Religious intolerance or freedom of speech.

[Louis VI the Fat]

How's that?

Oh fergitit. It's just that I ain't never herd yew fellar use all them big wurds and talkin' 'bout the Lawd that way.

[A.Saturnus]

C'est ca. Psycholigists have always known that groups that differ heavily on something bring friction, only the politicians have a hard time catching up.

Psychologists do also know that in-groups are always seen as moral superior to out-groups. In fact, minimal group paradigmas have shown that groups do not need to differ heavily to bring friction. Even randomly generated groups that only differ by colored bands can evoke racist tendenties. The lesson to learn is that frictions are not a function of the differences of groups but of the mindset of the members of the groups.

To me it seems as if these protest are also a sign of helplessness. They know very well that they can't change anything about the way Europe is and at the same time they don't understand Europe. Since ignorant people are afraid of what they don't understand, they experience a vague, looming threat against which they don't have weapon. I don't want to offend anyone but I think these people demonstrate a culture of immaturity and insecurity.

[Kommodus]

You're confusing religion and society now, although I'll give you te two can be hard to keep apart when discussing Muslim countries. Muslims aren't rioting (or whatever) because of Islam; they're rioting (or whatever) over a whole host of issues, for which Islam provides a socially acceptable and fairly safe front.

I certainly did not intend to; sorry if I gave anyone that idea. That's why I didn't say there was something wrong with Islam, but rather Islam as it is currently practiced. I was referring to the overall culture and attitude of the Muslim world, not the religion per se. Although you're right; it is a bit difficult to divide the two.

I'm fully aware that, at least in theory, there is a possibility for a Muslim "reformation" of sorts. I just hope it doesn't take anything like the religious wars of Europe to make it happen.

[Watchman]

Methinks it is already underway, through the inevitable filtration of what might be termed "modern" values, cultural icons (think McDo's and suchlike) and so on into the Islamic world.

Which is, obviously, among the causes for the anxiety now getting shouted out in the streets. It's my firm belief that worry about "cultural polution" of sorts, or at least "debasement of our traditional values", is among the prime motivators of most Muslim extremists.

Not that anyone ever had too easy a time accepting that sort of thing. We have had and have no shortage of reactionaries in the West either, after all. Heck, the damn Nazis were partly a reaction against modernity...

[Devastatin Dave]

Oh fergitit. It's just that I ain't never herd yew fellar use all them big wurds and talkin' 'bout the Lawd that way.

I get warnings now if I speak urban or hick.

[Devastatin Dave]

Well looks like the UN is taking action....
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/02/06/D8FJPIBG2.html
which is just basically lip service like everything the UN says or its fearless leader says. Too bad the UN isn't located in Europe where it can get torched like the rest of Europe will be in the next 5 to 10 years. Europe needs to learn to be more tolerant like they constantly preach to the US to be. The irony really is that NOW after all the rioting and criminal acts of their newest "citizens", the Europeans are sounding more like Pat Buchanan at an all white golf course.

[Meneldil]

I'm starting to get the feeling that this isn't about the cartoons anymore. This seems to be evolving into a general Anti-West 'movement'. The longer this goes on, the less sympathy I have for them. It's rare that incidents cause me to change my mind about my most basic beliefs, but my belief in the general goodness of the greater Muslim population is being severely shaken. In situations like this, if you do not decry the violence that is being done, you are condoning it.

Same thing here. In 2002, when the extreme right reached the 2nd turn of the presidential election, I manifest, joined an anti-racism association (SOS Racisme). Yet, over the past few years, I changed my mind, and I'm now on the verge of blank racism.
Right now, with the cartoon issue, I think we should either bomb them or stop all kind of diplomatic and trading relations with the middle east, bar a few countries and let them do whatever they want in their lands. I have no more pity, I don't even want to understand them anymore. I read the Qur'an, a lot of books on Islam, but now I don't respect this religion anymore, nor I want to hear anything about it.

Well looks like the UN is taking action....
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/02/06/D8FJPIBG2.html
which is just basically lip service like everything the UN says or its fearless leader says. Too bad the UN isn't located in Europe where it can get torched like the rest of Europe will be in the next 5 to 10 years. Europe needs to learn to be more tolerant like they constantly preach to the US to be. The irony really is that NOW after all the rioting and criminal acts of their newest "citizens", the Europeans are sounding more like Pat Buchanan at an all white golf course.

Well, frankly, what should have Annan said ? 'Stop right now, or we're going to bomb the hell out of you a make jokes about Mohammed daily ?'. The UN is powerless atm. They are supposed to deal with governements, not with angry crowds.

[Devastatin Dave]

The UN can't even deal with bad catering to one of its millions of "meeting" let alone any rogue government or unruley mob.

[Kralizec]

The site of the Arab European League (AEL) has over the past few days posted anti semetic cartoons in reaction to the Danish caricatures. I'm not going to provide a link, as it probably would be a violation of the forum rules. Google for AEL if you're interested.
I can only wonder what these guys were "thinking"...

"Shameless dogs! You can't abuse freedom of speech like that! Watch as we do the same!"
and
"Blasphemous Danes, slandering our prophet! Let's pick on the jews!"

[Samurai Waki]

Just to confuse and bewilder the Muslims, I think Christianity should steal the prophet Muhammed and claim him as a sacred symbol of Christianity, and that we'll fight to the death to protect his good name.

[Goofball]

Right now, with the cartoon issue, I think we should either bomb them

Bomb who, exactly?

[BDC]

Right now, with the cartoon issue, I think we should either bomb them or stop all kind of diplomatic and trading relations with the middle east, bar a few countries and let them do whatever they want in their lands. I have no more pity, I don't even want to understand them anymore. I read the Qur'an, a lot of books on Islam, but now I don't respect this religion anymore, nor I want to hear anything about it.

I think this is the view of a lot of Europeans. You invite people into your country, protect them, give them the same opportunities as everyone else, and then it appears that they reject this all.

This isn't the case though, the people in the Middle East burning stuff aren't European Muslims, and the extremists here are just idiots. There are plenty of home grown fanatics for other causes who happily blow stuff up and threaten violence for some vague, never-achieveable goal.

[Watchman]

There's also the little detail that the average European is either unaware or unwilling to admit just how badly the immigrant groups on the average get Ye Olde Boot In The Head...

Someone once said "give them work and tolerance so they don't segregate into veil cults." Too bad that has not, in practice, been tried too hard...

[Meneldil]

Bomb who, exactly?

The guys who torched the ambassadies, for example.

There's also the little detail that the average European is either unaware or unwilling to admit just how badly the immigrant groups on the average get Ye Olde Boot In The Head...

Yeah, sure, they were and are probably badly treated, and in some places, second class citizens. But that's what happen to migrants everywhere in the world. I'm fully aware my point of view may sounds silly, but why the hell our Pole or Cambodian migrants don't piss me off as much as the muslim ones ? As I said in the topic about the french suburb riots, I don't feel responsible for what my parents or grand parents did to them 30 years earlier. Yet, as a someone studying in a relatively big city, I constantly have to deal with the - mostly arab - scums. I'm not speaking about serious stuffs like rapes, racketerring (if that's the correct word), but about the everyday little annoyances that makes you feel they hate you while you don't deserve it.

Someone once said "give them work and tolerance so they don't segregate into veil cults." Too bad that has not, in practice, been tried too hard...

Great. And do you have a genius idea to integrate them into a western society ? In liberal countries, governements allowed them to do whatever they want, thinking they would sooner or later turn into average europeans. It didn't work.
In France, we tried to impose our values and customs upon them. It didn't work.

Should we teach them La Marseillaise in arabic ?

[Watchman]

Whether you feel responsible for it or not doesn't lessen their plight one bit, far as I can tell.

People who feel like they're not welcome in a community will react accordingly. And young men without future prospects are a major source of trouble everywhere; add that to the above, and what the Hell can you expect ?

I'm fully aware my point of view may sounds silly, but why the hell our Pole or Cambodian migrants don't piss me off as much as the muslim ones ?

Hey, our Asian migrants never drew even a fraction of the hostility the rather more numerous Somali refugees who came in the early Nineties still get. Doesn't make the latter's lot any better, or the problems our society gets from it any less largely self-inflicted.

It's racism, pure and simple. That it's concentrated on a single prominent (and relatively large) group quite possibly only makes it worse - if nothing else, it's not even being consistent...

[Brenus]

There are divisions in Islam.
There isn’t a unique lecture of the Koran. Because there is no Pope in Islam, no Rome (even if Saudi Arabia wishes to be seen as), a lot of scholars debate the faith and its practise. The best known is between Shiite and Sunnite, but Islam goes from pacific Sufis to the more reactionaries Wahabists and Taliban for the most extremists.

The main problem to reform Islam is the book was written by the Prophet himself. Christianity rules were fixed 300 years after Christ, and base on documents written 60 years after his death the resurrection. Knowing that Christ died at around 33 years old and his disciples were probably around the same age, that let the atheists like me questioning the validity of such witness, but that is another debate…

The New Testimony is the base of Christianity, not the Bible, which is recognised by the Christians (and the Muslim) is questionable. The words of Christ himself are depending of the witness. The Muslims haven’t such possibility of doubts.
But interpretations of the words are still possible, and all the Muslims intellectuals during the centuries never failed to do it.
Islam and Democracy are mixable. Who could have believed that the Catholic Inquisition would melt, that people like Torquemada would give path to Las Casas.
Ok, it cost the extermination of all South and Central America, but all religions could evoluate.

[TinCow]

The question at this point then becomes, can we reform Islam and improve the condition of Muslims quickly enough to prevent an all-out conflict between them and the West? What's scaring me is that the positive movements seem to be advancing much slower than the march towards all out warfare.

[Watchman]

The main problem to reform Islam is the book was written by the Prophet himself.

Except it wasn't, AFAIK. It was compiled not long after his death when the rulers of the Caliphate became alarmed at the fact there were, oh, about three somewhat differing versions of the creed currently being circulated in their realm. So they set to work codifying the thing, gathered the most reliable versions, double-checked the whole thing with the Prophet's private secretary, and declared the end result unchangeable and inviolable.

Which actually worked. To my knowledge Muslims haven't engaged in the Christian pasttime of Massacre Over Translation Errors and the like, although sectarian violence and factionalization over interpretation was naturally never absent.

'Course, I suspect the average Muslim will seriously blow a fuse if you try to tell most of the above to him. I once managed to goad a perfectly sensible, moderate imam into a quite lenghty exposition of apocryphal 'proof' of the Prophet's divine miracle-working abilities via the simple expedient of asking a few nosy questions about the man. The experience was enough to convince me Muslims tend to have a bit of hair trigger about some things.

[Samurai Waki]

You're using the word racism a little too liberally, methinks. True racism generally involves one group hating another group without being provoked. It's a superiority complex that ALL people have, if you say you aren't a little racist or a little prejudicistic towards something that either goes against your moral values, or is threatening the destruction of your way of life then I'd call you a complete liar.

Meneldil brings up a very valid point, and it is, that there is a good reason to be wary of Islamic Fanatics. It's a natural developed thought process, that seeks the best ways for self preservation.

If you didn't want to go into a place contaminated with Ebola Virus, but someone said you were racist because you didn't want to be close to the victims, because you might get killed, I don't see anything racist about that.

[Sjakihata]

What scarces me the most is, that Denmark was one of the first european countries to show solidarity with USA, in terms of the Iraq war (I still dont agree with it) - but USA takes a long while before they back Denmark up in this conflict - true allies... right

[Meneldil]

Whether you feel responsible for it or not doesn't lessen their plight one bit, far as I can tell.

People who feel like they're not welcome in a community will react accordingly.

And here we are. This is a vicious circle. They don't like me because I don't like them, and I don't like them because they don't like me.

And young men without future prospects are a major source of trouble everywhere; add that to the above, and what the Hell can you expect ?

I'd be expecting them to try to get a work and to study, instead of standing in the street insulting and making fun of everyone.
I'm really not fond of the liberal ideology, but I seriously think young people are having trouble because they're idiots, and don't even try to get a better life. I know a lot of people that appeared to be doomed to have a totally crappy life, but who worked hard, studied, and who are now doing alright, even though they're black or arab.

[Watchman]

Oh, I'm all for the "better your lot by working hard" idea too. I just don't see how people who have to climb up a far steeper slope in face of assorted prejudices and crappy starting conditions can be expected to pull it off with success rates as good as the folks with decks less stacked against them display.

Try to work your way out of the slums when the ethnic majority hates you, and I'll quarantee your chances of success are way lower than they'd be if you were the local equivalent of "white trash" who at least aren't disadvantaged by their very physical existence. And if you fail, what do you have left ? Damn near nothing.

Big surprise you get a fair number of embittered drop-outs and failures hanging out in street corners with nothing better to do as a result.

[Lazul]

My father said this when we watched the new's today; "Why are they angry at the danish people and their gov., the newpaper isnt owned by the state, but is a private-company."

Thats a damn good question, are the muslim nutcases trying to tell us to censur our newspapers?
Well they sure know how to gain enemies.

[Watchman]

Actually when you think about it, given how most Muslim countries are governed the idea of a free news outlet not at least de facto controlled by the governement may indeed be somewhat alien to many of the inhabitants...

That said, I don't think it's unheard-of for Western governements to demand an official apology from their peers over what some private news enterpreneur has said. I seem to recall Israel being particularly sensitive in that regard.

[Devastatin Dave]

Actually when you think about it, given how most Muslim countries are governed the idea of a free news outlet not at least de facto controlled by the governement may indeed be somewhat alien to many of the inhabitants...

Exactly, as far as they know they think that the government is in control of the media, much like their former resident governments. Its hard to to re-educate those of such different societies to the Western frame of mind. But at the same time, I think many out there doing the rioting are simply using the cartoons as an excuse, a lame one at that, in an attempt to further the Kingdom of EuArabia...

[solypsist]

Are the cartoons freedom of speech? Well, yeah. Of course you have the right to print ******, racist cartoons that serve no purpose but to inflame Arab sentiment and make racist right-wingers feel good about themselves. You have the right to show a black man hanging from a tree or a buck-toothed Asian, too. But in any of those cases you don’t have the right to feign petty self-righteous faux-amazement that people got upset about it. Instead of saying “these are controversial but we uphold a standard of free speech, regardless of ones personal tastes,” they claimed that people getting outraged were simply being ridiculous. Le Monde made this their cover today- they might as well have printed “darn it, we LOVE mocking Arabs and **** you if you don’t!” as the headline.

The cartoons were drawn for one single purpose: to attack Muslims and provoke their ire.

[Sjakihata]

Not really expanding Eurabia, but more like using the West as an excuse. Instead of channelling the anger inwards, against their own regimes and the poor lives of the majority of the people as a result of those regimes. Instead of trying to focus on the real issues and bettering their own situation, said regimes are using the West as a scapegoat and lifting the lid of the valves against the West.

The cartoons were drawn for one single purpose: to attack Muslims and provoke their ire.

For a full description see: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=60868 my post is #6

[Watchman]

Well, protesting against the West doesn't get you visits from the resident secret police. Protesting against your own governement, which most no doubt well know to be among the main sources of their misery, does.

Do the math.

[Goofball]

Are the cartoons freedom of speech? Well, yeah. Of course you have the right to print ******, racist cartoons that serve no purpose but to inflame Arab sentiment and make racist right-wingers feel good about themselves. You have the right to show a black man hanging from a tree or a buck-toothed Asian, too. But in any of those cases you don’t have the right to feign petty self-righteous faux-amazement that people got upset about it. Instead of saying “these are controversial but we uphold a standard of free speech, regardless of ones personal tastes,” they claimed that people getting outraged were simply being ridiculous. Le Monde made this their cover today- they might as well have printed “darn it, we LOVE mocking Arabs and **** you if you don’t!” as the headline.

The cartoons were drawn for one single purpose: to attack Muslims and provoke their ire.

So what?

As has been pointed out numerous times in this thread, members in the Arab/Muslim community make statements every day (i.e. Israel should be wiped off of the map), or take actions (i.e. cutting of hostages' heads then posting the video on the Internet) that have one purpose: to attack non-muslims and provoke their ire.

So for them now to stand back and (to use your term) "feign petty self-righteous faux-amazement" that a non-muslim cartoonist might engage in a little acid humor at the expense of their religion is so incredibly ridiculous as to be almost sublime in its idiocy.

Yes, the cartoon was a nasty shot at Muslims as a whole.

But their reaction to it has been entirely out of proportion, no matter how one looks at it.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Whats wrong with pictures of Mohamed anyway?

















Am I in trouble?