julianw Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 This situation...is stupid. Any goverment or represental body of a country has anything to with a private newspaper in another country. It's good to see that everyone at this board has the general concensus that the Arabic countries are overreacting. If there's anyone who thinks that Denmark owes the muslim community an apology and a shutdown of the newspaper, then YOU HAVE NO MORAL AUTHORITY TO BASE YOUR ARGUMENT UNLESS YOU DISAPROVE THE FREEDOM OF PRESS. Case. F*cking. Closed. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Freedom of press cannot cross the line of morality. The violent reactions from angry Muslims are certainly condemnable but that doesn't make the act of insulting other people's prophets any more justifiable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cantousent Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 Yeah, but people go out of their way to insult specific religions or religion in general all the time. The question isn't whether the cartoon was distasteful. The question is whether the paper has the right to print the cartoon. ...And if you bow down to Muslim anger on this issue, you've got a lot of other religions to placate as well. There are two arguments here. The first revolves on the nature of the cartoon. Was it distasteful? Was it wrongminded? Should we condemn it? I think all three statements are reasonable. The second revolves around the right of the paper to print the article. Should the government forbid the cartoon or censure the paper? The answer is a resounding "NO!" Fionavar's Holliday Wishes to all members of our online community: Happy Holidays Join the revelry at the Obsidian Plays channel:Obsidian Plays Remembering tarna, Phosphor, Metadigital, and Visceris. Drink mead heartily in the halls of Valhalla, my friends! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
julianw Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 And if you bow down to Muslim anger on this issue, you've got a lot of other religions to placate as well. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Perhaps it would be good for religious communities to purchase the rights to the images of their prophets and then they could pursue legal actions when they are being misused. No? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cantousent Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 comedy. Still, someone would carricature the image anyhow. Fionavar's Holliday Wishes to all members of our online community: Happy Holidays Join the revelry at the Obsidian Plays channel:Obsidian Plays Remembering tarna, Phosphor, Metadigital, and Visceris. Drink mead heartily in the halls of Valhalla, my friends! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucius Posted February 3, 2006 Author Share Posted February 3, 2006 Just read this BBC article, and saw a debate they had on a show called Nightwatch (I think?) it's somewhat interesting if you want the the whole thing summed up nicely. Linky - The video is top right corner. That's all for now, laters. DENMARK! It appears that I have not yet found a sig to replace the one about me not being banned... interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkreku Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 Thankfully, there are no more virgins Except for 90% of the guys on this forum.. Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorth Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 Thankfully, there are no more virgins Except for 90% of the guys on this forum.. Somebody is going to be very surprised when they discover the nature of the promised 72 virgins... :D On the subject actually discussed. I just saw the two videos of one of the resident socalled Imams. The one showing what he told the danish population what he was going to say to the muslim viewers and the one from Al Jazeera (I think thats the one) what he actually said. Abu Laban the Goat Humper is apparantly a lying son of a bitch and nobody probably wonders anymore why people are upset, if thats the crap that has been spouting when his associates were touring the muslim countries gathering support for their personal outrage at the publication of the pictures. I wonder how much it would take to get traitors like that expelled in other countries ? “He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meshugger Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 This situation...is stupid. Any goverment or represental body of a country has anything to with a private newspaper in another country. It's good to see that everyone at this board has the general concensus that the Arabic countries are overreacting. If there's anyone who thinks that Denmark owes the muslim community an apology and a shutdown of the newspaper, then YOU HAVE NO MORAL AUTHORITY TO BASE YOUR ARGUMENT UNLESS YOU DISAPROVE THE FREEDOM OF PRESS. Case. F*cking. Closed. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Freedom of press cannot cross the line of morality. The violent reactions from angry Muslims are certainly condemnable but that doesn't make the act of insulting other people's prophets any more justifiable. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That's a whole other issue. Being distasteful is not illegal, and for a good reason. "Some men see things as they are and say why?""I dream things that never were and say why not?"- George Bernard Shaw"Hope in reality is the worst of all evils because it prolongs the torments of man."- Friedrich Nietzsche "The amount of energy necessary to refute bull**** is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it." - Some guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
213374U Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 (edited) The first revolves on the nature of the cartoon. Was it distasteful? Was it wrongminded? Should we condemn it? I think all three statements are reasonable. Well, then do reason them. I think the answer to all three is "no". I am not an atheist, but I have a deeply seated hate for organized religion. For me, nothing is sacred, at least as far as ideas are concerned. I don't see why one should make distinctions based on what some people's notions are of what is "sacred", seeing how "holiness" and the like are unjustifiable by any seriously substantial means. I can't say for sure, but I doubt those cartoons' intended target audience was the muslim community, anyway. I see my beliefs being ridiculed on the newspapers on a regular basis. Some of them are pretty damn funny, too. And I don't go starting up all kinds of trouble because of that. Again, I don't see why we should keep some ideas free from criticism, even if it's from a humoristic standpoint, just because they are thousands of years old, and wrapped in mysticism and historical inaccuracy. In fact, I find it sadly ironical. The fact that we are even pondering these questions is sad proof as to the weak moral state we live in, now. Or maybe not, as we will go as far as re-examining the validity of such strongly rooted ideas such as freedom of speech and press, and weight them against... what? Tradition, ignorance, and intolerance. Again, the irony. Edited February 3, 2006 by 213374U - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jediphile Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 Not sure if this was posted before, but in the interest of enlightenment, you can see the controversive cartoons on wikepedia - make your own judgment from that. Visit my KotOR blog at Deadly Forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
213374U Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 Not sure if this was posted before, but in the interest of enlightenment, you can see the controversive cartoons on wikepedia - make your own judgment from that. Heh. This page has been temporarily protected from editing to deal with vandalism. It's the first time I see this kind of notice over there. Quite revealing. - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astr0creep Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 Not sure if this was posted before, but in the interest of enlightenment, you can see the controversive cartoons on wikepedia - make your own judgment from that. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> All this for that? No wonder the world is 'effed up. People get offended way too easily. http://entertainmentandbeyond.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucius Posted February 3, 2006 Author Share Posted February 3, 2006 Aye. The really nasty ones (or so I've heard they were) that our dear residing Imam Abu Laban used were not printed in any of our news papers. Funny that the name of this traitor, "laban", actually means "bully" in Danish. DENMARK! It appears that I have not yet found a sig to replace the one about me not being banned... interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaftan Barlast Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 I just thought of something very strange, the original article appeared in Jyllandsposten in SEPTEMBER 2005 but the actual blowback doesnt come until now. DISCLAIMER: Do not take what I write seriously unless it is clearly and in no uncertain terms, declared by me to be meant in a serious and non-humoristic manner. If there is no clear indication, asume the post is written in jest. This notification is meant very seriously and its purpouse is to avoid misunderstandings and the consequences thereof. Furthermore; I can not be held accountable for anything I write on these forums since the idea of taking serious responsability for my unserious actions, is an oxymoron in itself. Important: as the following sentence contains many naughty words I warn you not to read it under any circumstances; botty, knickers, wee, erogenous zone, psychiatrist, clitoris, stockings, bosom, poetry reading, dentist, fellatio and the department of agriculture. "I suppose outright stupidity and complete lack of taste could also be considered points of view. " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atreides Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 Aye. The really nasty ones (or so I've heard they were) that our dear residing Imam Abu Laban used were not printed in any of our news papers. Funny that the name of this traitor, "laban", actually means "bully" in Danish. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What did the dude do? Spreading beauty with my katana. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucius Posted February 3, 2006 Author Share Posted February 3, 2006 (edited) Him and some other residing Imams toured the middle east with the drawings (and some nasty fake ones) spreading misinformation to upset the people against us... and then they come back here to live in our welfare state again. The government is now looking into if is possible to have them thrown out at a later time, when things have cooled down. Edited February 3, 2006 by Lucius DENMARK! It appears that I have not yet found a sig to replace the one about me not being banned... interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astr0creep Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 Him and some other residing Imams toured the middle east with the drawings (and some nasty fake ones) spreading misinformation to upset the people against us... and then they come back here to live in our welfare state again. The government is now looking into if is possible to have them thrown out at a later time, when things have cooled down. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Oh no! That means they will come to Canada! http://entertainmentandbeyond.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jediphile Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 I just thought of something very strange, the original article appeared in Jyllandsposten in SEPTEMBER 2005 but the actual blowback doesnt come until now. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Some muslims from Denmark have been touring the arab nations looking for support in their rage over this. The fact that a norwegian magazine also chose to publish the drawings only a few weeks ago seems to have pushed the issue. Visit my KotOR blog at Deadly Forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kumquatq3 Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 I have read just about 0% of the posts in this thread, so if this point was made, ignore me: They are mad that Muhammad was depicted and especially mad that he was depicted with a bomb on his head. They feel, and understandably so, that the image depicts all Muslims are terrorists. So how do they respond? Death threats, telling Europe to "learn a lesson from 9/11", storming embassies, Palestinian gunmen briefly kidnapping a German citizen, protesters in Pakistan chanting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jorian Drake Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 I have read just about 0% of the posts in this thread, so if this point was made, ignore me: They are mad that Muhammad was depicted and especially mad that he was depicted with a bomb on his head. They feel, and understandably so, that the image depicts all Muslims are terrorists. So how do they respond? Death threats, telling Europe to "learn a lesson from 9/11", storming embassies, Palestinian gunmen briefly kidnapping a German citizen, protesters in Pakistan chanting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astr0creep Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 I say burn all the flags! Let us dance around the planet as one big happy frakkin' family! http://entertainmentandbeyond.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laozi Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 Well, I'm glad to see that the Muslim agenda and mine are back inline. Perhaps now we can set aside our differences and lay waste to some "pasties". People laugh when I say that I think a jellyfish is one of the most beautiful things in the world. What they don't understand is, I mean a jellyfish with long, blond hair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jorian Drake Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 I say burn all the flags! Let us dance around the planet as one big happy frakkin' family! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Be said: If we do this they just make new ones, thats the way of Human Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
213374U Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 They are mad that Muhammad was depicted and especially mad that he was depicted with a bomb on his head. They feel, and understandably so, that the image depicts all Muslims are terrorists. I don't think that's the idea behind that particular caricature. I'm more inclined to believe it's a way of hinting the form in which some have chosen to interpret the prophet's message, and therefore, depicting Islamic terrorism as Muhammad's brainchild, in a twisted way. Remember, this is all after the paper already apologised and it is still, in fact, a drawing that caused this. A sad mistake, if you ask me. - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kumquatq3 Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 They are mad that Muhammad was depicted and especially mad that he was depicted with a bomb on his head. They feel, and understandably so, that the image depicts all Muslims are terrorists. I don't think that's the idea behind that particular caricature. I'm more inclined to believe it's a way of hinting the form in which some have chosen to interpret the prophet's message, and therefore, depicting Islamic terrorism as Muhammad's brainchild, in a twisted way. I did say "they feel". Without an explanation, the image can very easily be taken in that light. A sad mistake, if you ask me. agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.jpg.ce846aae50e732dc4985eb712252381f.jpg)
Recommended Posts