Muslim anger towards Scandinavia...

[Atreides]

I was quite surprised that Israel's in the Euro 2008 qualifiers, suggesting they're part of Europe. Anyway, yeah. It's interesting that some Euro countries are rallying behind the Denmark paper.

[Jediphile]

I foresee some pretty good times for Arab flag salesmen, good times yeah 

 

 

(unless they get smart about it and start burning the EU flag)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Still have to get the flags of Norway and Iceland, though - they're not members of the EU...

[Darth Launch]

Nice way to further support your position and then try to close the discussion before anyone can argue further against it.

Feel free to start a new thread about propaganda if you so wish... however, I don't see how it is appropriate for us to start a discussion about it in this thread... we wouldn't want to de-rail this love-in, would we? ^_^

 

Besides, reading about it and doing research could mean anything, so it doesn't particularly impress me. After all, I've done my own research and reading too, so just saying that as a supporting fact is not going to carry much weight (which is why I didn't do it before myself).

My intention wasn't to impress you... I apologise if that's the impression I gave in my post... I don't know you and therefore I don't care what you think of me... unfortunately, I don't have my findings or results from my research here with me, otherwise I'd be happy to share them with you... I can ask to have them posted up to me if you so desired

 

Debate of any sort will invariably include both ignorance and disrespect sooner or later. And I said in my last post that it's not pretty, but then made the point that this is part of the democratic debate. You conveniently decided to ingore that in your response, however, and instead just focus of mention of ignorance and disrespect, which you then use to call me naive. So how much respect did you show yourself?

I don't believe that this forum is a democratic state as such... therefore, how does that make this thread a democratic debate? Please feel free to explain how it would work in this context though... I'm happy to admit if I'm mistaken or wrong

 

Also, could you explain how me calling you naive in your viewpoint about the presence of ignorance and disrespect in democratic debate is a "blow" to my self-respect?

 

What a well-articulated point...   

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thank you... but I think you used " " by mistake there though... "

[Gfted1]

I didnt know Denmark was a monarchy. Neato.

[Lucius]

It was an absolute monarchy for some 800 years before evolving into a constitutional monarchy with the monarch as head of state, but without real political power. (in theory, she could dismiss the government, but that would probably spell doom for the monarchy).

 

On a funny and rather ironic note, the Saudis (I think) are expected to run outta butter in one week if they keep up the boycott.

Edited February 1, 2006 by Lucius

[Gorth]

It was an absolute monarchy for some 800 years before evolving into a constitutional monarchy with the monarch as head of state, but without real political power. (in theory, she could dismiss the government, but that would probably spell doom for the monarchy).

Sometimes, a (mentally stable) monarch is a good patron for a democratic system. She just sits there, observes, comments and is by the way head of the armed forces and wields absolute power (together with the rest of the "Reichs Council" in case of martial law. The politicians better do their damned best to keep things civil and avoid that

[Jediphile]

It was an absolute monarchy for some 800 years before evolving into a constitutional monarchy with the monarch as head of state, but without real political power. (in theory, she could dismiss the government, but that would probably spell doom for the monarchy).

 

On a funny and rather ironic note, the Saudis (I think) are expected to run outta butter in one week if they keep up the boycott.   

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I also find it utterly ironic that by reacting so violently, the muslims have now made the majority of the european press reprint the cartoons just to be informative to their readers and possibly also to stand behind the right to free speech. If they had just argued their case, they would probably have achieved much better results, but by forcing the issue, they effectively left Denmark and Jyllands-posten with only the choice of either standing their ground or else submit entirely to populist muslim interests. Since the latter was no a genuine option in a democratic country, the situation escalated, and consequently the controversial cartoons has received far more exposure and interest... Which is just sad.

[Jediphile]

Also, could you explain how me calling you naive in your viewpoint about the presence of ignorance and disrespect in democratic debate is a "blow" to my self-respect? 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I found it quite... ironic (the lesser offensive word) that you call for tolerance and then admonish against ignorant and disrespectful comments in the same post.

 

It seems contradictory to me, given that what someone is almost always certain to take exception to something someone else says..

 

Don't get me wrong - ignorant and disrespectful comments are not fun neither to read nor to hear, but you cannot get rid of them without getting rid of democratic debate, as per the Churchill quote I mentioned above.

[Rosbjerg]

If you spit on people and kick them in the balls you can generally expect that they will be rightfully angry with you.

 

Muslims have a right to free expression too.

 

So now you get to live with it.

 

Stop whining about the consequences of your offensive displays of material designed to be offensive to Muslims.

 

Danes have no done their work against Muslims. Time for them to move on and take pride in their ability to offend Jews and Catholics and other groups too.

 

After reading the attitudes of Danes in this thread and elsewhere I'm going to join the boycot myself. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Every Dane is responsible? I don't hold every muslim accountable for the actions of a few? but you do? seems like you are the ignorant one..

 

I fully understand their anger, but I don't tolerate threats or demands that we surrender liberties or other constitutional rights..

 

Jyllandsposten was in their right to do what they did.. it was incredible stupid and narrowminded however, but why should every single Dane be held responsible and threatned for that?? And why should our goverment be held responisble?

start a debate, pull the paper to court, but never never resort to threats of violence or death - that is stupidity and won't generate anything but recentment right back at you...

 

Denmark has become increasingly extreme in it's political opinion towards foreginers.. and this (plus misinformation in our country) doesn't help the problem.. we are still some who believe Denmark would benefit greatly from a continued immigration, but we are viewed as soft and idealistic these days .. and why? because the population is now more afraid than ever of

Edited February 1, 2006 by Rosbjerg

[Lucius]

Well I guess that's where you and I differ Ros. I am one of those that you're not particularly proud off, and so are most of my friends. ^_^

 

Note, we're not some band of S

Edited February 1, 2006 by Lucius

[Dark Moth]

I found it quite... ironic (the lesser offensive word) that you call for tolerance and then admonish against ignorant and disrespectful comments in the same post.

 

It seems contradictory to me, given that what someone is almost always certain to take exception to something someone else says..

 

Don't get me wrong - ignorant and disrespectful comments are not fun neither to read nor to hear, but you cannot get rid of them without getting rid of democratic debate, as per the Churchill quote I mentioned above.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Coming from you, I find that comment rather amusing. And ironic.

Edited February 1, 2006 by Mothman

[Lucius]

That's good Mothie, it makes me happy that you are happy

 

But I on the other hand find it ironic that you for once defend Islam, when you so often have told us how warlike it is.

[Jediphile]

I found it quite... ironic (the lesser offensive word) that you call for tolerance and then admonish against ignorant and disrespectful comments in the same post.

 

It seems contradictory to me, given that what someone is almost always certain to take exception to something someone else says..

 

Don't get me wrong - ignorant and disrespectful comments are not fun neither to read nor to hear, but you cannot get rid of them without getting rid of democratic debate, as per the Churchill quote I mentioned above.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Coming from you, I find that comment rather amusing. And ironic.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes, with that comment I can see how you are undoubtedly more mature than I am...

 

I stand corrected.

[Dark Moth]

That's good Mothie, it makes me happy that you are happy 

 

But I on the other hand find it ironic that you for once defend Islam, when you so often have told us how warlike it is. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I just find it amusing how he criticizes the same things he's guilty of. The same one who thinks religion is responsible for WWII and has been the cause of most wars throughout history.

 

As for Islam, that's my intepretation of it, coming from its scriptures, its primary prophet, and its history. But at the same time I realize others may interpret it differently. And it is a faith shared by millions of people, most of whom aren't terrorists, so I try to keep my comments at least a little respectful.

Edited February 1, 2006 by Mothman

[Lucius]

...most of whom aren't terrorists, so I try to keep my comments at least a little respectful.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't think anyone here, or in the actual crisis, have called them that. But I know what you're getting at.

Edited February 1, 2006 by Lucius

[Jediphile]

That's good Mothie, it makes me happy that you are happy 

 

But I on the other hand find it ironic that you for once defend Islam, when you so often have told us how warlike it is. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I just find it amusing how he criticizes the same things he's guilty of. The same one who thinks religion is responsible for WWII and has been the cause of most wars throughout history.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

This is the sort of misrepresentation that I really should report to the moderator as per the rules, except that I don't believe in moderated boards in general.

 

It's true that I believe religion is the cause of most wars and that I said so.

 

It is not true that I said it was the cause the WWII, however. I just said that religion was an issue that Hitler misconstrued to his advantage in order to escalate the conflict in the direction he desired.

 

And it's incredible that you call for tolerance and yet change the subject to be about me and even bring out posts where I alone am the subject of your criticism on a personal level. That means you wrote a post which was solely a personal attack against me alone.

 

This topic is called "Muslim anger towards Scandinavia...". It is not called "Troll and flame ad libitum against Jediphile". I am not nearly interesting enough to warrant my topic or even personal posts on these boards. After all, they say that opinions are like as*holes - everybody's got one and they all stink. This does not exclude mine. Opinions are not right or wrong, they just are. To discuss them is fine. To use them to flame against the people who expressed them is not.

 

However, since I do not wish to troll, I shall refrain from responding in a similar manner.

 

As for Islam, that's my intepretation of it, coming from its scriptures, its primary prophet, and its history.  But at the same time I realize others may interpret it differently.  And it is a faith shared by millions of people, most of whom aren't terrorists, so I try to keep my comments at least a little respectful.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Agreed, but muslims aren't the only people in the world. There are those of us, including myself, for whom concepts like liberty, democracy, freedom and the right to free speech are just as important as islam are the muslims, yet nobody seems to respect our "faith". Respect goes both ways.

[Nartwak]

Go ahead and report it. Don't let little things like that "misrepresentation" is not against any of the guidelines at all stop you.

 

Wait, were you going for the holier than thou, higher road thing; or the persecuted whining narcist thing? You're sort of going both ways.

[SteveThaiBinh]

I see the editor of France Soir has lost his job for reproducing these cartoons in his newspaper.

 

Look like this row isn't dying down any time soon.

[Surreptishus]

At this point is reprinting the cartoons in defence of free speech or does it in effect just goad a minority population in Europe?

[Meshugger]

Bah, the whole situation is silly. Muslims around the world should know better than whining about some local newspaper in a distant country. Mocking any religion is one of the major traits of western, secular societies.

[Dark Moth]

This is the sort of misrepresentation that I really should report to the moderator as per the rules, except that I don't believe in moderated boards in general.

 

It's true that I believe religion is the cause of most wars and that I said so.

 

It is not true that I said it was the cause the WWII, however. I just said that religion was an issue that Hitler misconstrued to his advantage in order to escalate the conflict in the direction he desired.

 

And it's incredible that you call for tolerance and yet change the subject to be about me and even bring out posts where I alone am the subject of your criticism on a personal level. That means you wrote a post which was solely a personal attack against me alone.

 

This topic is called "Muslim anger towards Scandinavia...". It is not called "Troll and flame ad libitum against Jediphile". I am not nearly interesting enough to warrant my topic or even personal posts on these boards. After all, they say that opinions are like as*holes - everybody's got one and they all stink. This does not exclude mine. Opinions are not right or wrong, they just are. To discuss them is fine. To use them to flame against the people who expressed them is not.

 

However, since I do not wish to troll, I shall refrain from responding in a similar manner.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You didn't report me? Too bad. Even if it wasn't against guidelines.

 

To borrow Meta's phrase, I call it like I see it. Opinions usually aren't right or wrong, but in this case yours is, because religion hasn't been the cause of most wars. That's a fact. If you can say something like that, and I know this is harsh, then you really don't know what you're talking about. You're just making things up to justify your own prejudice. You even said yourself you'd think it'd be a good idea to remove all religious expression.

 

In fact, being the major reason for war and death throughout history, religious expression in public space is probably the first thing we should ban on that list...

 

Except I don't generally support laws that dictate what people can or cannot express either...  <_<

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

What are we supposed to gather from that? And as for your statements about Hitler, here, I'll quote it for you.

 

...For example, WW2 has ties to a confrontation between the jewish faith and Hitler's interpretation of christianity. Now, I know you'll say that Hitler's philosophies are not very christian and I agree with that, but the point is that religion was still an issue that served as a convenient pretense for pursuing the jews. If religion had not been an issue, it would have been more difficult for the nazis to do what they did.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Even what you said is wrong, because Hitler did not use religion to persuade the Germans to his cause. He only targetted a religious group - it is not the same thing. In fact, he used nationalism to invoke his cuase, not religion. And even without the Jews taken into account, WWII still would have occured. Hitler's top priority wasn't killing the Jews, it was building Germany into a world power. The Jews were just a convenient scapegoat he found to blame Germany's problems. But rest assured, he would have found another even if they weren't taken into consideration.

 

Anyway, then when someone criticizes you for your statements, you turn things around and try to make yourself look like the victim. Grow up. Learn to take criticism without trying to make the criticizer look like a bully. Never did I flame you, or troll. And yes, I am calling for tolerance, tolerance from mindsets such as yours, which is why I targetted you in the first place. That's all I'll say for now, since I don't wish to have this thread locked.

Edited February 2, 2006 by Mothman

[moreKOTORplz]

just pull a france and say you'll nuke them.................. ohhhhhh right you guys don't have an army i forgot sorry bout that, well you can always whoop some arab ass in footie ball at the world cup would that cheer you up?

[Lucius]

just pull a france and say you'll nuke them..................  ohhhhhh right you guys don't have an army i forgot sorry bout that, well you can always whoop some arab ass in footie ball at the world cup    would that cheer you up?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

We do have an army, only most European armies don't have a nuclear arsenal, not that using it would in any way be wise at all.

 

Perhaps you should stick to more KOTOR and less WORLD.

Edited February 2, 2006 by Lucius

[Jediphile]

To borrow Meta's phrase, I call it like I see it.  Opinions usually aren't right or wrong, but in this case yours is, because religion hasn't been the cause of most wars.  That's a fact.  If you can say something like that, and I know this is harsh, then you really don't know what you're talking about.  You're just making things up to justify your own prejudice.  You even said yourself you'd think it'd be a good idea to remove all religious expression. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Interesting. Especially given that I have actually tried to cite examples to support my position. Unlike you, I might add. But then I guess you just know so much better than me that you don't to worry about little things like supporting your position with the very facts you mention.

 

You also fail to distinguish between my opinion and myself. Don't feel too bad, though - sadly, it happens rather more frequently than I should like to admit, which makes the chance of a civil discussion astronomically small...

 

In fact, being the major reason for war and death throughout history, religious expression in public space is probably the first thing we should ban on that list...

 

Except I don't generally support laws that dictate what people can or cannot express either...  <_<

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

What are we supposed to gather from that?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That I can't very well argue in favor of open discussion where any opinion should be heard while I run to the moderators when I don't like something that someone else says. If I did that, then I would be a hypocrit. But then I'm sure someone will twist that to mean that I am anyway... Based on this topic, my opinion of some members of these boards did not so much drop as plummet.

 

And as for your statements about Hitler, here, I'll quote it for you. 

 

...For example, WW2 has ties to a confrontation between the jewish faith and Hitler's interpretation of christianity. Now, I know you'll say that Hitler's philosophies are not very christian and I agree with that, but the point is that religion was still an issue that served as a convenient pretense for pursuing the jews. If religion had not been an issue, it would have been more difficult for the nazis to do what they did.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Thank you. It should be quite clear from the phrase "religion was still an issue that served as a convenient pretense for pursuing the jews" that I did not say religion was the cause of the entire war. That is the only rational conclusion. The use of the word "pretense" is rather clear.

 

Even what you said is wrong, because Hitler did not use religion to persuade the Germans to his cause.  He only targetted a religious group - it is not the same thing. In fact, he used nationalism to invoke his cuase, not religion. And even without the Jews taken into account, WWII still would have occured.  Hitler's top priority wasn't killing the Jews, it was building Germany into a world power.  The Jews were just a convenient scapegoat he found to blame Germany's problems.  But rest assured, he would have found another even if they weren't taken into consideration. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

And of all the possiblities, religion was the focus of the - to use your own words - "convenient scapegoat" he chose to polarize the germans against an "foreign" threat.

 

To me that says rather a lot about religion, but feel free to draw your own conclusions. Just consider my point before you dismiss it, please.

 

Anyway, then when someone criticizes you for your statements, you turn things around and try to make yourself look like the victim.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Criticizing my statements is the not same as criticizing me. You made comments like "coming from you" and similar. Those do not refer to my arguments or statements by to me as an individual.

 

Grow up.  Learn to take criticism without trying to make the criticizer look like a bully. Never did I flame you, or troll. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I am grown up. I have not become angry or voiced attacks against you. I have discussed the topic and called you on it when you strayed from it.

 

But I will continue to demonstrate that you are a bully as long as you give me cause and as long as I feel like it... So whether I continue is really up to you - if you stop giving me cause, then I cannot and will not continue.

 

And yes, I am calling for tolerance, tolerance from mindsets such as yours, which is why I targetted you in the first place. That's all I'll say for now, since I don't wish to have this thread locked.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'm more tolerant than you give me credit for. But when someone attacks the right to free speech, I do take it very seriously, as it is far more important to me than any religion. I didn't like the cartoons and didn't see their purpose, so I thought printing them was a mistake, but if someone says the newspaper can't print them, then I'll stand 100% behind the newspaper, because nobody should censor the press. Similarly, I may not like it when you misrepresent and criticize me, but I'll support your right to do so.

[Jediphile]

Go ahead and report it. Don't let little things like that "misrepresentation" is not against any of the guidelines at all stop you.

 

Wait, were you going for the holier than thou, higher road thing; or the persecuted whining narcist thing? You're sort of going both ways.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>