for no reason?!

Ah...you cant expect to me to debate with you what kind of this is the worst thing?????

Abusing a child is not for 'no reason'????? Or maybe what kind of perversions you can allow?

[Chase]

Wow.. I hate to say...but yes.. i didnt ask you a question ...but Ill ask you now...:D waht do you think about the superpower-- the alnd of freedom supporting dictatorship in the THIRD world?????

Now you have a question here...hope I finally have your answer...
:rolleyes:

That was the only blemish, in my opinion, on President Reagan's tenure as President. I know why they did it... to stop the rise of Soviet backed communist leader... but I don't necessarily think that that it was a wise decision to back far right fascist forces. But, that's the nature of war. Sometimes people ally themselves against a common enemy... in that case, it was Soviet based communism.

[Chase]

Ah...you cant expect to me to debate with you what kind of this is the worst thing?????

Abusing a child is not for 'no reason'????? Or maybe what kind of perversions you can allow?

A fucked up priest... in no way, shape, or form... is as evil as a terrorist who KILLS innocent people in cold blood. A terrorist that kills men, women, children, and the elderly.

[Ana4Stapp]

That was the only blemish, in my opinion, on President Reagan's tenure as President. I know why they did it... to stop the rise of Soviet backed communist leader... but I don't necessarily think that that it was a wise decision to back far right fascist forces. But, that's the nature of war. Sometimes people ally themselves against a common enemy... in that case, it was Soviet based communism.

So you are saying your governement did something wrong...yeah...seems that we have some progress here...:rolleyes:

[Ana4Stapp]

A fucked up priest... in no way, shape, or form... is as evil as a terrorist who KILLS innocent people in cold blood. A terrorist that kills men, women, children, and the elderly.

Thanks God ... now we are talking the same language...another progress. ;)

[Chase]

So you are saying your governement did something wrong...yeah...seems that we have some progress here...:rolleyes:

Of course they did something wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right.

[Chase]

Thanks God ... now we are talking the same language...another progress. ;)

I was saying that a murdering terrorist is worse than a perverted priest. I don't know if you got that or not lol :D

[Ana4Stapp]

I was saying that a murdering terrorist is worse than a perverted priest. I don't know if you got that or not lol :D

Hey I need to go to bed!!!! My eyes arent working anymore ... :oalso its tooo late here and honestly I always get what you say but now...lol

you know its sooo disappointing-- much more than your defense for some cartoons in newspapers or because US need to invade a country to spreed democracy...
I can understand --not agree -- with your points here ...but you know... I CANT understand your comment...theres no sense...Im so disappointed that you have no idea...

sorry...:( :(

PS: Oh MY God!!!! Theres no progress in here!!!!!! Too bad!

[Chase]

Do you not think of terrorists as evil? Or do you not understand me because of the language barrier?

[Ana4Stapp]

Do you not think of terrorists as evil? Or do you not understand me because of the language barrier?


wow! Finally im back (not sure why I was offline...)

Of course I think terrorists are evil!!!!! I can understand your point --they are cowards people who kill innocents: kids, women, men...


And YES...I can really understand you!!!!!!!! Theres no language barrier between us...;) lol--- otherwise how could we keep our debates ????

PS: well ... hum... yes ... maybe I can see a 'language barrier' by PMs (when you dont answer them :mad: ) but not on board...lol

[RalphyS]

Look, Ralphy Im a person who ALWAYS defended FREEDOM in all means-- I grew up in a country that lived a long era of dictatorship...so FREEDOM is a very important thing to me and to my people...
I m a history teacher with liberal point of view --who always voted for lefts party (btw - The Workers Party!) so democracy is a word I really love. But I think that we have to "USE" democracy and all the rights with RESPONSABILITY!!!!!!!!!!
So you and Chase are saying that in the name of freedom we can do wverything we want???? EVERYTHING????

Can you imagine if those cartoons were refering to the Holocaust?? Would europeans think the same???? Oh ..jews nreed to be tolerant...ihn the name of freedom!!!!!! One thing is say " I hate Bush foreign policy and all the its represents all over the world "and other is kill George Bush and all the american people because they represent the opressor and unfair capitalism that condemned my people to the poverty" This is insane!!!!!!!!!!!

Look Ana, as you've seen in other threads/debates I clearly don't always agree with Chase on everything. No-one was more disappointed about Bush's theft of the presidency and how the majority of the American electorate rewarded him for it by re-electing him. I was against the invasion of Iraq, because I did not believe there was a connection between Al-Queayda and Saddam Hussein and the story of WMD's was blown totally out of proportion.

I do however feel that islamic fundamentalism/radicalism needs to be addressed forcefully, if we want to get rid of terrorism. Therefore we cannot compromise the basic western values as freedom of speech and freedom of press to appease people, who resort to violence over a (maybe poor) attempt of humor about a human, who has been dead for over 1200 years. We cannot let the radicals dictate our actions.

As a teacher of history you will remember that the British prime minister Chamberlain also tried to appease Hitler after he invaded Czechy (sp?) in 1938, he basically stated, ok, we will look the other way this time, but this is were it stops. Ofcourse it didn't.

I'm all for negotiating with moderate muslims to hopefully live in peacefull coexistence, but I am not willing to sacrifice our western values for it. The buck has to stop somewhere and I am not willing to sacrifice some cartoonists, newspapermen or whoever to the wishes of an angry mob.

I even cannot understand why cartoons about the holocaust come even close to comparing to this. The holocaust was a terrible tragedy in which millions of people were killed, how many people were physically hurt by the cartoon of Muhammad. Still I myself am not above making jokes about Jews and Hitler on occasion, insensitive, yes, but we live in a free society and if I want to be insensitive it is my right to be so. Do I feel it is wrong to make cartoons about the holocaust, probably, but if it happens I will have to deal with it, I may protest to them and find them in poor taste, but I cannot dictate others not to make them, unless there are commonly agreed laws upon which I can sue the makers.

I do agree with Chase, that the islam has never learned to deal with people of other beliefs/worldviews, as the Christian/Catholic Church had to at earlier times. Christianity used to be just as intolerant if not more in centuries past and it had to learn over time that, what they called heresy or blasphemy, is just another opinion on the subject, that you will have to deal with and coexist with. Maybe now it's time that islam learns the same. To be honest there are enough muslims, who are not reacting with violence and the sad thing is, that once again they, through their religion, get blamed for the actions of the radicals. It's a hard lesson for islam, but it is one they have to learn, imo.

On the other subject, the comparison of a pedophile to a murderer, both are terrible acts and are severely punishable by law. But the killing of someone gets a harder punishment as the sexual molestation of someone, it is generally considered to be a more worse crime, since it ends a life. The sexual molestation of a child makes a life very, very hard and painful to live, but there is some hope of some recovery, whereas the killing of a life leaves no hope. This is how we measure the severity of the crime, so on this point too I have to agree with Chase, although I find the comparison not very appropriate.

[Ana4Stapp]

Look Ana, as you've seen in other threads/debates I clearly don't always agree with Chase on everything. No-one was more disappointed about Bush's theft of the presidency and how the majority of the American electorate rewarded him for it by re-electing him. I was against the invasion of Iraq, because I did not believe there was a connection between Al-Queayda and Saddam Hussein and the story of WMD's was blown totally out of proportion.

Well, I can agree with everything you said in this first paragraph...no surprise...

do however feel that islamic fundamentalism/radicalism needs to be addressed forcefully, if we want to get rid of terrorism. Therefore we cannot compromise the basic western values as freedom of speech and freedom of press to appease people, who resort to violence over a (maybe poor) attempt of humor about a human, who has been dead for over 1200 years. We cannot let the radicals dictate our actions.

Defending cartoons published in the newspaper really wont help the efforts in
slowing down the terrorist activities but the opposite is true: we are observing the increase of the anti-occidental sentiment, especially being targets : US and Europe.

As a teacher of history you will remember that the British prime minister Chamberlain also tried to appease Hitler after he invaded Czechy (sp?) in 1938, he basically stated, ok, we will look the other way this time, but this is were it stops. Ofcourse it didn't.

As an history teacher I remember that Germany got the Sudetenland in October 10, and de facto control over the rest of Czechoslovakia as long as Hitler promised to go no further...but we all know the rest of this promise...I meant europeans ignored Hitler strenght for so long and how long are we 'preapring' and ignoring another charismathic leader in the Middle East????



I'm all for negotiating with moderate muslims to hopefully live in peacefull coexistence, but I am not willing to sacrifice our western values for it. The buck has to stop somewhere and I am not willing to sacrifice some cartoonists, newspapermen or whoever to the wishes of an angry mob.

Our western values are already sacrificed: FREEDOM --- Im not talking about theory ..Im trefering to put into practice...for example ask your latest ally Chase (hes american, right?) if he feels really safe in going to Europe (at least he said he will go to Europe) in the next semester (I think)...oh you can say -- but hes free to choose to going in there...but is this the real point????

I even cannot understand why cartoons about the holocaust come even close to comparing to this. The holocaust was a terrible tragedy in which millions of people were killed, how many people were physically hurt by the cartoon of Muhammad. Still I myself am not above making jokes about Jews and Hitler on occasion, insensitive, yes, but we live in a free society and if I want to be insensitive it is my right to be so. Do I feel it is wrong to make cartoons about the holocaust, probably, but if it happens I will have to deal with it, I may protest to them and find them in poor taste, but I cannot dictate others not to make them, unless there are commonly agreed laws upon which I can sue the makers.

I think its definitely an unecessary thing...we really need this? You can see a new war which started because of someone thought that ridiculing muslims religions was "funny" . 'Very' Cool! 'Very' smart! Very coward !

I do agree with Chase, that the islam has never learned to deal with people of other beliefs/worldviews, as the Christian/Catholic Church had to at earlier times. Christianity used to be just as intolerant if not more in centuries past and it had to learn over time that, what they called heresy or blasphemy, is just another opinion on the subject, that you will have to deal with and coexist with. Maybe now it's time that islam learns the same. To be honest there are enough muslims, who are not reacting with violence and the sad thing is, that once again they, through their religion, get blamed for the actions of the radicals. It's a hard lesson for islam, but it is one they have to learn, imo.

I can understand Chase saying it --but seriously -- I cant believe in you doing the same...(this thread is so weird that Im agreeing with Ryan --who most of the times agrees with Chase and consequently disagreeing with you- who until now-- always said exactly what I had in my head ...ah...but its okay...Im still disagreeing with Chase...lol)

Look all the religions are intolerant...theres no news here...and frankly Catholic Church is less intolerant these days because lost LOTS of its power ...

Actually I remember something Chase said that I can agree: islan is still in 14 century so we have to deal with it...ignoring or being tolerant...theres no middle ground here...

On the other subject, the comparison of a pedophile to a murderer, both are terrible acts and are severely punishable by law. But the killing of someone gets a harder punishment as the sexual molestation of someone, it is generally considered to be a more worse crime, since it ends a life. The sexual molestation of a child makes a life very, very hard and painful to live, but there is some hope of some recovery, whereas the killing of a life leaves no hope. This is how we measure the severity of the crime, so on this point too I have to agree with Chase, although I find the comparison not very appropriate.

Amazing the way you are agreeing with Chase ...lol

Seriosuly I cant even think about pedophiles...they are pervert people who most of the times were abused too...I cant compare death to sex abuse...Can you ? Sometimes sexual molestation of a child let not hope --because for some children... trying to 'live' with this kind of scars is even worse than death ...:(

[Ana4Stapp]

Of course they did something wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right.

why exactly you think it was wrong???? Im curious...:D

[RalphyS]

Defending cartoons published in the newspaper really wont help the efforts in slowing down the terrorist activities but the opposite is true: we are observing the increase of the anti-occidental sentiment, especially being targets : US and Europe...(

I am not defending these cartoons, because I think that this will decrease anti-occidental sentiment. It is clear at this time that it will increase it, but I am not willing to sacrifice the values of the occident (I never heard of this word before and had to look it up actually) like freedom of speech and press to reduce this anti-occidental sentiment. If all the people in the US and Europe would convert to islam, this would also remove anti-occidental sentiment, but I am not willing to do that, just as I am not willing to apologize for the values we have in our western culture, which led to the publication of these cartoons.

What I would like to know from you, Ana, is what you think should be done about the cartoons? Do you think Europe and the US should formally apologize to islam nations, the islam belief or islam clerics? And if you do, do you think they should do that, because it was wrong to draw and publish these cartoons or should they apologize just because it will maybe calm them down? If we do apologize should we also apologize about Salman Rushdie's book "The Satanic Verses" in which, according to the muslim fundamentalists, the prophet and islam were insulted? In fact, should the press use another standard of scrutiny towards the excesses of the islam as it does towards other things, just because we might piss them off again (excuse my French).

If we give in now and we do apologize, where does it stop? I probably agree that there needs to be a certain level of responsibility and sensibility, but where do we draw the lines? The political leader of Iraq stated that Israel should be wiped off the map of the world, some cartoonists drew some over-the-top illustrations in a relatively small European (Danish) newspaper, yet the latter is excused of being insensitive, the comparison stinks. We let them get away with murder, so to speak, and we should pay heed to our every word and drawing about islam or Muhammad.

If they feel they have a right to be angry at the West for this, so be it. I feel we have much more reason to be angry, yet we try to do the civilized thing and talk about it.


As an history teacher I remember that Germany got the Sudetenland in October 10, and de facto control over the rest of Czechoslovakia as long as Hitler promised to go no further...but we all know the rest of this promise...I meant europeans ignored Hitler strenght for so long and how long are we 'preapring' and ignoring another charismathic leader in the Middle East????


I do not think it was the strenght of Hitler they ignored, it was just that they thought that if they give him a finger (Czechoslovakia), he would be satisfied not to take the rest of the hand. They thought they could control him by appeasing him. Just like you think you can control the radical forces in islam, if we are just always accomodating them. Btw I don't think the military strength of the islamic nations can in any way compare to that of the Third Reich, if you take the different times ( +/- 1938 to 2006) into the equation. The only nuclear islamic nation is Pakistan, but they could never take a stand against a combination of nuclear powers like France, England and the USA, but this is not what terrorism is about so it is basically not the problem here.


Our western values are already sacrificed: FREEDOM --- Im not talking about theory ..Im trefering to put into practice...for example ask your latest ally Chase (hes american, right?) if he feels really safe in going to Europe (at least he said he will go to Europe) in the next semester (I think)...oh you can say -- but hes free to choose to going in there...but is this the real point????


Yes, after the terrorist attacks in the States, Djakarta, Nairobi, Madrid, London, we had to take some actions that infringed on our privacy and therefore maybe our freedom, but we were coerced in doing so. Some of the measures that have been taken, go to far in my opinion, like listening devices without court orders, but some are necessary, because there is a thin line between freedom and safety, while terrorists try to hurt the innocent. You however are now willing to sacrifice certain freedoms voluntarily, not coercevily, just to appease those who have already infringed our freedoms. It's like saying, let's just try giving them what they want, maybe they will leave us alone than. It doesn't work like that, at some point you have to take a stand, and say this is what we stand for, we won't let you coerce us to put down these basic principles, I think in this case we reached that point.


I think its definitely an unecessary thing...we really need this? You can see a new war which started because of someone thought that ridiculing muslims religions was "funny" . 'Very' Cool! 'Very' smart! Very coward !

Were the cartoons unnecessary, probably! But this is beside the point. In the west we make fun of our innermost principles, we ridicule our leaders, our holy figures, we even ridicule the best of people, we can laugh about almost anything, and we should not have to compromise that for anything. What if these riots hadn't occurred, would anyone have giving a second thought to these cartoons and now suddenly because some muslims (I still cannot think of them as the majority) go all bazurk over them, we have to say it was wrong. This is not how it works. Let's be honest, if the cartoonists and the newspaper would have known what kind of commotion the drawing and publishing of the illustrations would have led to, they probably wouldn't have done it, but that is hindsight. It doesn't take anything away from the fact, that they had the perfect right to do so and calling them cowards for doing so, is more wrong than the actual publication itself, I believe.


Look all the religions are intolerant...theres no news here...and frankly Catholic Church is less intolerant these days because lost LOTS of its power ...

Actually I remember something Chase said that I can agree: islan is still in 14 century so we have to deal with it...ignoring or being tolerant...theres no middle ground here...


So what you are saying is that religions are intolerant and therefore we should walk on our toes in regard to them. No, if I feel something is intolerant, be it a religion or something else, I will address them on it, even attack them for it, if I feel the intolerance goes to far as to warrant it.

You cannot say that the Catholic Church is less tolerant as in the days of the inquisition, sure I still disagree with their viewpoints on homosexuality, abortion, condoms and others, but at least they are not burning people at the stakes anymore.

I do not feel any religion, be it islam, christianity, judaism, hinduism or whatever is above the law. People tend to be more allowing to people who do or say unspeakable things in the name of religion, I look through the cover-up of religion and only see the unspeakable things happening, and no religion is any justification for these things.

I do feel there is some middle ground in dealing with religion and its lack of tolerance of certain things. As long as the religion doesn't affect others in a negative way, I can allow almost anything, I disagree with it and might even make fun of it, but I'll let the believers do their thing. I also accept believers making fun of me for not-believing, just as long as they do not tell me what to do or be.


Seriosuly I cant even think about pedophiles...they are pervert people who most of the times were abused too...I cant compare death to sex abuse...Can you ? Sometimes sexual molestation of a child let not hope --because for some children... trying to 'live' with this kind of scars is even worse than death ...:(

Do not get me wrong, pedophilia is a very serious and terrible crime, and the people who purport it, should be put into jail for a very long time, maybe forever if they are still having tendencies to repeat their crime, but the taking of a life is the most serious crime of all (except for ofcourse killing more people) and basically every judiciary system in the world thinks so.
Maybe it is even wrong to compare severity of certain crimes, but if we make laws we have to do so.

[Ana4Stapp]

Is this the way you wont sacrifice western values????

But I can see the sacrifice in here ...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11233372/

4 more Afghan deaths during cartoon protests
11 killed in week; Muslim clerics call for calm as global unrest persists

[Ana4Stapp]

And more:

Incited by al-Qaida and Taliban?

Senior Afghan officials said al-Qaida and the Taliban could be exploiting anger over the cartoons to incite violence. Provincial governor Mohammed Latif said he suspected al-Qaida may have had a hand in the unrest. He said two men from eastern Afghanistan were arrested during the protest and were being interrogated.

“The violence today looked like a massive uprising. It was very unusual,” Latif said.

Will Chase finally UNDERSTAND it??? :rolleyes:

[Chase]

And more:



Will Chase finally UNDERSTAND it??? :rolleyes:

You know I don't think it was a good idea to publish the cartoons... but there is no crime against stupidity. They had every right to do so. Just as Al Jazeera has had the the right to air anti-Western propaganda for the past decade. If you're against these cartoons... then surely you're against the racist, anti-Semitic, intolerant propaganda that the Arab media puts into circulation. Peoplek make offensive comments about the Catholic Church ALL THE TIME. Still... you don't see all Catholics rioting in the streets.

... and I actually do feel safe about going to Europe. We're just as much as a target in America... so the possibility of a terrorist attack in Europe doesn't scare me. If I go to the Netherlands... I completely trust the Dutch with my safety and well being for a few months.

[Ana4Stapp]

You know I don't think it was a good idea to publish the cartoons... but there is no crime against stupidity. They had every right to do so. Just as Al Jazeera has had the the right to air anti-Western propaganda for the past decade. If you're against these cartoons... then surely you're against the racist, anti-Semitic, intolerant propaganda that the Arab media puts into circulation. Peoplek make offensive comments about the Catholic Church ALL THE TIME. Still... you don't see all Catholics rioting in the streets.

Finally!!!!!! I knew you were intelligent, Chase! ;)
But explain to me why you dont think that was a good idea to publish the cartoons...

[Chase]

Finally!!!!!! I knew you were intelligent, Chase! ;)
But explain to me why you dont think that was a good idea to publish the cartoons...

Like I said earlier... just because it makes Americans and Europeans more of a target. However, the right a free press is essential to modern Western political thought... and that's a valuable right to have. The Danish government didn't publish these cartoons... it was a private newspaper which is completely independent of the government.

[Ana4Stapp]

Like I said earlier... just because it makes Americans and Europeans more of a target. However, the right a free press is essential to modern Western political thought... and that's a valuable right to have. The Danish government didn't publish these cartoons... it was a private newspaper which is completely independent of the government.

which had no preoccupation or social responsability about considering the obvious effects that this action could provokes... and yeah you are right the newspaper is independent but now the whole country is responding for it...

[RalphyS]

I am not defending these cartoons, because I think that this will decrease anti-occidental sentiment. It is clear at this time that it will increase it, but I am not willing to sacrifice the values of the occident (I never heard of this word before and had to look it up actually) like freedom of speech and press to reduce this anti-occidental sentiment. If all the people in the US and Europe would convert to islam, this would also remove anti-occidental sentiment, but I am not willing to do that, just as I am not willing to apologize for the values we have in our western culture, which led to the publication of these cartoons.

What I would like to know from you, Ana, is what you think should be done about the cartoons? Do you think Europe and the US should formally apologize to islam nations, the islam belief or islam clerics? And if you do, do you think they should do that, because it was wrong to draw and publish these cartoons or should they apologize just because it will maybe calm them down? If we do apologize should we also apologize about Salman Rushdie's book "The Satanic Verses" in which, according to the muslim fundamentalists, the prophet and islam were insulted? In fact, should the press use another standard of scrutiny towards the excesses of the islam as it does towards other things, just because we might piss them off again (excuse my French).

If we give in now and we do apologize, where does it stop? I probably agree that there needs to be a certain level of responsibility and sensibility, but where do we draw the lines? The political leader of Iraq stated that Israel should be wiped off the map of the world, some cartoonists drew some over-the-top illustrations in a relatively small European (Danish) newspaper, yet the latter is excused of being insensitive, the comparison stinks. We let them get away with murder, so to speak, and we should pay heed to our every word and drawing about islam or Muhammad.

If they feel they have a right to be angry at the West for this, so be it. I feel we have much more reason to be angry, yet we try to do the civilized thing and talk about it.

Ana, why don't you answer my questions, once again in bold this time?

You keep posting reports about casualties to emphasize how wrong the publishing of the cartoons were, but that only proves to me how wrong the reaction of these radicals is, towards these cartoons. The cartoons itself caused no physical harm, the totally out-of -proportion reactions to it are to blame for the deaths and wounded.

Have you actually seen any of the cartoons, I looked them up on the net yesterday and they are totally innocent. All the fuzz is made about the one with the bomb-turban, this could perhaps have been a little over the top, but in no way it warrants the violent reactions of the protesters. Most protesters have never seen them, this all seems like some sort of mass hysteria, which is not unusual for islam as we witnessed it over the last years, maybe decades.

I read an interesting editorial in my local newspaper yesterday. No-one has any problems with a religion and the rules it sets for its followers, but when they try to make rules, in this case the disallowance to draw the prophet, also apply to non-believers this simply goes to far.

[Ana4Stapp]

Ana, why don't you answer my questions, once again in bold this time?

You keep posting reports about casualties to emphasize how wrong the publishing of the cartoons were, but that only proves to me how wrong the reaction of these radicals is, towards these cartoons. The cartoons itself caused no physical harm, the totally out-of -proportion reactions to it are to blame for the deaths and wounded.

Have you actually seen any of the cartoons, I looked them up on the net yesterday and they are totally innocent. All the fuzz is made about the one with the bomb-turban, this could perhaps have been a little over the top, but in no way it warrants the violent reactions of the protesters. Most protesters have never seen them, this all seems like some sort of mass hysteria, which is not unusual for islam as we witnessed it over the last years, maybe decades.

I read an interesting editorial in my local newspaper yesterday. No-one has any problems with a religion and the rules it sets for its followers, but when they try to make rules, in this case the disallowance to draw the prophet, also apply to non-believers this simply goes to far.


Sorry, Ralphy -- In all honesty I dont know what happened...:o-- actually Im having a hard time at my work (big big problem) so I havent been able to get online ...but I remember of your questions and I think I just replied to Chase's posts first because we two were online at the same time.:D

But okay...Im here:

First --Yeah, you re definitely right: Im posting these reports to prove to you and Chase how wrong and irresponsible was the paper in deciding to publish those cartoons. Or do you think that the editors didnt have the faintest idea about the consequences of their action?
Again, I'm not pro censorship!!!! But drawning a cartoon which is too far from being innocent... And I saw those cartoons ...Do you really think that putting a 'bomb-turban' is an innocent attitude ? Give me a break, Ralphy! You know that unhappily we still live in two worlds, theres a clear gap (?) between West -and our values and East and their religious fanatism.

They see West as the Evil especially represented by US and Europe, and btw the americans troops in Iraq are the climax of the alleged persecution to Islam. They are saying that... You talked about hysterya --yes also there are certain groups trying to use the drawns --did you read that perhaps Al QAEDA and Osama Bin Laden are involved in it? Do you believe in this possibility?

Chase said that US and Europe forces are stronger than the fanatic Islam...but you know they have strength too: not militaire but religious. Religion is placed in the highest position obviously to control people...This is the only strenght they have but its still dangerous even to US (you can see it clearly in Bushs position in condening the cartoons) and Europe. They are fanatics so they have nothing to lose...they offer their own lives to God --they have nothing to lose!

You also asked me if I think itsthe right thing to Denamark France and all the others europeans countries that published the cartoons to ask for apologize to Islam?
Maybe, but honestly I dont believe in apologizes now that the damage is done.

[RalphyS]

Sorry, Ralphy -- In all honesty I dont know what happened...:o-- actually Im having a hard time at my work (big big problem) so I havent been able to get online ...but I remember of your questions and I think I just reply to Chase's posts first because we two were online at the same time.:D .

I'm sorry to hear you have a problem at work and I hope you can work it out.


First --Yeah, you re definitely right: Im posting these reports to prove to you and Chase how wrong and irresponsible was the paper in deciding to publish those cartoons. Or do you think that the editors didnt have the faintest idea about the consequences of their action?

I honestly do think that the 'editors' did not anticipate this kind of uproar, stemming from a few cartoons, ofcourse there was evidence in history that it might:

In 1980, privately owned British broadcaster ITV aired a documentary about the stoning of a Saudi Arabian princess who had allegedly committed adultery. The government in Riyadh intervened and the British government issued an apology. We saw the same kowtowing response in 1987 when (Dutch comedian) Rudi Carrell derided (Iranian revolutionary leader) Ayatollah Khomeini in a comedy skit (that was aired on German television). In 2000, a play about the youngest wife of the Prophet Mohammed, titled "Aisha," was cancelled before it ever opened in Rotterdam. Then there was the van Gogh murder and now the cartoons. We are constantly apologizing, and we don't notice how much abuse we're taking. Meanwhile, the other side doesn't give an inch.


Again, I'm not pro censorship!!!! But drawning a cartoon which is too far from being innocent... And I saw those cartoons ...Do you really think that putting a 'bomb-turban' is an innocent attitude ? Give me a break, Ralphy! You know that unhappily we still live in two worlds, theres a clear gap (?) between West -and our values and East and their religious fanatism.

They see West as the Evil especially represented by US and Europe, and btw the americans troops in Iraq are the climax of the alleged persecution to Islam. They are saying that... You talked about hysterya --yes also there are certain groups trying to use the drawns --did you read that perhaps Al QAEDA and Osama Bin Laden are involved in it? Do you believe in this possibility?

I've seen far worse cartoon of Dubya portrayed as Hitler and thought nothing of it, maybe agreeing partly in it. Hasn't islam or at least its radicals actions warranted a view in the general public of the west, that it's a religion very strongly attached to terrorism and bombings, and isn't this what comes out in cartoon like this.

Yes, I heard on Dutch radio today that the taliban received lots of volunteers to be suicide terrorists, because of the cartoons. And now, you want us to go and talk with these people about being rational and tell them we're sorry, they are willing to go and blow up themselves and as many innocent people as possible, there is no more rationality there. You cannot discuss something rationally with raving lunatics, which these people more and more prove to be and therefore I am not willing to accomodate them anymore.


Chase said that US and Europe forces are stronger than the fanatic Islam...but you know they have strength too: not militaire but religious. Religion is placed in the highest position obviously to control people...This is the only strenght they have but its still dangerous even to US (you can see it clearly in Bushs position in condening the cartoons) and Europe. They are fanatics so they have nothing to lose...they offer their own lives to God --they have nothing to lose!


As this controversy is in a motion of continued intensification in the days to come, it is an opportune moment for the Westerners as well as the Muslims to reflect on if the Prophet of Islam deserves to command unqualified respect from the Westerners in the light of the theological doctrine he had set forward some 14 centuries ago. It should be considered that Muslims are expecting such unqualified respect for the prophet on the Islamic theological ground which prohibits depiction of their prophet in any form. It will hence be most appropriate to consider the desired respect for the prophet from the Westerners in the light of same Islamic theological doctrine, which comprises of the edicts of the Koran and deeds and traditions of the Prophet.

When delve into the Islamic theological doctrine that the Prophet Muhammad had preached and propagated, it becomes the most difficult and unreasonable proposition for the Westerners to show any respect for the Prophet. In the Islamic doctrine of the Prophet, the Westerners who comprise of mainly of the Jews, Christians and nontheists, are conisdered Kaffirs, which means cruel, deceptive and hypocrite infidels or unbelievers [Koran 2:39 ]. The Westerners are the worst beast in the eyes of Allah, the Islamic God [Koran 8:55]. The Gods of the Jews and Christians of the West are false who lead them to darkness [Koran 2:258 ]. Westerners are deceptive and liars [Koran 3:23] and wrongdoers [Koran 2:254 ]. The Western infidels must not be taken as friends and contacts must be avoided at all costs [Koran 3:28]. Muslims must not associate with their own kindred (son, parents and wives) if they do not submit to Allah [Koran 58:22] and such kindred are their enemies [Koran 64.14].

Whatever we do as Westerners, these people are supposed to hate us, it is written in their holy book!!! It is hard to respect the wishes of people, who look at us with so much hatred and therefore I see less and less reason to let them dictate us what to do, say, draw or publish.

I think these quotes are very apropriate in this situation.

The beauty of religious mania is that it has the power to explain everything. Once God (or Satan) is accepted as the first cause of everything which happens in the mortal world, nothing is left to chance... logic can be happily tossed out the window.
Stephen King

Religion is the idol of the mob; it adores everything it does not understand.
Frederick the Great

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.
Voltaire (1694 - 1778)

With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven Weinberg (1933 - ), quoted in The New York Times, April 20, 1999


You also asked me if I think itsthe right thing to Denamark France and all the others europeans countries that published the cartoons to ask for apologize to Islam?
Maybe, but honestly I dont believe in apologizes now that the damage is done.

So what should be done about the situation in your opinion?

[Chase]

Bottom line... it's hard for Westerners to take these people seriously. Let's be realistic here. The majority of them claim that Islam is a "religion of peace." That term gets thrown around alot... especially after disgusting attacks like 9/11, London, and Madrid. For being a "religion of peace," they sure do resort to violence rather quickly. Every attack, whether it be a full scale terrorist attack... or the beheading of an innocent, is done for Allah. Look... people have done some pretty sacreligious things to Christian symbols, but I didn't go and resort to violent riots. Now... the Iranians, Syrians, and Al Qaeda are exploiting these people. These radical governments are giving these people Danish, French, Israeli, and American flags to burn. "Religion of peace," right?

I have yet to see is the Islamic world be sensative to Europe, America, India, Christianity, Judaism, or Hinduism. They're intolerant... violent, and racist. As far as I'm concerned, they've already declared war on the United States, Europe, Asia, and Australia. If this is World War III... then it's clear as day as to who the agressors are. I'm not advocating a war or anything... but all I'm saying is to open your eyes. The only people who have disgraced Islam... are Muslims.

[Ana4Stapp]

[QUOTE]I'm sorry to hear you have a problem at work and I hope you can work it out.


Oh thanks Ralphy...but the problem is disappearing...and finally I can 'breath'...lol

I honestly do think that the 'editors' did not anticipate this kind of uproar, stemming from a few cartoons, ofcourse there was evidence in history that it might:

You know...but I cant believe in no way in their innocence...



I've seen far worse cartoon of Dubya portrayed as Hitler and thought nothing of it, maybe agreeing partly in it. Hasn't islam or at least its radicals actions warranted a view in the general public of the west, that it's a religion very strongly attached to terrorism and bombings, and isn't this what comes out in cartoon like this.

Look Im not saying I dont agree with the drawns, I can find them funny or intelligents, but me and you arent fanatics muslims...we dont live in 14 century (and yes now im biased in saying this...but this is true.). We live in west having western values of freedom and respect. We are more tolerant because we are not from a theocratic state which tries to keep us blind using religion.

Yes, I heard on Dutch radio today that the taliban received lots of volunteers to be suicide terrorists, because of the cartoons. And now, you want us to go and talk with these people about being rational and tell them we're sorry, they are willing to go and blow up themselves and as many innocent people as possible, there is no more rationality there. You cannot discuss something rationally with raving lunatics, which these people more and more prove to be and therefore I am not willing to accomodate them anymore.

I clearly belive that Osama and Al Qaeda are taking advantage of this situation...their own enemies gave the reason to hate west more and more
I never said that we have to talk with these fanatics....but I dont see a reason to provoke this situation that become a global crisis.




Whatever we do as Westerners, these people are supposed to hate us, it is written in their holy book!!! It is hard to respect the wishes of people, who look at us with so much hatred and therefore I see less and less reason to let them dictate us what to do, say, draw or publish.


Yes, yes...I said it too many times here and this is definitely my point : they hate us and will hate more now...because they were inflamad by the cartoons.

I think these quotes are very apropriate in this situation.

The beauty of religious mania is that it has the power to explain everything. Once God (or Satan) is accepted as the first cause of everything which happens in the mortal world, nothing is left to chance... logic can be happily tossed out the window.
Stephen King

Religion is the idol of the mob; it adores everything it does not understand.
Frederick the Great

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.
Voltaire (1694 - 1778)

With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven Weinberg (1933 - ), quoted in The New York Times, April 20, 1999]

Very good quotes.;)

So what should be done about the situation in your opinion
:rolleyes:
I really dont know ...but I know what shouldnt be done....

[Ana4Stapp]

Bottom line... it's hard for Westerners to take these people seriously. Let's be realistic here. The majority of them claim that Islam is a "religion of peace." That term gets thrown around alot... especially after disgusting attacks like 9/11, London, and Madrid. For being a "religion of peace," they sure do resort to violence rather quickly. Every attack, whether it be a full scale terrorist attack... or the beheading of an innocent, is done for Allah.

Hey this kind of absurd actions (burning flags, riots, trowing bombs etc...) are made by the fanatics (the extremists). You are being extremely biased here, Chase. You cant say that every muslim people are terrorists ...Would you like if I said that all americans are stupids because I dont like Bush foreign policy?:rolleyes:


Look... people have done some pretty sacreligious things to Christian symbols, but I didn't go and resort to violent riots. Now... the Iranians, Syrians, and Al Qaeda are exploiting these people.

Thanks God you are a rational guy... Seriously, you grow up in a country that put religion and politics in two differents sides and even though you are religious (not sure : are you? ...) you dont see religion as a part of your state.
Your education, like mine was based in principles as FREEDOM, RESPECT, LOVE TOLERANCE.
You learned at school the revolutionaires " LIBERTÉ, IGUALITÉ, FRATERNITÉ-- that by the way I LOVE to teach to my students because I DO believe in these words! In its meanings. ;)

These are definitely the reasons why we wont see you, Chase, burning flags or throwing bombs in shoppings or airplanes.

And you are a man, can you imagine the situation for a woman? ...its even worse...we know horrible stories from women being abused, humillated by men ...and these woman cant do anything...I read a story about a man who killed his 3 daughters because someone said to him that one of them(who was commited)had an involvement with another guy...so he decides to do that just to avoid ´that all of them could the same thing.'..and you know? their mother didnt do anything...she only saw that awful scene..can you believe in the same situation here in west? And the most incredible was that the killer (father) said that he wasnt regretful because he was thinking about the honor of his family...what family? oh a last note: of course he didnt kill his boy...

These radical governments are giving these people Danish, French, Israeli, and American flags to burn. "Religion of peace," right?

Ive told you, dear... I've told you...:rolleyes:



I have yet to see is the Islamic world be sensative to Europe, America, India, Christianity, Judaism, or Hinduism. They're intolerant... violent, and racist. As far as I'm concerned, they've already declared war on the United States, Europe, Asia, and Australia. If this is World War III... then it's clear as day as to who the agressors are. I'm not advocating a war or anything... but all I'm saying is to open your eyes. The only people who have disgraced Islam... are Muslims.

I think that you are the one who needed to open your eyes to the damage provoked by the 'innocents cartoons' published in that newspaper in the name of 'freedom of speech'....:rolleyes:

I honestly hope you arent advocating a war--because we clearly dont need it...but I can understand you and also I can agree with your point here; muslims are disgracing Islam...but only a few : the extremists, not the whole people...believe me ;)

[Chase]

Hey this kind of absurd actions (burning flags, riots, trowing bombs etc...) are made by the fanatics (the extremists). You are being extremely biased here, Chase. You cant say that every muslim people are terrorists ...Would you like if I said that all americans are stupids because I dont like Bush foreign policy?:rolleyes:




Thanks God you are a rational guy... Seriously, you grow up in a country that put religion and politics in two differents sides and even though you are religious (not sure : are you? ...) you dont see religion as a part of your state.
Your education, like mine was based in principles as FREEDOM, RESPECT, LOVE TOLERANCE.
You learned at school the revolutionaires " LIBERTÉ, IGUALITÉ, FRATERNITÉ-- that by the way I LOVE to teach to my students because I DO believe in these words! In their meanings. ;)

These are definitely the reasons why we wont see you, Chase, burning flags or throwing bombs in shoppings or airplanes.

And you are a man, can you imagine the situation for a woman? ...its even worse...we know horrible stories from women being abused, humillated by men ...and these woman cant do anything...I read a story about a man who killed his 3 daughters because someone said to him that one of them(who was commited)had an involvement with another guy...so he decides to do that just to avoid ´that all of them could the same thing.'..and you know? their mother didnt do anything...she only saw that awful scene..can you believe in the same situation here in west? And the most incredible was that the killer (father) said that he wasnt regretful because he was thinking about the honor of his family...what family? oh a last note: of course he didnt kill his boy...



Ive told you, dear... I've told you...:rolleyes:



.

I think that you are the one who needed to open your eyes to the damage provoked by the 'innocents cartoons' published in that newspaper in the name of 'freedom of speech'....:rolleyes:

I honestly hope you arent advocating a war--because we clearly dont need it...but I can understand you and also I can agree with your point here; muslims are disgracing Islam...but only a few : the extremists, not the whole people...believe me ;)

The people in these streets aren't the radicals... they're the everyday, "normal" Muslims. Seeing as I have yet to hear of Muslim communities condemning these heinous acts... I have every right to put all Muslims into the category of being violent. I know they all aren't. But until they start protesting attacks attacks on school children, woman, humanitarians, and other innocent people... they will be sending this image to the rest of the world. It's not the "few" in the streets of the Middle East. It's a damn large percentage. They just don't seem to care. They are exporting violence and intolerance... and soon they're going to regret it. You're going to race riots in Europe, economic sanctions from every world power, and pissed off and provoked Europeans storming through the Middle East. It seems like they've taken European pacifism, liberalism, and isolationism for granted now. There are millions of Europeans who are anti-immigration when it has to deal with Middle Eastern and Northern Africans coming to Europe. You're going to even more restrictions against people from these regions because, quite frankly, Europe is getting tired of housing radial Islamic clerics and rioting Muslims youths. Remember what happened in December in Australia? Those type of racial backlashes are going to occur in Europe if Muslims keep this behavior up. They're only hurting themselves.

[Ana4Stapp]

The people in these streets aren't the radicals... they're the everyday, "normal" Muslims. Seeing as I have yet to hear of Muslim communities condemning these heinous acts... I have every right to put all Muslims into the category of being violent. I know they all aren't. But until they start protesting attacks attacks on school children, woman, humanitarians, and other innocent people... they will be sending this image to the rest of the world.

Okay but they were inflamed by the radicals...and I really dont think you or whosoever have the right 'to put all Muslims into the category of being violent'. This is an irresponsible position silmilar to theirs claiming that all you americans are evil:rolleyes: ...
what I was trying to say is that you need to realize the most of muslims clearly dont have the understanding that they are crossing the line...its not the point ...they think they are acting in 'self-defense' of the odious west:
See it:
"But let George Bush and the arrogant world know that if we have to ... we will defend our prophet with our blood, not our voices.



It's not the "few" in the streets of the Middle East. It's a damn large percentage. They just don't seem to care. They are exporting violence and intolerance... and soon they're going to regret it. You're going to race riots in Europe, economic sanctions from every world power, and pissed off and provoked Europeans storming through the Middle East. It seems like they've taken European pacifism, liberalism, and isolationism for granted now. There are millions of Europeans who are anti-immigration when it has to deal with Middle Eastern and Northern Africans coming to Europe. You're going to even more restrictions against people from these regions because, quite frankly, Europe is getting tired of housing radial Islamic clerics and rioting Muslims youths. Remember what happened in December in Australia? Those type of racial backlashes are going to occur in Europe if Muslims keep this behavior up. They're only hurting themselves

When I used the 'few' I was trying to say that the radicals dont represent the majority of the muslims. But I can agree when you say that these are exporting violence and intolerance... yes , they are...but are you advocating more intolerance when you claims that Europe will put a lot of sanctions to these countries ?like 'restrictions against people from these regions '...is this prejudice ? racism? is this what you want to see in the future? I hope not.

[Ana4Stapp]

Well Im not exactly a fan of her..but Im quoting her opinion because its the same of mine:;)

We all need to respect each other's religions, we need to respect freedom of the press. But ... (with) freedom of the press comes responsibility."
Condoleezza Rice (U.S. Secretary of State)

[RalphyS]

Well we seem to agree by now, that the intolerance and violence of islam fundamentalists/radicals, maybe fueled by some groups who want to (ab)use the situation for their political/terroristic goals, is the basic problem in this situation.

Yesterday I saw several items on tv about the issue.

First there was this UK-show, in which a moderate muslima (she was apparently second in the UK-version of a show called 'The Apprentice'), who very strongly accused all the protesters, who had resorted to violence, of kidnapping her religion. Sira Khan, as I think her name was, stated that anyone who resorted to violence, and especially these protesters, should be arrested immediately and severely punished (she was primarily speaking about protests in front of embassies in the UK itself). She had no problem at all with the cartoons, she said that it was a privilege to live in a western society with all the freedoms attached to that, and that people who rioted against these freedoms did not appreciate them. She also claimed that the protesters were a minority in the islam community in the UK, and if they couldn't deal with western freedom, that they should move to other places. In reaction to her comment of it being a minority, the presenter and his 2-person-panel, reacted with the results of a poll held under 500 UK-muslims earlier, in which large percentages considered these cartoons, just like 9/11, part of a jewish conspiracy. Khan reacted by stating that she didn't know people like that in her surroundings and that it was time that the moderate muslims took back their religion and spoke out against these radicals/fundamentalists. She was really very passionate and I hope to see more muslims like her on air, who not only defend their religion, but also attack the radical forces inside it.

Secondly there was a short item about 2 muslims in Danmark on a Dutch show, one was a Dane from Egyptian background, who worked as a stand-up comedian in acts, where he regularly made fun about his own religion. He brings a 'bomb' on stage, and its supposed to go off after his act. He said he could not understand how someone could not have a sense of humor about things like this. You need humor to evaluate anything, if you take anything too seriously, it will only make things worse.
The other muslim Dane was one of the imams, who send the cartoons to clerics in the middle east. He had the cartoons with him and he showed them to the interviewer on tv and discussed what especially appalling and insulting about them. Even the more moderate cartoons annoyed him a lot, a drawing of Mohammed and a donkey, which I wouldn't even call a cartoon, bur merely an illustration of a muslim 1300 years ago apparently showed the stupidity of Mohammed as viewed by Westerners to him. The drawing of Mohammed face with the Turkisch half moon was also very insulting, the star in the eye made Mohammed look like 'a pirate'. Apparently by sending the cartoons 'home' it was his intention to (quote) 'contain the situation', the interviewer (just like me) found this strange and asked if he couldn't have anticipated the reactions. He gave a very vague reaction and told about how the people who wanted to 'contain' the situation, where now being blamed for it. The strange thing was that when explaining the insult by the cartoons, he was smurking about them. The interviewer told him therefore that he seemed to be able to laugh about it. "It's was I am supposed to do, but I'm raging inside", the imam said. The last question was whether he would ever be able to just laugh about cartoons like this and go on with his life, he seemed to laugh off the question.

Thirdly I saw a report on the same Dutch program about the reaction in the USA on the cartoons item. With some clips from news reporters (CBS anchorman, I think) addressing the item, than Jon Stewart ridiculing it and finally Newt Gingrich defending the Danes on the O'Reilly factor. What followed was an assessment of the Dutch correspondent in New York. He stated that the USA was walking on tiptoes in this situation, apparently only one newspaper in Philadelphia had dared to publish any of the cartoons and Newt Gingrich's address was the only outspoken condemnation of the rioters. The US-media and politicians, according to the correspondent, were very carefull and even self-censoring about the issue out of fear that, their true opinion, that the Danes had every right to publish the cartoons, might cause even more anti-American violence and because there are at this time so many possible American targets in the middle east, it seems no-one is saying what they truly feel out of fear of being responsible for the deaths/casualties of American soldiers/reporters in the area.

On the other hand hand I heard this morning about the press conference that Dutch congreswoman and former muslima Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who was elected 'European of the year' by Reader's Digest and who has also been among the prominent top 100 of 'Time' magazine, yesterday gave in Berlin.
This woman, who wrote the script for the short movie 'Submission' in which she critiques the female unfriendliness (to put it mildly) of the koran and islam, has already had a friend/colleague, the director of 'Submission' Theo van Gogh murdered by a radical muslim and who is under constant surveillance/protection against fundamentalists, is brave enough to once again go out their and state her opinion, our rather strong conviction in spite of the threads, hatred and possible attempts on her life that it will cause.
She praised the European newspaper for having the courage to publish the cartoons, she did the same for the Danish premier Rasmussen, who in her opinion wasn't afraid to oppose the pressure from the muslim world to contain the freedom of press, and she wished that the Dutch premier Balkenende had the same courage. She also stated that she held this pressconference to defend the right to offend within the boundaries of the law. It is "necessary and important" to criticize islam and the teachings of Mohammed.

"Many muslims are peace-loving people, not all of them are fanatics. In my opinion they have every right to be true to their convictions, but within islam there is a radical islamic movement that rejects democratic freedom and aims to destroy it", as the Somalian born stated.

Hirsi Ali furthermore suggested that the European Union financialy compensated Danish companies who were stricken by the boycott from the middle east. "Freedom isn't cheap. It is worth it to pay a few million euro to defend the free word", according to Hirsi Ali, who also lashed out at newspapers, who were afraid to publish the cartoons.

[Ana4Stapp]

Well we seem to agree by now, that the intolerance and violence of islam fundamentalists/radicals, maybe fueled by some groups who want to (ab)use the situation for their political/terroristic goals, is the basic problem in this situation.

Yesterday I saw several items on tv about the issue.

First there was this UK-show, in which a moderate muslima (she was apparently second in the UK-version of a show called 'The Apprentice'), who very strongly accused all the protesters, who had resorted to violence, of kidnapping her religion. Sira Khan, as I think her name was, stated that anyone who resorted to violence, and especially these protesters, should be arrested immediately and severely punished (she was primarily speaking about protests in front of embassies in the UK itself). She had no problem at all with the cartoons, she said that it was a privilege to live in a western society with all the freedoms attached to that, and that people who rioted against these freedoms did not appreciate them. She also claimed that the protesters were a minority in the islam community in the UK, and if they couldn't deal with western freedom, that they should move to other places. In reaction to her comment of it being a minority, the presenter and his 2-person-panel, reacted with the results of a poll held under 500 UK-muslims earlier, in which large percentages considered these cartoons, just like 9/11, part of a jewish conspiracy. Khan reacted by stating that she didn't know people like that in her surroundings and that it was time that the moderate muslims took back their religion and spoke out against these radicals/fundamentalists. She was really very passionate and I hope to see more muslims like her on air, who not only defend their religion, but also attack the radical forces inside it.

Secondly there was a short item about 2 muslims in Danmark on a Dutch show, one was a Dane from Egyptian background, who worked as a stand-up comedian in acts, where he regularly made fun about his own religion. He brings a 'bomb' on stage, and its supposed to go off after his act. He said he could not understand how someone could not have a sense of humor about things like this. You need humor to evaluate anything, if you take anything too seriously, it will only make things worse.
The other muslim Dane was one of the imams, who send the cartoons to clerics in the middle east. He had the cartoons with him and he showed them to the interviewer on tv and discussed what especially appalling and insulting about them. Even the more moderate cartoons annoyed him a lot, a drawing of Mohammed and a donkey, which I wouldn't even call a cartoon, bur merely an illustration of a muslim 1300 years ago apparently showed the stupidity of Mohammed as viewed by Westerners to him. The drawing of Mohammed face with the Turkisch half moon was also very insulting, the star in the eye made Mohammed look like 'a pirate'. Apparently by sending the cartoons 'home' it was his intention to (quote) 'contain the situation', the interviewer (just like me) found this strange and asked if he couldn't have anticipated the reactions. He gave a very vague reaction and told about how the people who wanted to 'contain' the situation, where now being blamed for it. The strange thing was that when explaining the insult by the cartoons, he was smurking about them. The interviewer told him therefore that he seemed to be able to laugh about it. "It's was I am supposed to do, but I'm raging inside", the imam said. The last question was whether he would ever be able to just laugh about cartoons like this and go on with his life, he seemed to laugh off the question.

Thirdly I saw a report on the same Dutch program about the reaction in the USA on the cartoons item. With some clips from news reporters (CBS anchorman, I think) addressing the item, than Jon Stewart ridiculing it and finally Newt Gingrich defending the Danes on the O'Reilly factor. What followed was an assessment of the Dutch correspondent in New York. He stated that the USA was walking on tiptoes in this situation, apparently only one newspaper in Philadelphia had dared to publish any of the cartoons and Newt Gingrich's address was the only outspoken condemnation of the rioters. The US-media and politicians, according to the correspondent, were very carefull and even self-censoring about the issue out of fear that, their true opinion, that the Danes had every right to publish the cartoons, might cause even more anti-American violence and because there are at this time so many possible American targets in the middle east, it seems no-one is saying what they truly feel out of fear of being responsible for the deaths/casualties of American soldiers/reporters in the area.

On the other hand hand I heard this morning about the press conference that Dutch congreswoman and former muslima Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who was elected 'European of the year' by Reader's Digest and who has also been among the prominent top 100 of 'Time' magazine, yesterday gave in Berlin.
This woman, who wrote the script for the short movie 'Submission' in which she critiques the female unfriendliness (to put it mildly) of the koran and islam, has already had a friend/colleague, the director of 'Submission' Theo van Gogh murdered by a radical muslim and who is under constant surveillance/protection against fundamentalists, is brave enough to once again go out their and state her opinion, our rather strong conviction in spite of the threads, hatred and possible attempts on her life that it will cause.
She praised the European newspaper for having the courage to publish the cartoons, she did the same for the Danish premier Rasmussen, who in her opinion wasn't afraid to oppose the pressure from the muslim world to contain the freedom of press, and she wished that the Dutch premier Balkenende had the same courage. She also stated that she held this pressconference to defend the right to offend within the boundaries of the law. It is "necessary and important" to criticize islam and the teachings of Mohammed.

"Many muslims are peace-loving people, not all of them are fanatics. In my opinion they have every right to be true to their convictions, but within islam there is a radical islamic movement that rejects democratic freedom and aims to destroy it", as the Somalian born stated.

Hirsi Ali furthermore suggested that the European Union financialy compensated Danish companies who were stricken by the boycott from the middle east. "Freedom isn't cheap. It is worth it to pay a few million euro to defend the free word", according to Hirsi Ali, who also lashed out at newspapers, who were afraid to publish the cartoons.


Not a feminist in here, but did you realize that muslims women seem to be more determined and willing to claim for changes?

[Ana4Stapp]

But until they start protesting attacks attacks on school children, woman, humanitarians, and other innocent people... they will be sending this image to the rest of the world.

Well ... I know that they live in America (and we have to consider it) but seems that some of them are trying to change this image...;)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11239054/

While we condemn the cartoons, we also condemn the violence connected to it.”

[Ana4Stapp]

Hey guys...No more answers or comments ??!! It seems that I am all alone here!! :(

[RMadd]

http://www.news-leader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060212/OPINIONS/602120326/1006/ARCHIVES

--------------------

Last week, mobs of protesters jammed the streets in Damascus, Syria, setting fire to the Danish and Norwegian diplomatic missions in anger over cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammad, which is banned under Islamic law. Protests in other Islamic countries targeted European facilities and Arab Christians. They are enraged that Western leniency toward expression would allow the cartoons to be published.

Protesters feel Western civilization is insulting Islam. Their claim is hypocrisy, propelled by those wishing to explain away many social problems in the Islamic world under the guise of victimization by the West. Many Islamic governments, especially Iran and Syria, encourage anti-Western and anti-American images, including the toleration of belittling other religions in their own societies.


Governmental control of expression in many Islamic countries is a necessity to power. They channel frustrations of their poverty-stricken and disenfranchised populations from their own rule and blame others. They also kindle the passions of their citizens against the West in order to release the frustrations of being desperate for a better life and to maintain support from Islamic fundamentalists.


The embassy burnings are an example of how the Syrian government used the cartoon issue for its own political ends — a common tactic to mislead the citizenry.


While teaching politics at the University of Jordan last year, I realized my Jordanian and Palestinian students did not know that the 1993 U.S.-led Operation Restore Hope in Somalia, which is 100 percent Muslim, was a humanitarian aid mission conducted after more than 300,000 Somalis died due to famine and war.


The students were surprised that I lost my legs as result of a land mine explosion while conducting humanitarian relief work in Somalia. I told them I was a credit union training officer funded by the U.S. government, which was simply interested in helping Somalis re-start their lives. It was hard for them to believe that the U.S. aided a Muslim society despite no geo-strategic objective or plot to control an Islamic country, as they were led to believe.


The real story is rarely told in the Islamic world.


Many Muslims do not know that over the past 15 years, American foreign policy has saved hundreds of thousands of Muslim lives. U.S. policies can lay claim to protecting more Muslims from death than any other government.


In 1991, U.S.-led Operation Desert Shield protected Saudi Arabia from Iraq-occupied Kuwait. In 1992, Operation Provide Comfort saved and protected tens of thousands of Kurds, who are Muslims, from Saddam Hussein's helicopter gunships, war planes and chemical weapons. Later, U.S. missions in Bosnia, Kosovo and Macedonia primarily benefited the Balkan region's Muslim population. These stories are rarely told in the Islamic world.


While working in Bosnia in the late '90s, my job was to help the war disabled, many of them Muslims, recover from injuries and reintegrate into society. Much of the reconstruction funding for the Muslim-controlled areas of Bosnia originated with the U.S.


In contrast, funds from Islamic countries, including Saudi Arabia, were mainly funneled to build mosques. This story is rarely told in the Islamic world.


Current operations and projects in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine are also bringing democratic opportunity to millions. The U.S. remains one of the largest bilateral donors to the Palestinians, and the American-led World Bank gives more money per capita to Palestine than any other nation. This story is rarely told in the Islamic world.


In May, while giving a speech in Syria, many Syrians told me privately how they yearned to live in the "free" U.S. They could not publicly express their true feelings toward the U.S., they said, because there is no freedom in Syria. My Arab students in Jordan told me, "We appreciate the U.S. and its principles."


Many of my American students were unaware of foreign cultures and international events before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. But as a result of that tragedy, I can now see from both my Missouri and Jordan students a willingness to understand other cultures and appreciate freedom. I am grateful that freedom's torch will be in secure hands when it is eventually passed to today's youth — if they are given the opportunity.

Ken Rutherford is associate professor of political science at Missouri State University. He taught politics at the University of Jordan in spring 2005.

[RalphyS]

Good post, RMadd!

Sending courageous teachers to the Middle East instead of soldiers would indeed probably do a lot more good.

The misuse or even abuse of religion for political or other reasons is well documented in history.

Religion is the idol of the mob; it adores everything it does not understand.
Frederick the Great

Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich.
Napoleon Bonaparte