But I've said over and over that I UNDERSTAND how someone could be offended. It's just that it's the POINT of a political cartoon. It's SUPPOSED to be offensive.
dont u guys wish that aliens invaded our planet like independence day so people can get along? and will smith (horry) will save the world? religion is dumb. i know this dude who is Seek (people think these dudes are muslms cause they were turbans), he shaved off his hair and beard. i asked him, wasnt that against your religion, and he said yeah.. but its too freakin hot in texas and he couldnt take it any longer.
yes lets put blindfolds on so even when someone does something positive we can't see that. as buchanan says you neo-cons are teenagers. often clever but never wise.
NOT WHEN IT PORTRAYS THE PROPHET AS A TERRORIST, INDICATING THAT ALL HIS FOLLOWERS ARE ALSO TERRORISTS SINCE THEY ASPIRE TO EMULATE THE WAY HE LIVED! Still, I said it's ok for the Danish paper to publish that cartoon, but don't bit## and moan when people get pissed off about it. I am not going to shoot someone or kidnap anyone, but I am offended to say the least. I am also offended by that painting showing Jesus in a piss (is that what you said?) but I hadn't heard of it until recently. Secular arrogance is running rampant...
No more debate. Our leader has spoken. Follow the instruction, damnit. US backs Muslims in cartoon dispute http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1576751 Reuters Feb 3, 2006 — By Saul Hudson WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States backed Muslims on Friday against European newspapers that printed caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad in a move that could help America's battered image in the Islamic world. Inserting itself into a dispute that has become a lightning rod for anti-European sentiment across the Muslim world, the United States sided with Muslims outraged that the publications put press freedom over respect for religion. "These cartoons are indeed offensive to the belief of Muslims," State Department spokesman Kurtis Cooper said in answer to a question. "We all fully recognize and respect freedom of the press and expression but it must be coupled with press responsibility. Inciting religious or ethnic hatreds in this manner is not acceptable." He said he had no comment as to why the United States chose to pass judgment in a dispute that ostensibly does not involve America. "We call for tolerance and respect for all communities for their religious beliefs and practices," he added. The United States, which before the September 11 attacks was criticized for insensitivity to the Islamic culture, has become more attuned to Muslim sensibilities. Accusations last year that U.S. officials desecrated the Koran sparked deadly riots in Asia and heightened that awareness. Major U.S. publications have not republished the cartoons, which include depictions of Mohammad as a terrorist and offend believers as blasphemous. In contrast, some European media responded to the criticism against the Danish newspaper that originally printed the caricatures by reproducing the images and fueled anger that has led to boycotts of Danish products and widespread protests. Stephen Zunes, a professor of politics at the University of San Francisco and a Bush administration critic, said the United States was responsible for creating far more anger in the Muslim world because of its invasion of Iraq. "The United States is the last nation that should caution against unnecessarily inflaming sentiments in the Muslim world," he said. The official U.S. response also contrasted with European governments, which have tended to acknowledge the tension between free speech and respect for religion but have generally accepted the newspapers' rights to print the cartoons. The U.S. criticism of the newspapers also comes after the Pentagon complained over a Washington Post cartoon. The Joint Chiefs of Staff sent an unusual letter to the editor published on Thursday, denouncing as "reprehensible" and "beyond tasteless" a cartoon earlier in the week portraying Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld as insensitive to U.S. troop casualties. The cartoon portrayed a soldier who had lost his arms and legs with Rumsfeld at his hospital bedside saying, "I'm listing your condition as 'battle hardened."'
why tiger, i implore you, why does it matter if someone makes fun of the prophet? i guess you can't answer this simple question. i know this is a sensitive issue, but i am extremely curious.
That's part of freedom of the press/speech/expression, though. That's what allows those on the left to constantly bash the current administration at will. It's what this country was founded on. It's what others (like the Danish) are aspiring to. You have the ability to be an A-hole. You can't just say that you have all freedoms except when someone's offended.
Yeah, I saw that. Very sad. OT: Where you been wnes? I haven't seen you around here in a while. I don't agree with pretty much anything you say but I was getting worried there for a while. Glad to see you back.
I think our govt did the exact right thing on this. Acknowledge freedom of press...don't call for censorship...but point out that it's not a great thing to call out an entire religion and label them as terrorists; particularly in a way that demeans a person or symbol they hold dear. I think that's about as American as it gets. I'm proud of that. Acknowledge the freedom...but expect responsibility. As an aside...thanks, Europe, for taking our place as the Great Satan.
I don't think they've taken our place. They're like Satan, Jr. Although the hate is much more global now:
the same muslims who arent condoning violence at the current cartoons are the ones who actually have knowledge of christ and moses in other religions. The crazy militant ones, as ive said, are mistaken about what the quran teaches, and hence would not really even know that jesus pbuh is the same Isa in the quran, and in turn would not threaten when similar actions are done to Jesus.
we'll see. i think this inflames radical Islam in a way that is very different from the US. but maybe i'm wrong.
well dude you need to find this misinformed ones and tell them correct. but i guess it's hard when they dress up in green ninja outfits with rocket propel grenades right? yo bro, uh.. that verson of the religion you are reading is wrong.
But why should I be fighting Denmark's battles for them? Are you proposing that the US should get involved in every conflict between contries? What if a newspaper in Nigeria publishes a cartoon mocking Ghandi and Indians get upset and demand an apology should the US step in then? The problem with this attitude is that you're placing it as our responsibilty to resolves other's problems. If that's the case then prepare for war without end because there are a lot of disagreements out there between countries and people that have absolutely nothing to do with the US. You can advocate non-interference and still not condone or engage in the practice. You're painting this as all or nothing. In regard to a hierarchy of principles that is a necessity. If you didn't regard that there is a hierarchy of principles then you should be saying that war supporters should enlist and go fight in Iraq since they believe that is critically important. Since you've argued, skillfully I might add, that that is a ridiculous postion you obviously priortize those principles. Bringing liberty to the Iraqis (or whatever reason you believe for the war) isn't as high of a principle as leading a productive life safe at home. [quote} I don't believe in gential mutilation. That doesn't mean we should go to war with east africa, but we could support the World Health Organization program to educate at a grassroots level there (which is already going on). [/quote] No one is asking you to believe in it. I'm not saying not to do anything against it. If genital mutilation or child prostitution were legal in the US I would certainly work to outlaw those and end the practice in the US. I would say focussing on the US in regard to things like freedom of the press and religious tolerance is one of the best things you can do for that issue and far better than going around criticizing Muslims in other countries. For one you as an American citizen have far more power to enact change locally and are more knowledgeable about the US. Also working to make the US live up to principles helps the US lead by example rather than doing a do as we say not what we do finger pointing. Also in regard to NGO's that fine. What I'm talking about is the US government or prominent US political figures sticking their noses into this. If you want to support Danish freedom of the press by giving to Reporters Without Borders that's great. I'm against the idea though that the US should be exerting economic, diplomatic or military pressure on Denmark and France so they don't censor their press or on Jordan and other Muslim countries to keep their citizens from protesting the Danish Press. There's another reason for this that is practical. In case you haven't noticed the US isn't very popular among Muslims or Europeans. IMO the surest way to turn European opinion against the papers is for the US government, President Bush and other US politicians to start pushing this issue. Muslims will be even more inflamed over it and most Euros will start thinking if Bush supports this position there must be something wrong with it. And if the Canadians and Germans threatened economic and diplomatic sanctions over the US' lack of universal healthcare or fund political candidates in the what then? Even short of war though would you tolerate foreign countries taking such steps to try to force their values on us? War may not take place and I didn't advocate war that was a question to you since you're the one advocating intervention. I will ask it again though since you think the US has an interest in this controversy how should we intervene in it? As for your slavery argument yes I totally agree that the US was wrong and deserved to be criticized but that goes to my point earlier. I'm not advocating doing nothing but think that change at home is far more important and more successful strategy than poking our noses trying to solve other's problems. Finally in regard to your argument that we should be pushing our values and interfering in other countries affairs is that it smacks of The White Man's Burden. That other countries are so backward and uncivilized that its up to us civilized Americans to go and straighten things out for them. Yes there are many problems in the World but the US neither has the economic, military or political capital to be expending trying to solve everyone's problems. Further since many in the rest of the World consider the US to be one of the BIGGEST PROBLEMS we're not necessarily helping by sticking our noses into affairs that have very little do with us.
Don't be sad, it's a PR move, albeit a smart and well-calculated one that won't cost us anything and something we could gain from. Also, it's true: free speech is your right, but be prepared to bear the responsibility of your actions. Again, they have the right to print whatever they want, but much like those neo-Nazi marchers a few months ago who insisted on going through a minority neighborhood, they should be prepared to take the backlash that would follow. It's pure incitement, and poking the angry caged lion is not smart at all, au contrair, it's stupid. I hope there is no violence against the Danish or anyone else, may be the Muslim world will just let out their frustrations in street protests and burn a few flags and get this whole thing out of their system. Then again, given the already high tensions in that part of the world, I won't be surprised at all if violence breaks out sooner or later.
True, it's a PR move. It's just we've spent so much time/energy trying to say we're attempting to spread freedom throughout the middle east and then we have a chance to defend something that matters more than democracy (freedom of expression) and we don't.
You must have missed the threads regarding the protest in the PRC regarding Japan's text books. Much of the same rhetoric criticizing Muslims for overreacting were directed at Chinese for those protests.
