|
| Thread: More on Mohammed and the freedom of speech issue |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
maretti
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
posted February 12, 2006 04:01 PM |
|
|
Quote:
@ Binabik: if the point had been to show it should be possible to draw a picture of mohammed, there really was no need to make a picture which insinuated that all muslims are terrorist
How about showing it should be possible to draw a picture of muhammed insinuating that SOME muslims are terroists and are abusing islam being so?
Quote:
But this thing about drawing mohammed is about very personal and religious issues which has great importance for the offended, and very little importance for non-muslims.
I couldnt disagree more. This is not a personal issue. Religion controls huge muslim groops lifes and therefore effects the hole society. The reactions to the drawings from both sides shows that very clearly.
Because what comes next?, what if we get a similar reaction if we forbid certain things that are holy for the muslims but we regard as a big problem for society?
____________
Crag rules, Orrin and Ivor suck
|
|
frakel
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted February 13, 2006 02:01 AM |
|
|
What I meant was, that its not like we (in Denmark) are afraid to challenge or discuss some aspects of the creeds of Islam or arab culture: for instance the position of women, honour-killings of muslim girls who go against their families wishes about marriage, mixed-sex physical education in school etc. etc. These are issues that has an impact on other citizens and society as a whole. The question about drawing muhammed, on the other hand, has very little practical importance compared to other citizens.
____________
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
|
posted February 13, 2006 10:32 PM |
|
|
Quote:
honour-killings of muslim girls who go against their families wishes about marriage
Fun fact: This is a cultural issue, not a religious one, per se, since it's also practiced by Christians in the Middle East. (Off-topic, I know, but there's a lot of people who thinks that this is a custom specific to Islam, which it's not.)
By the way, I've seen people say that if the editors responisble for printing these caricatures were to apologise, they would be surrendering to the pressure of religious totalitarians.
But is this true?
The way I see it, it's important to separate the snot from the moustache (to use a Norwegian proverb). If they'd apologised for printing the caricatures, then yes, they'd be surrendering and sacrificing the freedom of expression. However, if they were to apologise for offending people, they would not, since they'd then only apologise for hurting people, and not for the act of using their freedom of expression...
Now that I come to think of it, though, isn't that what most of them have already done? 
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
|
Loknar
Adventuring Hero
Missing Links
|
|
posted February 16, 2006 03:56 AM |
|
Edited by Loknar on 15 Feb 2006
|
Russ
Quote:
I couldn't have said it better myself.
I don't agree with its whole line of argumentation. It claims that the right of speech can only be protected by cutting it. It treats freedom of speech as a privilege that shouldn't be exploited to avoid being stripped of it, and not as a right. I'm not in the least afraid of the politicians who would want to take it away. I just wouldn't elect them anymore, and neither would my compatriots.
Lady_Milena
Quote:
How do you think would a devout, practising Catholic feel about offensive pictures involving the Pope or Jesus? I avoid being graphically explicit here but I'm sure your imagination can play.
I dispute that the western world does or should forbid that. I really believe that it is an important trait of western culture that you can freely use religious symbols to express anything you see fit and also to criticize a specific religious belief or religious belief as such. (This is true as long as you don't force somebody to expose himself to it. The same applies to porn and other potentially offensive stuff.) Think about "Life of Brian" by Monty Python, think about all the pictures of modern artists that fill our museums and do exactly what you don't dare in your post. I just don't see any way to separate the Danish caricatures from these. And regarding the forcedness of the exposal, most of the people who protest haven't even seen the pictures (and neither have I). They just find the idea of depicting the prophet in such a way offensive. The claim that is on trial here is if this is enough to forbid a publication.
Binabik
Quote:
Quote:
Is it threatening the right to free speech that mohammed should not be drawn? Most people think not.
I guess I'm not "most people". 
That makes us two.
But all that refers only to the question whether the newspaper should have the right to publish those caricatures. It was morally low, and of course they shouldn't have done it, it was wrong and they willfully threatened an already problematic social peace. When I read that the newspaper has personal connections to a nationalist party which will doubtlessly profit politically from the outbreaks of hatred they have provoked, I am disgusted by the malice of the political calculus behind it. But on the other hand, no one could have really foreseen what fuss it would create.
Consis
Quote:
Islamic law does not traverse or delineate my country's laws. Here we have freedom of speech and so many such cartoons exist. I am so confused because these kinds of cartoons have been in existence in U.S. for a very long time. In fact we have many cartoons making fun of every single one of our presidents, all religious icons, and every significant historical figure dating back to the Benjamin Franklin.
Disturbingly, it also seems to mean that all the violence is primarily due to an event of clarification or insight. It's not about what somebody did, but about what became visible.
privatehudson
Quote:
People living already poor lives need very little to set them into revolt about something. Religion is no more the central issue here than it was between the two sides of the Northern Ireland issue, it's just an excuse.
What needs adressing is why what began as a very sensible and legal protest against the cartoons in Denmark was hijacked and turned into a violent illegal protest across the world.
These protests really evolved "across the world", more precisely in the whole of the Islamic world from Indonesia to Palestine, and there are also some "Muslim protests" in the cities of the western world (at least Europe). They have different social backgrounds, but share one thing: that they are Muslim. So I don’t think this is a social conflict but nor do I think it is one between Christianity and Islam or the occident and the orient. Perhaps it can be explained as one between theocracy and democracy, at least as long as we focus on the question of legality. But I don't think it can be explained without referring to religion and - even worse - specifically to Islam. I know this is an unpleasant line of thought. (And one mustn't forget that the vast majority of the Muslims didn't go protesting). But it is hardly a coincidence that such a claim comes from the Islamic world and not, say, from the Buddhist. A dominant interpretation of Islam seems to imply a theocratic claim, as realized in Iran, or this religion at least has such a potential (or maybe tradition) that can be very easily exploited by a populist movement.
It is also interesting that this massive protest arrises around a question that is already debated in the western world. It appears as if the overall dominance of the west can be confronted with a moral superiority (measured by the height of the moral claim that a majority of the western world principally accepts.)
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
|
posted February 16, 2006 06:04 PM |
|
|
Quote:
These protests really evolved "across the world", more precisely in the whole of the Islamic world from Indonesia to Palestine, and there are also some "Muslim protests" in the cities of the western world (at least Europe). They have different social backgrounds, but share one thing: that they are Muslim. So I don’t think this is a social conflict
So you don't think this is in any way related to how this must appear to Muslims around the world? When Westerners -- who meddle in Muslim affairs, wage war on Muslim countries, patronise an entire religion, and keep them down economically through an economic system based on Western premises and where Western countries have all the advantages -- make fun of their most holy Prophet, that just might tip the scale. And, whaddaya know, it did.
Their reactions can be called ridiculous, of course, but what else'd they do? Write a letter to their local newspaper and protest? Write a letter to a Danish newspaper? Remember that the protestors are typically poor, scarcely educated and unemployed men.
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
|
Shiva
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted February 16, 2006 06:40 PM |
|
|
Terje, champion of the poor, down trodden, Islamic
masses  ...The Muslim world is down not exclusively
because of Western ascendancy, but because religious
fundamentalism tends to create a static culture, where
progress in most areas is not wanted because of extreme
conservatism. Progressive thinking leads to innovation,
new technology, greater wealth and so, societies that
support their populations, just like Norway, where oil
money combined with social equality gives a free
university education to all. Even allows guys like Terje
who can afford to criticize his own civilization because
he's so well taken care of...
____________
|
|
Conan
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
posted February 17, 2006 10:49 PM |
|
|
|
Nebuka
Promising
Supreme Hero
Save me Jebus!
|
|
posted February 17, 2006 11:01 PM |
|
|
Grow a backbone Canadia!
Quote:
But school headmaster Paul Bennett says the cartoon had to be removed because it crossed acceptable boundaries of free speech.
Acceptable by whom? That's not a free speech Mr Bennett.
____________
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
posted February 17, 2006 11:39 PM |
|
|
Now it seems to get even worse:
Quote:
MSNBC News Services
Updated: 9:04 a.m. ET Feb. 17, 2006
PESHAWAR, Pakistan - A Pakistani Muslim cleric said Friday that he and supporters were offering rewards of more than $1 million for killing Danish cartoonists who drew caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad.
Maulana Yousef Qureshi, a cleric in the northwestern city of Peshawar, said during Friday prayers that he personally had offered to pay a bounty of 500,000 rupees ($8,400), while a jewelers association was putting up $1 million, and others were offering $17,000 plus a car.
"If the West can place a bounty on Osama bin Laden ... we can also announce reward for killing the man who has caused this sacrilege of the holy prophet," Qureshi told Reuters, referring to the $25 million U.S. bounty on the al-Qaida leader's head.
He apparently did not realize that 12 cartoonists, not one, drew the drawings that have led to protests across the Muslim world
Earlier this month a Taliban commander in Afghanistan was reported as offering a bounty of 220 pounds of gold to anyone who killed a cartoonist who drew the pictures.
The commander, Mullah Dadullah, also offered 12 pounds of gold to anyone who killed a Danish, Norwegian or German soldier.
Protests over the cartoons have turned violent in several Pakistani cities this week and at least five people have died.
125 arrested
Also on Friday, police detained 125 protesters for violating a ban on rallies in eastern Pakistan and put a radical Islamist leader under house arrest, amid fears of more deadly demonstrations.
Police were ordered to restrict the movement of all religious leaders who might address any rallies and round up religious activists “who could be any threat to law and order,” a senior police official said in the main eastern city of Lahore.
In Multan, another city in Punjab province, about 300 police swooped down on 125 protesters who had gathered Friday morning at a traffic circle, calling themselves “slaves of the prophet” and trampling on a Danish flag, said Sharif Zafar, a police official.
Protesters shouted “Death to Musharraf!” as they were bundled into two police buses, referring to Pakistan’s leader, President Gen. Pervez Musharraf.
Zafar said they were being taken to a police station because they were violating a ban on rallies in Punjab — imposed after deadly riots in Lahore on Tuesday.
In Karachi, police fired tear gas and swung batons to disperse about 2,000 protesters, many wielding sticks, who blocked the main highway into the southern city, said Alim Jafari, a Karachi police official. The road was cleared and some 30 protesters were detained, he said.
Protests in Pakistan against the cartoons have turned violent this week. Five people have died in riots, and Western businesses have been vandalized and burned.
Wide protests
Demonstrations broke out in Muslim countries after newspapers in several European countries reprinted cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad that were first published in Denmark in September. Islamic tradition frowns on any depiction of Muhammad, and the satiric nature of some of the Danish cartoons — such as one showing Muhammad’s turban as a bomb — further inflamed some Muslims.
In Hong Kong, thousands of Muslims, mostly Pakistanis, Indians, Indonesians and Sri Lankans living in the territory, angrily chanted slogans as they marched from a downtown mosque to the local office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees.
“Don’t play with our religion,” read a placard held up by a protester. “No double standards. We want justice!” read another.
Ghulam Mustafa, one of the organizers, said more than 3,000 people participated in the protest. Police put the figure at about 2,000.
The crowds dispersed peacefully after march leaders presented a U.N. representative with a petition condemning the cartoons as sacrilegious.
In Bangladesh, about 500 protesters marched through streets outside Dhaka’s main mosque, chanting “Down with Islam’s enemies.”
In Lahore, a spokesman for the radical group Jamaat al-Dawat said a heavy contingent of police arrived at the home of its leader, Hafiz Mohammed Saeed, on Friday morning and told him he could not go outside. He was due to make a speech in Faisalabad, about 75 miles away, said the spokesman, Yahya Mujahid.
Lahore police chief Khawaja Khalid Farooq said 12,000 police and an unspecified number of paramilitary troops were guarding government and foreign installations, mosques and other public places like shopping centers, restaurants and cinemas.
Supporters of the radical Jamaat-e-Islami, Pakistan’s largest Islamic group, also planned to hold rallies in Karachi after midday prayers Friday, said Sarfaraz Ahmed, a spokesman for the anti-U.S. group.
More anti-cartoon protests were expected Friday in other Pakistani cities, including Rawalpindi, Quetta and Peshawar — the northwestern city ravaged by riots on Wednesday. Police were guarding multinational businesses and government buildings, witnesses said.
Peacefull religion....they compare a massmurderer like Bin Laden with a cartoonist...
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
privatehudson
Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
|
|
posted February 18, 2006 12:08 AM |
|
|
One or two bad apples do not represent the whole tree.
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted February 18, 2006 12:14 AM |
|
|
This is becomming a big mess. I still think the cartoons fall under free speech, but they sure stirred up a wasp's nest.
Quote:
In Bangladesh, about 500 protesters marched through streets outside Dhaka’s main mosque, chanting “Down with Islam’s enemies.”
Does anyone know if Bangladesh is primarily Muslim or Hindu? I thought it was mostly Hindu. If that's right, I would think the government would be pretty strict about Islamic protesters.
____________
|
|
maretti
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted February 18, 2006 12:17 AM |
|
|
Quote:
When I read that the newspaper has personal connections to a nationalist party which will doubtlessly profit politically from the outbreaks of hatred they have provoked, I am disgusted by the malice of the political calculus behind it. But on the other hand, no one could have really foreseen what fuss it would create.
An amazing amount of wrong information about Denmark is aparently cirkeling around the world. Jyllandsposten does NOT support Dansk folkeparti and it is not an extreme right newspaper. Nothing what so ever indicates that there was a political calculus behind the puplication to support Dansk folkeparti.
Quote:
Terje, champion of the poor, down trodden, Islamic
masses ...The Muslim world is down not exclusively
because of Western ascendancy, but because religious
fundamentalism tends to create a static culture, where
progress in most areas is not wanted because of extreme
conservatism. Progressive thinking leads to innovation,
new technology, greater wealth and so, societies that
support their populations, just like Norway, where oil
money combined with social equality gives a free
university education to all. Even allows guys like Terje
who can afford to criticize his own civilization because
he's so well taken care of...
Well said
____________
Crag rules, Orrin and Ivor suck
|
|
frakel
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2006 10:32 PM |
|
|
Quote:
An amazing amount of wrong information about Denmark is aparently cirkeling around the world. Jyllandsposten does NOT support Dansk folkeparti and it is not an extreme right newspaper. Nothing what so ever indicates that there was a political calculus behind the puplication to support Dansk folkeparti.
I second that. Jyllandsposten is a major centre-right newspaper - not an extremist paper. They are not connected to Dansk Folkeparti. The paper is independent, but might be said to be sympathetic to the two current centre-right government parties. I also agree that their probably wasn´t a political calculus behind bringing the cartoons. I believe that their ends (protecting free speech) was noble, their means somewhat foolish...
____________
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
|
posted February 20, 2006 01:13 AM |
|
|
Shiva,
Quote:
Terje, champion of the poor, down trodden, Islamic
masses ...
Yay, that's me! Always fighting the good fight for the little guy!
Quote:
The Muslim world is down not exclusively because of Western ascendancy, but because religious fundamentalism tends to create a static culture, where progress in most areas is not wanted because of extreme conservatism.
Obviously.
I was simply trying to point out some of the other reasons why these cartoons have caused such a commotion, not why some Muslim countries are lagging behind the West. But of course, you're right. I presented a badly nuanced picture. My apologies.
This is where I stray from my path.
Quote:
Progressive thinking leads to innovation, new technology, greater wealth and so, societies that support their populations, just like Norway, where oil money combined with social equality gives a free university education to all.
I agree on the part about "Progressive thinking leads to innovation, new technology, greater wealth and so, societies that support their populations", but I nearly take offense when you try to use Norway as an example. We're not that progressive, we're not that innovative. We simply tax our asses off (we pay somewhere in the area of 50% taxes). That's why we have a socially equal society and can pay for people's education.
Quote:
Even allows guys like Terje who can afford to criticize his own civilization because he's so well taken care of...
Hey, I there was no "loyalty clause" on this Compact of Society I signed!
But seriously, what else should I critisise but my own "civilisation"?
Stay with me for a while.
From what I've read in this thread, most people here agrees that Western society is superior to that of the Middle East, correct? (I'm gonna be generalising here, so if you don't like generalisations, stop reading.) We like civil and human rights, freedom of expression, freedom of speech, and things like that. And we would like it very much if the rest of the world adopted our pluralistic and open democratic form of society. Actually, we actively promote our values in other parts of the world.
And there are people who listen!
Chinese dissidents. Iranian intellectuals. Russian activists. Inntelligent people all, and they like what we're selling!
But there is a problem. These people are usually minorities in their own countries. The majority of most polulations -- country matters not -- are conservative. They are afraid of change. They are sceptical to these ideas we and the "elites" of their countries present. Many of them are religious, many are illiterate, and many of these rely on even more conservative clergymen in religious matters, and in other matters relevant to society -- politics, and whatnot.
And we and our allies try to sell our message -- slowly, slowly, since we do not want to frighten the people we see as poor and uneducated. We spend decades, attempting to familiarise them with our values. We do not know if we are making progress, but some things may indicate that we do.
Then, disaster strikes.
Because not everyone agrees with our ways. Other Westerners, who share our feelings of political superiority, are not as patient. They would like to display how superiour our ways are to the ways of those not like us, so they attempt to stage a confrontation. They may have the best of intents, such as illustrating how our system works, and how free we are. So they do something which offends people of another culture -- one of the cultures we see as backwards -- and they do so using one of the freedoms we have spent years advocating in other cultures.
And what happens?
Well, people in powerful positions in what we call backwards countries, people who would not benefit from extensive civil liberties being given to the people, say to the people they rule: "Look at the decadent people of the West! Do you see what they do? They blaspheme, they insult everything you hold as sacred, using the very liberties they try to make you adopt! If they have their will, they'd turn us all into blasphemers!"
And the people go into a fury, and everyting that we have been working for falls to the ground. Our allies in the backward countries are sent to prison, and the people of these countries reject civil liberties that they would have benefitted from embracing.
Now, in this little story of mine, do you see who the villains are?
Yes, you're quite a clever little fellow, ain't you? The villains are the rulers, but also the well-meaning "confrontationalists" who set these things off. They knew that making ridiculing images of the Muslim Prophet is seen as a great offense by many Muslims. They know that the people of the Muslim world does not hold us in high esteem as it is. And they must have known that this would not simply go unheeded. This is a globalised world, a "global village" to use an imprecise cliché, where huge groups of people move from one place to another, across the globe, and where information can be sent around the world in seconds. They must have been aware of the implications of their actions.
Now, this is still no excuse for the people who have threatened to kill the publishers, the editors, the cartoonists (you have no idea how it pains me to befoul an artform I love by using this word here) and whatnot. Death threats is a rather crude, ineffective and last but not least illegitimate method of convincing people who disagree with you that you're right.
But seriously, what are the odds of such a killing? Do you see it as probable that innocent Danish citizens (or people of other nationalities) will be murdered in "retaliation" for these cartoons? I'm not saying that the chance isn't there -- because there's always a chance for everything.
But the consequences of the acts of these edtiors and publishers, we are seeing today, every time we watch the news. People are getting killed (just not Westerners), embassies burned, trade embargoes initiated, and so on and so forth. And that's just the material damage. The consequences this will have for intercultural relations in the next years, I try not to think too much about.
To sum things up: I have no respect, no understanding, no sympathy for the people who issue death threats. But neither have I much respect, understanding, nor sympathy for those on the recieving end of these threats. They knowingly abused their freedom of expression, well aware of the consequences, and helped to further increase the tensions between two cultures who are already at each others' throats.
I know I should support "the brave people who stood up for our freedoms against despotism" or whatever you'd like to call it, but I simply can not find it in me. They behaved like idiots, and now they must face the consequences, even if the consequences are way disproportional to their actions. Two entire cultures should not have to suffer from the acts of extremists. Sadly, that's just what's happening...
I hope that wasn't too long or too inconsistent; I didn't quite know where I would end up when I started typing.
Binabik,
Quote:
Does anyone know if Bangladesh is primarily Muslim or Hindu? I thought it was mostly Hindu. If that's right, I would think the government would be pretty strict about Islamic protesters.
Bangladesh - formerly East Pakistan - is perdominantly Muslim, which is one of the reasons why it's not just another part of India.
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
|
Vlaad
Admirable
Legendary Hero
ghost of the past
|
|
posted February 20, 2006 08:45 AM |
|
|
Quote:
But seriously, what are the odds of such a killing? Do you see it as probable that innocent Danish citizens (or people of other nationalities) will be murdered in "retaliation" for these cartoons? I'm not saying that the chance isn't there -- because there's always a chance for everything.
I'd take the death threats more seriously.
Quote:
They behaved like idiots, and now they must face the consequences, even if the consequences are way disproportional to their actions.
I strongly disagree.
____________
|
|
maretti
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted February 20, 2006 11:16 AM |
|
|
I dont know whats worse: Some unedjucated religious extremists from poor and undeveloped contries who let their frusration out in a braindead way or a well edjucated and privileged norwegian student with a braindead comment like: They behaved like idiots, and now they must face the consequences, even if the consequences are way disproportional to their actions.
But I know for sure whats most disapointing.
I have the feeling that you only come up with such nonesense because of the extreme reactions to these cartoons and its sad that people are so easily effected.
____________
Crag rules, Orrin and Ivor suck
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted February 20, 2006 11:46 AM |
|
|
Quote:
From what I've read in this thread, most people here agrees that Western society is superior to that of the Middle East, correct?
I personally don't look at Western society as superior, just different. The word "superior" is a word with a lot of very subtle connotations. The slightest twist will result in an entirely different meaning. I'm at a loss to explain what I'm getting at, but here's an attempt. Notice the similarity to the term "white supremacist". I know it wasn't meant that way, but what you said could *VERY EASILY* be interpreted in the same way as "white supremacist". Maybe not to that degree, but that's the best I can do. Let's put it this way, I don't even use the word. It's too easy to get trapped by it. And once someone gets the wrong connotation in their head, it's very difficult to explain away how someone, or something, can be superior, but not superior. Like if you and an Arab are walking toward each other on the sidewalk, are they supposed to move aside and let you pass because you are superior? (generic "you", not Terje-you)
All that ranting is for a reason. I think it's quite likely that a great number of middle easterners, maybe even a majority, view the west's attitude toward them with that very negative connotation of "superior". Not that we think aspects of our society are better than theirs, but that *WE* are better than them.
"We" think our ways are better than theirs, are more progressive, more civilized, more fair. And we try to push our view on them when it's not wanted. At least it's not wanted by the ones who count, the ones who control their society. What gives us the right? When we try to infuse democracy into their society, what gives us the right? Democracy means THEY decide, not us. And it's not just governments forcing their will. We can firmly believe in civil rights. We can firmly believe in women's rights. And we can firmly believe girls have as much right to an education as boys. But when public or private organizations go over there and try to push ours views on them, it's not wanted....again, not by the ones who count. And it’s not necessarily even wanted by the rank and file.
Social change can take decades. The people in the Middle East may have a somewhat filtered view of western society, but they *CAN* see it. We try to *MAKE* them see it. And we try to make them see it up close and personal, when it may be better viewed from a distance.....viewed from a distance to give them a chance to see it for themselves rather than having it forced on them. That's not going to happen quickly. And if they NEVER see it, we have to recognize their autonomous RIGHT to decide for themselves. We have a right to freedom of speech, and they have a right to decide things for themselves. I don't see how you can have one without the other.
The cartoons and freedom of speech are not really the issues here. Westernization is the issue. The cartoons are nothing more than a reminder of that. They are one more thing added to that already heavy burden of change they bear. If not for the ongoing expansion of the West, those cartoons would not have elicited the response they did. You can't feed a fire that's not already burning. They are surrounded by a rapidly changing world. A world that is crowding them out. And they are not ready for it. When they are being backed into a corner by an ever expanding and alien monster called the West, of course they are going to lash out. When that monster says it's only for their own good, they cower further into their corner from the alien language the monster uses. But if that monster leaves, given enough courage and time, they will eventually creep from their corner of refuge and cautiously peek out their window. They can view the monster from a distance and see that, like themselves, the monster also loves its children.
____________
|
|
Shiva
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted February 20, 2006 08:14 PM |
|
|
Although I'm quite happy to live in Canada, and think that
it is one of the better countries in the world, I don't
feel that whatever values that are here need to be
exported to other countries. Exporting democracy does not
work unless the countries freely choose it, since the
choice is about freedom. And even if they choose, they
may not choose a party that has the values you wish. Many
muslim countries, if given the choice, would elect a
conservative, Islamic governement. Since that is often
instead of some kind of secular dictatorship, its hard
to say what is better.
On the other hand, Western countries that have a way of
life already, do not need to be influenced by these same
conservative elements. Here in Canada, there has been
some debate about whether or not sharia law should be
allowed in certain cases. I'm totally against that.
The social laws and civil structures we have here are not
perfect, but are infinitely better than any kind of
thinking based upon antique Middle Age's thought.
Those kind of people that think a cartoon is an insult
because it represents a graven image are
forgetting that they already have a graven image in
their minds, which is their concept, and when this
concept is confronted, they get angry. If they were to
rid themselves of this inner "graven image", then
perhaps they would truly start to know Allah. Right now,
all they know is a false image of their own making.
____________
|
|
Russ
Promising
Supreme Hero
blah, blah, blah
|
|
posted February 20, 2006 09:50 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I dont know whats worse: Some unedjucated religious extremists from poor and undeveloped contries who let their frusration out in a braindead way or a well edjucated and privileged norwegian student with a braindead comment like: They behaved like idiots, and now they must face the consequences, even if the consequences are way disproportional to their actions.
But I know for sure whats most disapointing.
I'll tell you what IS worse. Did you know how all of those Islam extrimists came to power in the first place? At the end of the WW2 the Western block countries (mainly USA and Britain) were doing their best to put those religious fanatics in power in order to deal with the left wing. Well, they've dealt with the left wing long time ago. Now they've turned on those who helped them to get in power. So I think that whatever they do now will be well-deserved. Those responsible for putting millions of people in the Middle East under the rule of religious fanatics deserve to be punished.
|
|
SirDunco
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted February 21, 2006 11:32 AM |
|
|
Personaly I think that most of you are missing the biggest issue. This conflict is only what we make of it and it is not just about some stupid cartoon...
The whole cartoon issue is just another thing that adds to the whole problem.
I see many people comparing the sittuation to Germany of 1938 and the appeasement. Many people think that if we would be quiet we would be making the same misstake again. We are not talking about a nation but a billion people following the same religion. Guns will solve nothing here.
Over the past ten years a class of pro-western, pro-reformist muslim intelectuals, has formed. These people have been making a very solid effort of fighting against the Fundamentalist in power in most Muslim states. Trying to convice people that the west is not the birth of evil, as they are being told many times. People who are the only ones who can throw down the regimes of relegious fanatics. The chaange in the thinking of people can only come from within and never by force. And every incindent such as the one with the Cartoons throws them back on years of work.
These cartoons and other incidents are just fuel for the fundamentalist, to show that the west hates them, to prove that the people here are evil. That's why I belive that that these cartoons were an act of incredible stupidity and ignorance.
Freedom of speech or none we are talking about a greater issue then just some flame on Islam. The concenqiences can be much greater. To change the islamic world we must support the people working to bring it down from the inside and reform the fundementalist thinking of the people...
|
| |
|
|
