Danish Newspaper Cartoons

[anto1208]

anto, an american teenager just got shot by the cops for blasting a gay bar. are you seriously trying to tell me we react all that differently? itss a rule of law issue, not a religious one


true , i suppose i should have said that if something was ofensive to me i wouldnt burn down embassy's etc .

some good rules for life :
if you offended by a book/picture then dont read /look at it .
if your offended by gay men then dont watch gay men having sex .
if your offended by what some one is ssaying then dont talk to them .

maybe its a little too simple but it works for me im never offended

[Tired&Emotional]

Some of the posts on this link are OTT but some do tell it as it is with legitimate press quotes.
See what you think....the Age of the Cartoon Wars ...

http://www.anklebitingpundits.com/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=37069

[pete]

The cartoons have only been publised in 1 muslim country (Jordan) & newspaper editor got sacked there. How can people in other countries be protesting when its fairly clear they can't have seen the cartoons? I suppose thats like the Presbyterians banning a movie they haven't seen.

I've also read that in some countries they have linked the cartoons with other nastiers version got somewhere to deliberately inflame the situation.

Of course islamic countries are now been shown up as hypocrites due to anti-semetic cartoons & commentary in their media.

:rolleyes:

[jebus]

Personally I think its about time Muslims got the **** over themselves. Rioting and killing people because some rag printed pictures of Mohammad in a supposedly humourous light is just pathetic. I've been brought up as a Christian, and even if I'm not completly on board with Christianity much anymore I'd be out rioting after watching South Park depict Jesus Christ have sex with Satan if I were even half the fanatic that those ****s are. But do I/or we as a Catholic country, do we f.uck. We have a bit of common sense, something those ****ing barbarians have no clue about. May sound racist here but barbarian and ****hole are the only words I can think of to describe anyone, Muslim, Christian or Scientologist who would create such a hurricane in a teacup.

And I'm ****ing sick of being told to have a 21st century viewpoint when it comes to them. Why the **** should I? Do they have a 21st century viewpoint about ANYTHING??

Rant over

[strangeirish]

What do ye think of this (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060207/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_cartoons_2;_ylt=AjF25wLVf3cHl.tstzbk6T7bEfQA; _ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl)? A true test of free speech or tit for tat?

[John83]

What do ye think of this (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060207/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_cartoons_2;_ylt=AjF25wLVf3cHl.tstzbk6T7bEfQA; _ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl)? A true test of free speech or tit for tat?
Intended as the latter surely. I say let them print away.

On the other hand, I call on Catholics across the globe to rise up and crush those who disrespect the fifth commandment.

[Roverstillidie]

Of course islamic countries are now been shown up as hypocrites due to anti-semetic cartoons & commentary in their media.

:rolleyes:

how can semetic arabs be anti-semetic?

all imagry of mohammed is a sin.

do american abortion clinics blow themselves up? remember the protest outside the us embassy in dublin when a judge in yeeha land banned irish dancing because she classed it as lapdancing? uda firebombing catholic churches and throwing urine at schoolgirls? the furore over the da vinci code?

there is nothing inherent in muslims to react worse than us in the liberal west. the rest is a law and order issue

[Tired&Emotional]

What do ye think of this (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060207/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_cartoons_2;_ylt=AjF25wLVf3cHl.tstzbk6T7bEfQA; _ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl)? A true test of free speech or tit for tat?


Absolutely tit for tat and in doing so completely undermine their own reason for going on the rampage.

If they can riot because of Wetern newspaper caused offence then it doesn't follow, by their own argument, that they can publish cartoons to "cause offence" as they see it.........absolute nonsense and again, infantile. Any excuse to vent their violent tendencies...

[Tired&Emotional]

Intended as the latter surely. I say let them print away.

On the other hand, I call on Catholics across the globe to rise up and crush those who disrespect the fifth commandment.


....and some of the scenes from Father Ted had me (as a R.C.) filled with uncontrollable anger as well:rolleyes: ;) :D

[Peadar]

do american abortion clinics blow themselves up?

Where has anyone said that this is acceptable?

I also don't remember anyone being murdered over the publication of the da Vinci Code??? :confused:

[Tired&Emotional]

do american abortion clinics blow themselves up? remember the protest outside the us embassy in dublin when a judge in yeeha land banned irish dancing because she classed it as lapdancing? uda firebombing catholic churches and throwing urine at schoolgirls? the furore over the da vinci code?

How is all that relevant to (radical) Mulslims rioting & people dying as a result? :confused:

[Poor Student]

how can semetic arabs be anti-semetic?



What kind of pedantry is this? You know well what anti-semitism means in a modern context.

[Roverstillidie]

Absolutely tit for tat and in doing so completely undermine their own reason for going on the rampage.

If they can riot because of Wetern newspaper caused offence then it doesn't follow, by their own argument, that they can publish cartoons to "cause offence" as they see it.........absolute nonsense and again, infantile. Any excuse to vent their violent tendencies...

who are they? all arabs? its small groups of activists. in the same way we all dont smash up mcdonalds in the west.

from bbc.co.uk
Hamshahri says it wants to test the boundaries of free speech, echoing the reasons European papers gave for publishing the caricatures.

"Does the West's freedom of expression extend to... an event such as the Holocaust or is this freedom of expression only for the desecration of the sanctities of divine religions?" the best-selling paper said in its announcement

seems clear their intent to me.


How is all that relevant to (radical) Mulslims rioting & people dying as a result? :confused:

ill spell it out. radical christians also over-react, often with violent results.

the difference is law and order issue that surrounds their actions, and that is a direct result of development issues. we dont tolerate religious nutters in the rich west as easily in the poorer east.

[Bald Student]

Absolutely tit for tat and in doing so completely undermine their own reason for going on the rampage.

If they can riot because of Wetern newspaper caused offence then it doesn't follow, by their own argument, that they can publish cartoons to "cause offence" as they see it.........absolute nonsense and again, infantile. Any excuse to vent their violent tendencies...Tit for tat works both ways. Will western newspapers publish these holocaust cartoons to defend their right to freedom of expression? These cartoons would be illegal in several western countries.

[pete]

Being in favour of the freedom of speech means you support the right of people to express views that you hate. The Observer in sunday had some excellent articles on this.

[Tired&Emotional]

who are they? all arabs? its small groups of activists. in the same way we all dont smash up mcdonalds in the west.

from bbc.co.uk
Hamshahri says it wants to test the boundaries of free speech, echoing the reasons European papers gave for publishing the caricatures.

"Does the West's freedom of expression extend to... an event such as the Holocaust or is this freedom of expression only for the desecration of the sanctities of divine religions?" the best-selling paper said in its announcement

seems clear their intent to me.



ill spell it out. radical christians also over-react, often with violent results.

the difference is law and order issue that surrounds their actions, and that is a direct result of development issues. we dont tolerate religious nutters in the rich west as easily in the poorer east.


I'll spell it out for you so: "they" in the context of this debate have been the subject of same from day 1 of the rioting. THE RIOTING MUSLIMS! get with the programme.

And in the context of what's gone on over the last week or so their intent is very clear!

Millions of people were murdered during the Holocost - we all know the details, have seen the pictures and heard the stories.
Not a single hair on any human beings' hair was harmed by these cartoons

how the hell can you attempt to justify the reasoning you have quoted from Hamshahri

[Tired&Emotional]

Tit for tat works both ways. Will western newspapers publish these holocaust cartoons to defend their right to freedom of expression? These cartoons would be illegal in several western countries.


See post 116 on reason why they wouldn't be published in the "West"

[Roverstillidie]

Where has anyone said that this is acceptable?

I also don't remember anyone being murdered over the publication of the da Vinci Code??? :confused:

no-one per say, but their is an implication that us liberal christians wouldnt dream of, say, throwing urine at schoolchildern because they are catholic, oor gassing 8m people on the basis of their race.

us westerners were naughty long before them and have done far more damage to the world, and thats worth remembering in this discussion.

[John83]

I've nothing to back this up with, so take it with a pinch of salt, but I've heard that Middle Eastern newspapers regularly run antisemitic cartoons with references to the holocost.
Well, it's a Jewish source, but at least it's some sort of source:
http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-21.htm

[WeAreRovers]

Being in favour of the freedom of speech means you support the right of people to express views that you hate.

Do me a favour Pete, keep repeating that until it sinks in with everyone else. Cheers. ;)

KOH

[John83]

Were they slagging Mohammed though? - the one drawing I could find of the Prophet (see above) didn't look much like the cartoons - they reminded me more of the Ataytullohs in Iran. Here's the most accurate depiction of Muhammed known at this time:

[Roverstillidie]

I'll spell it out for you so: "they" in the context of this debate have been the subject of same from day 1 of the rioting. THE RIOTING MUSLIMS! get with the programme.

And in the context of what's gone on over the last week or so their intent is very clear!

Millions of people were murdered during the Holocost - we all know the details, have seen the pictures and heard the stories.
Not a single hair on any human beings' hair was harmed by these cartoons

how the hell can you attempt to justify the reasoning you have quoted from Hamshahri

did four people not die as a result of the cartoons? or is it 6?

firstly 'they' is pushing very close to a generalisation of most muslims, when it is clearly a lunatic fringe of activists, not a mass movement.

secondly, the argument is very very simple t&e.

the hamshari argument is broadly this: "we as muslims are extremely offended by these cartoons at a time when eastern muslims feel under threat from the west and western muslims are being subjected to harassment. so to test the liberal 'free speech' arguments used to justify mocking mohammed and his followers we will publish cartoons mocking something westerners are going to be offended by, ie the holocoust.".

i think this is an acceptable arguement to make, although i would be more comfortable if it were a 'mock jesus' competition and left jews out of it.

put another way. if you dont have a problem with these cartoons the danes published, but do have a problem with a drug dealing loon in a suicide belt in london or the proposed iranian cartoons, you do not believe in free speech. end of.

as was said here, its easy to defend free speech if you agree with whats being said. the iranians have very deftly played their hand here.

[hamish]

The Observer in sunday had some excellent articles on this.

I posted them a few posts back, Pete.:)

[hamish]

Here's the most accurate depiction of Muhammed known at this time:

I posted them a few posts back John83.:)

[John83]

did four people not die as a result of the cartoons? or is it 6?
Six according to the Indo.


firstly 'they' is pushing very close to a generalisation of most muslims, when it is clearly a lunatic fringe of activists, not a mass movement.
There are few enough dissenting voices that you'd be forgiven for thinking that there's a lot of passive support for them.


"we as muslims are extremely offended by these cartoons at a time when eastern muslims feel under threat from the west and western muslims are being subjected to harassment. so to test the liberal 'free speech' arguments used to justify mocking mohammed and his followers we will publish cartoons mocking something westerners are going to be offended by, ie the holocoust."

...

if you ... have a problem with a drug dealing loon in a suicide belt in london or the proposed iranian cartoons, you do not believe in free speech. end of.
No, they really haven't. This is on the level of two eight year olds calling each other names in school.

I really hope the Jews are mature enough to deal with this like adults, rather than going around burning flags and buildings and making death threats. On the other hand, if they don't, that part of the world is going to be very lively for the forseeable future.

[Poor Student]

On the other hand, if they don't, that part of the world is going to be very lively for the forseeable future.

When has it not?

[Closed Account 2]

I think this (http://www.suntimes.com/output/steyn/cst-edt-steyn05.html) is a fairly interesting piece on the whole thing.

[MOD EDIT: Don't quote entire stories.]

Its a bit crude and goes way over the top in some places, but I agree with a fair few of the points he makes. The self-censorship thing is interesting - it's like if it's too much hassle then papers won't print it. That to me has smacks of fear, but then with things like Van Gogh you can see their point of view.

I agree with the penultimate paragraph too, there is an element of a bi-cultural society.

[hamish]

Here are a couple of things I found on the Guardian website.

http://www.sorrynorwaydenmark.com/

This might be worth reading - heard it on the BBC this mornng

http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,,1704476,00.html

[Tired&Emotional]

did four people not die as a result of the cartoons? or is it 6?

firstly 'they' is pushing very close to a generalisation of most muslims, when it is clearly a lunatic fringe of activists, not a mass movement.

secondly, the argument is very very simple t&e.

the hamshari argument is broadly this: "we as muslims are extremely offended by these cartoons at a time when eastern muslims feel under threat from the west and western muslims are being subjected to harassment. so to test the liberal 'free speech' arguments used to justify mocking mohammed and his followers we will publish cartoons mocking something westerners are going to be offended by, ie the holocoust.".

i think this is an acceptable arguement to make, although i would be more comfortable if it were a 'mock jesus' competition and left jews out of it.

put another way. if you dont have a problem with these cartoons the danes published, but do have a problem with a drug dealing loon in a suicide belt in london or the proposed iranian cartoons, you do not believe in free speech. end of.

as was said here, its easy to defend free speech if you agree with whats being said. the iranians have very deftly played their hand here.


Roverstillidie, I have made my argument and don't want to end up repeating myself - as the risk of getting dizzy going around in circles, we can agree to disagree. You played devils advocate well!

I will keep watching this story though to see who makes the next move before i pick it up again...

[Hither green]

Millions of people were murdered during the Holocost - we all know the details, have seen the pictures and heard the stories. Not a single hair on any human beings' hair was harmed by these cartoons

I don't see what that's got to do with anything. If we've got freedom of speech then anything goes doesn't it? The argument goes that I'm not a Muslim or a believer in God, so why should I show him respect or reverence. Yes millions of people died in the holocaust, many died in the Ethiopian famine, but these were in far away countries and I didn't know any of them, why should I show reverence to them? I've got the right to say, print, publish whatever I like, no matter who I upset, because I've got freedom of speech and freedom of expression.

[Tired&Emotional]

I don't see what that's got to do with anything. If we've got freedom of speech then anything goes doesn't it? The argument goes that I'm not a Muslim or a believer in God, so why should I show him respect or reverence. Yes millions of people died in the holocaust, many died in the Ethiopian famine, but these were in far away countries and I didn't know any of them, why should I show reverence to them? I've got the right to say, print, publish whatever I like, no matter who I upset, because I've got freedom of speech and freedom of expression.

What is has got to do with is the fact that a large number of Muslims deny that the holocaust even happened. Therefore, by running a competition for Holocaust cartoons it's ridiculous contradiction.

They are blantantly trying to irratate and raise the stakes and then have the cheek to turn around and say it's under the banner of the Western philiosophy of free-speech (which is why they went on the rampage in the firstplace:confused: ). Do they think they're clever by running this competition? Do they think they are clever condemning freespeech with outlandish statements on placards etc. and then claiming to be excercising it by taking the pis.s out of something that they denied ever happened?

[Hither green]

What is has got to do with is the fact that a large number of Muslims deny that the holocaust even happened. Therefore, by running a competition for Holocaust cartoons it's ridiculous contradiction.

They are blantantly trying to irratate and raise the stakes and then have the cheek to turn around and say it's under the banner of the Western philiosophy of free-speech (which is why they went on the rampage in the firstplace:confused: ). Do they think they're clever by running this competition? Do they think they are clever condemning freespeech with outlandish statements on placards etc. and then claiming to be excercising it by taking the pis.s out of something that they denied ever happened?

I absolutely agree with you. What they're doing is exactly the same as what the Danes did, blatantly and deliberately go out to irritate under the pretence of freedom of speech. And on that basis, and that two wrongs don't make a right, I'm completely opposed to them printing such cartoons. That said, I'll be interested to see if any of the hypocritical western newspapers take up their challenge to reprint their cartoons, which they obviously won't as they're not aimed at the particular minority that they're trying rile.

[Terry]

. That said, I'll be interested to see if any of the hypocritical western newspapers take up their challenge to reprint their cartoons, which they obviously won't as they're not aimed at the particular minority that they're trying rile.

The French did so this morning

[Eire06]

The French did so this morning
They won a court ruling that allowed the to print all the original cartoons and even added one of their own, which takes up the entire front page - the headline 'Mohammed overwhelmed by the fundamentalists' with a caricature depicted the prophet with his head in his hands, remarking, “It’s hard to be loved by idiots.”

http://www.breakingnews.ie/2006/02/08/story243712.html

[Hither green]

The French did so this morning

I wasn't referring to the "freedom of speech" cartoons commissioned to insult the Muslim community but the "freedom of speech" cartoons Hamshahri are commissioning to insult the Jewish community. I'd be surprised if they'll ever be printed in Europe.

[anto1208]

with the right to freedom of speach comes a responsibility aswell that you dont abuse it , just because you have the right to print what you like does nt mean you have to , the mag in france today that has reprinted the 12 pics plus drawn a new one is just talking the **** there is no need for this at all

in this country you have a right to take a sh1te on the footpath but people dont do it .


if we start banning things where do we stop ? is everything deemed offensive to some one going to get banned ..i find ads for period pads offensive get them banned, i find ryan tubirty offensive get him banned ............allthought that does nt sound too bad an idea :D :D

[Tired&Emotional]

I absolutely agree with you. What they're doing is exactly the same as what the Danes did, blatantly and deliberately go out to irritate under the pretence of freedom of speech. And on that basis, and that two wrongs don't make a right, I'm completely opposed to them printing such cartoons. That said, I'll be interested to see if any of the hypocritical western newspapers take up their challenge to reprint their cartoons, which they obviously won't as they're not aimed at the particular minority that they're trying rile.

Well at least we agree on something!

But I don't think the initial publication in Denmark in Sept. 05 was intended to insult. However shortsighted we say it was now in hindsight, it was only because imams in that country went to the trouble of bringing them "home" to Muslim countries that people there knew about them. i think the cartoons were published in a general, Western-freedom-of-speech-way.

However I would definetley question the motivation of their republication in certain European countries in the last few days ...

[Tired&Emotional]

with the right to freedom of speach comes a responsibility aswell that you dont abuse it , just because you have the right to print what you like does nt mean you have to , the mag in france today that has reprinted the 12 pics plus drawn a new one is just talking the **** there is no need for this at all

in this country you have a right to take a sh1te on the footpath but people dont do it .


if we start banning things where do we stop ? is everything deemed offensive to some one going to get banned ..i find ads for period pads offensive get them banned, i find ryan tubirty offensive get him banned ............allthought that does nt sound too bad an idea :D :D


I agree with questioning the motivation of the Begian & French papers in reprinting them now, in the current climate but the political climate was different back in Sept!

The solution to this would be as complex as the problem. It's not really a clash of civilisations but a difference of viewpoint.

Do we, in the Western World ban all comic references to all religions? How would a law be clear-cut enough to direct interpretation - it can't be done!
Would we never be able to watch "Father Ted" again??

[Hither green]

Do we, in the Western World ban all comic references to all religions? How would a law be clear-cut enough to direct interpretation - it can't be done!

I agree that this isn't a clash of civilisations, despite the printing of these cartoons (or at least their reprinting) being a deliberate attempt to try to make it a clash of cultures by those with a political axe to grind. They could have gone out to annoy the Jewish community, or the Hindu community, or the Seikh community to show that those religions are incompatible with Western society but then they've no axe to grind against those communities.

It's true that a clear cut law with obvious boundaries would be difficult to write but perhaps it would be better than the current void where societies and part of societies can be divided by papers or politicians acting like they have carte blanche. If they can't exercise freedom of speech responsibly (as Jacques Chirac has just said) then perhaps they should be given a helping hand in making such decisions.

[jebus]

us westerners were naughty long before them and have done far more damage to the world, and thats worth remembering in this discussion.

Thats not relevant at all in my opinion, we ran the world single-handedly back then so obviously there would be mistakes made and idiots put in power, i.e. Hitler, Stalin, Thatcher and De Valera (:D ) but I shudder to think, given what generally passes for justice and common decency in arab countries what kind of world we would be living in today had the history of the world turned out differantly and made them the dominant race. For one thing I don't think we'd have so many Left Wing Nazis running around with their usual spiel of 'everyone's allowed an opinion, but if it differs from ours in the slightest than you're just a bigoted, homophobic Daily Mail reader', well okay in that sense it would have been a good thing.

[Tired&Emotional]

Thats not relevant at all in my opinion, we ran the world single-handedly back then so obviously there would be mistakes made and idiots put in power, i.e. Hitler, Stalin, Thatcher and De Valera (:D ) but I shudder to think, given what generally passes for justice and common decency in arab countries what kind of world we would be living in today had the history of the world turned out differantly and made them the dominant race. For one thing I don't think we'd have so many Left Wing Nazis running around with their usual spiel of 'everyone's allowed an opinion, but if it differs from ours in the slightest than you're just a bigoted, homophobic Daily Mail reader', well okay in that sense it would have been a good thing.


Well, listening to Anjem Choudary (he of Trinity College Dublin debate "Ireland is a legitimate target for terrorist groups as a result of Bush invading Iraq"), he has gone on record as saying he wants Sharia law in every country and looks forward to the day when the black flag os Islam flies over Downing Street and Dail Eireann!

If this is a voice for radical Islam and, as a group, they are going to be listened too to stop their cartoon protestations, I shudder to think of what the future holds for the world in gereral.

These radicals have done more for extreme right wing groups, such as the BNP, than these parties could have ever done by themselves.

I fear even more & worse confrontation in the future. Then factor in the desire for nukes in some countries........it isn't pretty.

[jebus]

These radicals have done more for extreme right wing groups, such as the BNP, than these parties could have ever done by themselves.

I fear even more & worse confrontation in the future. Then factor in the desire for nukes in some countries........it isn't pretty.

I agree completely with that, if you were to put a label on what I used to be it was a conservative liberal I'd reckon, but I've been pushed into the center on my political views and am increasingly looking to right wing groups as opposed to left wing to sort the world out. Point of view on this is that if you have extreme Muslim groups in power in the Middle East and with a lust for atomic weapons than we need hardline right wingers to be able to deal with them. For all the talk of the Republicans and the Conservatives and New Labour being out-dated in America and Britain respectively would you really trust a Ralph Nader or the Lib-Dems to be able to handle terrorist action against either country?

What with the rise of fascist groups in France, Holland and Europe in general I do think its only a matter of time before they come back to power, although obviously not an extreme fascist group like the Nazi party. I think as soon as one of these groups realise the key to getting into power is having a charasmatic frontman who is able to make the public believe that while they may be fascist, they are compassionate fascists (i.e. non-racists) than they will get back into power. As soon as that happens it really is an 'its us or them' situation in the world between the Western World and the Muslim World and thats where World War 3 breaks out. I paint quite the picture don't I!? :o

[Block G Raptor]

I fear even more & worse confrontation in the future. Then factor in the desire for nukes in some countries........it isn't pretty.

The Israeli's are unpredictable and with the Neuclear issue in Iran hitting the headlines I really fear that Israel may use this escaltion in muslim hatred as an excuse for a preemptive pop at Tehran, if that Happens there is a chance that Russia and China may retailiate on Isreal with the Yanks jumping to israels defence and we'll all go to hell in a hand basket for the sake of a few lousy cartoon's so finely balanced is the situation in the Mid-East

[Hither green]

but I shudder to think, given what generally passes for justice and common decency in arab countries what kind of world we would be living in today had the history of the world turned out differantly and made them the dominant race.

I think that’s outrageous. In areas where they were dominant things worked absolutely fine. And I’m not harking back to medieval times, in the 19th century when “we” the West (well Russia mostly) were really getting into anti-semitism the Jews fled into the Ottoman Empire for sanctuary and were welcomed. It’s only been with the advent of the nation state and the artificial creation of countries in the middle-east that things have gone pear-shaped - well that and 80 years of western meddling. That’s often what happens when you artificially create countries instead of letting them evolve, you end up with dictators, or unenlightened regimes based on local customs or extreme religious practice. Many of the regimes in Africa aren’t much better. So perhaps instead of vilifying "arab countries" we should vilify western countries for making them what they are today, instead of what they would have become had they been left to their own devises.

[Tired&Emotional]

Agree entirely with you both (jebus & Block G Raptor)
WW III was on my mind as well - the whole situation needs to get under control and FAST.

It could start with some sort of law, anything at this stage, on the press in Western Europe. - one that will go some way to appease Muslims and at the same not impact free speech in the West (and by that i would mean stopping incitement to hatred/insult by provocation, an add on to recent laws that have come into being).

Another would be open dialogue with muslims countries to explain (among a other things) how state and media are separate and that governments are not (up to the point of the above, say) reponsible for newspaper editors.

By all their rioting the Muslims have themselves been prophetic to the bomb depicted in the cartoons - but then terrorised groups have coloured the West's attititude to Muslims already.

[Roverstillidie]

a few points:
t&e, you are sailing close to the wind by constantly referring to the small groups of radicals stirring it up and rioting (no mention of the larger peaceful vigils in the western press that started all this) as 'them' or 'the muslims'. You are stereotyping and its unhelpful.

another choice bit of garbage was 'large numbers of muslims deny the holocoust happened', utter tripe. small amounts of extremists wish it had been more 'effective', so the jews wouldnt have landed in the palestine in the first place and wind israilies up about it. appaling yes, but a different proposition to denyal. why run a cartoon comp if you deny it took place? you are throwing nonsense around all over the place

Choudary was asked a direct question about whether SHANNON's use as a US military facility leaves us open to terrorist attack and he replied yes. this is something the security apparatus of this state, journos, politicians and the yanks themselves have been saying. when an arab says it is described as a threat and he is immediatly labelled a terrorist by bigots like you. its like saying tim pat coogan was a provo. and islams colour is green, so thats 2 factual innacuracies in one post.

t&e, some of this garbage is borderline racist.

there was a professor of history on newstalk with dunphy and he made a very valid point. up until very recently it was christians who killed 'unbelieviers' and aggressivley prostelised. we developed economicially and stopped. his point was islam is currently going through this developmental cycle and will grow out of it if we let them.

[Tired&Emotional]

Firstly, I completely reject the accusation - if you disagree fine but don't go fanning the flames! "Them" is alot shorter to type - I have said in my earlier posts who I am referring to. If you follow my threads the understading should be "minority of radical Muslims taking offence to cartoons published in Denmark in Sept 05". Your jumping in with two feet here trying to stir this up.
You're the one with the inflamatory language!

Secondly, do some research on denial of the holocaust. And my "nonsense" as you put it is actually highlighting the nonsense of printing cartoons about the holocaust!! That is what i am questioning.

Thirdly, do you know anything of Choudray's history or alter ego or are you basing your comments on what you hear when he in on the Eamonn Dunphy Breakfast Show? btw his other name is Omar Bakri Muhammad - do a Google on both an educate youself properly first!

If this is garbage & racist then report me to a mod - i have done nothing but put forward constructive arguments on this topic. - just because you take exception doesn't mean you can go say what you like - there are rules!

[Roverstillidie]

the cartoons about the holocoust are direct tit-for-tat in testing our reaction to something that offends us. i have never heard or heard it alledged, even by the most ardent zionist, that radical muslims deny the holocoust ever took place. you put it out there, back it up, otherwise you are making bizarre allegations.

i was at the debate in trinity, who are what choudary is isnt the point here. you are misquoting him to try and push the agenda that all arabs are terrorists. what he actually said was, again, ireland has involved itself in the war in iraq and some nutters will see us as a legitimate target. nothing 99% of us dont already know. why is it different when a man from the mid-east says it?

the eamon dunphy show reference, if you had actually bothered to read my post before going off on a self righteus rant (kind of ironic considereing the topic at hand), was the historian placing contemporary islam against historical christianity. it was very interesting and relevent when you put christianities past achievements (holocaust, crusades, conqustadores, anti-jewish progroms etc) into the frame, this burst of islamic defiance is a bit of a storm in a teacup really.

this is getting pointless. but for 1 second think, that with the same media bias against muslims and ****s like you who swallow it, how do they see us? we are the jew killing, decadent, polluting, lazy, imperialist west who insult their religion, steal their oil and back up the dictators that oppress them in between worshipping paedophile priests and injecting heroin.

stereotypes are easy to do....

[hamish]

In areas where they were dominant things worked absolutely.fine................................... .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ....So perhaps instead of vilifying "arab countries" we should vilify western countries for making them what they are today, instead of what they would have become had they been left to their own devises.

Good summing up HG - look at Rwanda and the Congo. Belgium sucked both areas dry for their raw materials for so long, supported minorities to control those areas (brutally) and then fcuked off when both countries tilted into dreadful violence.
Historically, the West/Europe has a lot to answer for. It was the Brits who created Iraq, it was the Brits and the US who undermined a democratically elected leader in Iran to install the murderous Shah. Only a couple of examples but should we really be surprised when payback occurs. It might not be us individually responsible for those historical aspects but we must ensure that we don't compound the problems of the past by continuing the abuse. Buying more Fair Trade goods, supporting the Iraq obscenity protests, fcuking out Bush, Bliar, Berlusconi and co are just a few of the things the West an do.

I heard a candidate for the Lebanese Presidency say on Radio 5 Live at 5.45pm today that the protests there last Sunday over the cartoons came damn close to starting another Lebanese civil war and he claimed Syria was involved too.
What a mess this whole thing is turning out to be.

[Condex]

The Israeli's are unpredictable and with the Neuclear issue in Iran hitting the headlines I really fear that Israel may use this escaltion in muslim hatred as an excuse for a preemptive pop at Tehran, if that Happens there is a chance that Russia and China may retailiate on Isreal with the Yanks jumping to israels defence and we'll all go to hell in a hand basket for the sake of a few lousy cartoon's so finely balanced is the situation in the Mid-East

With what has been said by Irans president, Israel will be well entitled to make a pre-emptive strike against nuclear facilites, just as they did in Iraq..