Somali axe man attempts to kill 75 yr old Danish cartoonist for Muhammad cartoon

<br>
Who was discussing if it was worth killing him over? I merely asked you what you would do in this situation. You never answered my question. How would you react??

 

Not sure, I don't have a daughter, but I can tell you I would not try to kill him.

And I would probably explain to my daughter that there are rude people in the world, but it is the people that rise above that rudeness that truly acheive.

And none of this is relevent or germaine to the conversation at hand.

The guy made a parody cartoon of Mohammed, and a lot of Muslim people overeacted to it, and some people died because of it.

Now which was worse, the guy making the insulting cartoon, or people that actually killed over it?

It is JUST a cartoon.....if you don't like it, feel free to say so, that is freedom of speech.

Whatever happened to:

Sticks and stones may break your bones, but words will never hurt you?

DD

 

<br>
It's actually quite relevant. The point remains (and any normal American male will tell you this) that most people would probably confront the said douchebag who was making comments about his daughter/sister/wife/whatever. The larger point is that when someone is offended on a personal level, they shouldn't have to just accept it. As far as these idiots trying to kill the man, that's as wrong as it gets. I don't think anyone is saying that it's right to kill over it. In fact, everyone here is on the same page and condemning that. But to say that the drawing is blown out of proportion and people should not react negatively to it is something else. The argument isn't over who is worse. I only dislike that you think the cartoonist is not at fault at all. You don't do obviously controversial things and expect everyone to just be like, "oh who cares.." Extremists aside, the cartoon was offensive and a complete ******* thing to do. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should...


Btw, what's germaine?? I've never heard of that...

 

No no, you were saying before that "they are equally big assholes" about someone who drew a cartoon compared to someone who tried to kill someone.

And yes, they should have to accept it, even if they are offended. They can voice their displeasure and can try to argue why it is distasteful, but they have no right to take any physical action. In that regard, they have to accept it.

 

stick to your points and quit the personal attacks.

It may make you feel real good to do it, but it isnt winning you any points with other members nor with the mods.

consider that a friendly warning

 

<br>
Ok, let me accept that I was wrong. The guy that tried to kill someone is always the bigger *******. But, the cartoon guy is a giant ******* in his own right.

And no, the shouldn't have to accept it. There's way to non violently show displeasure. Most of the general Islamic public did so. Of course, all we hear is that the extremists went nuts. Big surprise. No one has any right to take physical action. That's not even what this is about.
<br>

What you're saying isn't what DD originally said when he said, "The rules on their prophet are pathetic......so intolerant."

What was the point of saying something like that? No, please just go ahead and openly bash something that people hold dear to them and expect them to absolutely be thrilled. Intolerant?? Like really? Hmm, they have different a culture and rules then us, they must be wrong!! Where have I heard this one before?
<br>
Then DD goes on to say: "If you are offended, it is fairly simple, just ignore it......"

Right DD! Let's just ignore everything. Whenever someone is doing things to try and humiliate you, or disgrace something, just ignore it!! (BTW, as a note, this has nothing to do with killing anyone and IT IS NOT RIGHT TO HARM ANYONE)
<br>
You guys know what the whole point of tolerance and free speech is?? It's so everyone can live their life as they choose without fear of being chastised and made fun of for their beliefs. If you're going to use freedom of press to do just the opposite of that, you're a pretty big douchebag. Period.

 

Again the reason for the cartoon was to point out the intolerant views....

Which is accepatable in a freedom of speech society.

Relevant.

It should read germane.

DD

 

Disagree with your idea of freedom of speech then. If there is no control for people who abuse it, then I'd rather not have it frankly. That's not civilized to me.

Also, I stated in my post that murder in this case is out of the question. You must have misunderstood and thought that I don't think the axeman should be punished and I never said that.

If a guy punches me for cussing at his mother, it is your opinion that he is more at fault than I am. If I intended for him to feel like punching me in the face while expecting that no such thing would happen, then I think I was more at fault. I can tell you flat out right now if someone cussed out any member of my family to my face, he will not forget it for the rest of his life. That is how dear I hold my family (let alone the Prophet PBUH).

Who's the biggest ******* in the story? The axeman. But who's fault is it? The cartoonist.

 

<br>
Really? You're going to sit there and tell me that was honestly the only intention. No point in arguing it further when you have such a naive opinion of the whole thing.

<br>
Yeah, I figured. Lol I was just messing with you man
<br>
Btw, I should probably retract my previous statements about Ottomaton. You don't bash. Disagreement is part of the D&D and that was my fault for miscontruing what was actually going on. My B, brahh.
<br>
And for the record it's posters like eckosyltckeyksysks(or whatever his name is) who resort to unnecessary personal attacks that make the general Muslim public look ignorant and intolerant.

 

Not exactly the Muslim MadMax, after all... or perhaps that is the Muslim version of MadMax... in that case... .

 

There is a classic Danish story that explains the case for valuing honesty and free speech above good manners:

http://hca.gilead.org.il/emperor.html

 

<br>
Ok, this post is really interesting. Correct me if i'm wrong, and I really am legitimately just trying to understand what you are trying to say.

So.... In all honesty, do you mean that all muslims, even the moderate and sane ones are sad? Your line of reasoning here seems to allude that even Mathloom is stricken with some sort of inherent (or perhaps learned) flaw that afflicts all muslims. You can't tell me that you're not calling out an entire "race" right here. How is that not a statement full of prejudice? Or am I missing something here?

 

<br>
Awesome. In kindergarten, one of the first lessons you are taught is: "if you have nothing nice to say, don't say anything at all."

 

I believe there was a previous post where Mathloom was called the "Muslim MadMax" by MadMax. Now, MadMax is a very moderate and, I would say, "peaceful" poster who would rather "turn the other cheek" than get engaged in angry confrontation (at least that is his persona on the bbs and I would assume that he might be similar in real life...even though he is a lawyer ).

What mathloom posted was that if someone insulted his mother or his prophet, "he will not forget it for the rest of his life. That is how dear I hold my family (let alone the Prophet PBUH)." That does not sound peaceful or "turn the other cheek"-like at all. It sounds like he would retort to an insult (to his family or the prophet) with physical violence himself. That's why I said that he doesn't quite seem like MadMax after all.

Whether that (not turning the other cheek, but instead leaning towards resorting to physical violence when feeling offended) is representative of Muslims or at least 1-2 % of them (which would be what...15-30 million people?) or not - you tell me. I did put a question mark there. If it is indeed like that, I would find it sad. Which is why I put that sad smiley there.

 

"Abusing" freedom of speech is very nebulous. Simply being offensive is not abuse. Only someone dangerously insecure or fanatical would think otherwise.

Yes.

No matter the circumstance, the puncher in this scenario chose to react physically. I concur he is justified, but that is totally ancillary to the right of the other man to cuss out whoever he wants.

No. It's quite possible that the cartoonist is the bigger *******, as he conciously chose to offend a ****-ton of people for kicks - but the fault for the attack is solely on the attacker. And perhaps, a little bit of flame fanning by some nasty folks on the muslim side of the fence.

 

The problem though is if your view of freedom of speech is that it is legitimately constrained by the threat of violence then that isn't freedom at all.

As for being civilized I would say justifying attacking someone for their speech isn't civilized. That strikes me more as the culture of the school yard than civilization.

You haven't but you are continually justifying the axeman's motives by saying that such action should be both expected and legitimate since if someone says something offensive the proper response is violence.

You are basically saying that speech and violence is equivalent since the proper response to offensive speech is violence. They aren't especially as a society that encourages free speech. I will agree that the consequence of speech is often violence but that is something that is not generally accepted or encouraged. Consider that in the last World Cup an Italian player made some comments about Zidane's mother and Zindane headbutted him and got a red card. While yes Italian player was an ******* but no one is saying Zidane shouldn't have been tossed out. The sameway if someone where to punch somebody because they said something about their mother on the street the person who threw the punch would be the one charged with assault and the argument, "he said something about my mother." wouldn't be a valid defense.

Finally as I noted this can go all sorts of ways. Would you say that an otherwise peaceful Muslim public figure who made disparaging comments about someone else's culture or religion that they should then expect to be attacked?

The answer to offensive speech is more speech to counter such message not violence.

 

Lighten up world....just let the booty shake.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/LBRexUda65E&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/LBRexUda65E&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

 

I see how it is...

"Free speech as long as it agrees with our way of thinking"

ROFLMAO.

DD

 

I think you have a very low opinion of yourself, if not all humanity. The view that you have to (or can) resort to physical violence over words, and feel justified, implies to me that you have feel people have very little self control. That is similar reasoning to "she was asking for it with the way she was dressed", which I guess is part of the reasoning behind the clothing that Muslim women wear. I wish you had more faith in people.