Muslim anger towards Scandinavia...

[Nartwak]

I agree with you Commissar. I don't have a problem with the meaning of your statement, I just considered its expression overly heavy-handed and rhetorical.

Edited January 31, 2006 by Nartwak

[Lucius]

It is kinda strange, though, that people walk around in T-shirts with the letters "CCCP" or the soviet icon and noone really cares, but a swastika is banned.

 

I personally think both should be banned, both were murderous regimes responsible for the death of millions.

 

And lets not forget Che with his red star beret, the front of many a young wannabe rebel's T-shirt, a revolutionary to be sure, but still a violent man involved in killings.

Edited January 31, 2006 by Lucius

[Atreides]

The Che phenomenon is fascinating. There's tons of people wearing it and I don't think that most of them fully understand what he was about, besides some basic notion that he was a "rebel".

[astr0creep]

It is kinda strange, though, that people walk around in T-shirts with the letters "CCCP" or the soviet icon and noone really cares, but a swastika is banned.

 

I personally think both should be banned, both were murderous regimes responsible for the death of millions.

 

And lets not forget Che with his red star beret, the front of many a young wannabe rebel's T-shirt, a revolutionary to be sure, but still a violent man involved in killings.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The Soviet Union and Che did not kill X million Jews. Also, it was the Russians who stopped the Nazis, not the US.

 

If i am mistaken, please beat me up with your words, I am masochistic of the literally.

[Lucius]

The Soviet Union killed 20 million people of its own population...

And Che oversaw executions after the Reds took Cuba, he also assisted a rampaging rebel African clan who were quite ruthless if I remember correctly. (I'll try to find more if you really need convincing that Che wasn't a good guy )

 

BTW. The two main offices of the newspaper were evacuated today due to bomb threats.

Edited January 31, 2006 by Lucius

[Lucius]

Even someone as life threateningly pessimistic as you must admit that it isn't particularly funny to have someone call you and threaten to kill you. <_<

[Rosbjerg]

The worst part of it is that some imams living here in Denmark are sending false information down to fanatic religious groups, which in turn fuels this conflict (and it is a conflict now)... Now people think Muslims are being harrased and we are burning Korans on a daily basis..A few groups have even declared a Fathwa on Denmark and danish forces in Iraq .. although I'm sure some already existed!

but rumors are running rampant on both sides via textmessages.. which makes average S

Edited January 31, 2006 by Rosbjerg

[Lucius]

You're right Rosbjerg, I read some of the same stuff as you have.

 

Also at work today me and two guys were discussing the issue, and lemme tell ya these guys are angry, if election day was tomorrow DF would zoom past yet another party in parliament in terms of voter base.

[Colrom]

Here is a report that may also be relevant:

 

We must show our opposition to Islam, says Danish queen

By Hannah Cleaver in Berlin

(Filed: 15/04/2005)

 

Queen Margrethe II of Denmark has called on the country "to show our opposition to Islam", regardless of the opprobium such a stance provokes abroad.

 

Her comments further undermined the image of Denmark as a liberal haven for those seeking a new life in northern Europe.

 

 

Queen Margrethe II

The Danish government has already been accused of fuelling xenophobia by introducing measures which effectively closed the country to asylum seekers.

 

But in overtly political passages from an official biography published yesterday Queen Margrethe makes comments certain to complicate her nation's relationship with Muslims.

 

She said: "We are being challenged by Islam these years - globally as well as locally. It is a challenge we have to take seriously. We have let this issue float about for too long because we are tolerant and lazy.

 

"We have to show our opposition to Islam and we have to, at times, run the risk of having unflattering labels placed on us because there are some things for which we should display no tolerance."

 

"And when we are tolerant, we must know whether it is because of convenience or conviction."

 

The Queen, who turns 65 tomorrow and has reigned since 1972, wields no political power but does occasionally comment on political issues.

 

Denmark has seriously limited immigration in the past three years and the anti-immigrant Danish People's Party, an ally of the centre-Right government, has pushed through laws making it harder to bring in foreign spouses or qualify for asylum.

 

The queen told her biographer, Annelise Bistrup, apparently referring to Muslim fundamentalists: "There is something impressive about people for whom religion imbues their existence, from dusk to dawn, from cradle to grave."

 

She said she understood how disaffected young Muslims might find refuge in religion. This tendency should be fought by encouraging Muslims to learn Danish so they could integrate better, she said.

 

"We should not be content with living next to each other. We should rather live together."

[Colrom]

And yet the Danish also did this:

 

"It's one of the great stories of World War II: In 1943, in German-occupied Denmark, the Danish people find out that all 7,500 Danish Jews are about to be rounded up and deported to German concentration camps. Danish citizens spontaneously make their own decision: it's not going to happen. And it didn't. Risking their own lives, the Danes quickly rallied round to save their fellow citizens, and almost all of the country's Jews were able to escape the clutches of the Nazis and find refuge in neutral Sweden."

Edited February 1, 2006 by Colrom

[Lucius]

I support our Queen in those statements, moreso now than ever back when they were uttered. She was of course not referring to the moderate muslims here, nor am I.

 

And I don't see what this WW2 story has to do with the topic. Us Danes living today have as little to do with rescuing jews, as present day Germans have at killing them.

 

Btw. y'all can see two of the drawings here.

 

And a French newspaper is printing the 12 drawings today, for reasons not exactly clear to me.

Edited February 1, 2006 by Lucius

[Kaftan Barlast]

And a French newspaper is printing the 12 drawings today, for reasons not exactly clear to me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

For the same reasons that they were printed in the first place, to raise a debate regarding religious censorship vs. freedom of press/speech.

 

 

This whole thing began when there was a childrens book about Islam about to be released but noone could find illustrators to draw the pictures in it because they were afraid of muslim vengeance because Islam prohibits depicting any deity or prophet. This were just supposed to have been regular illustrations, not pictures of Mohammed with a bomb-turban or similar.

 

 

So Jyllandsposten gathered several known artists who werent afraid and gave them the task of drawing very provocing pictures of Mohammed in an attempt to strike back at this self-censorship that was going on because people were afraid of being the next Salman Rushdie. That, and to draw attention to the problem that fundamentalists in the middle-east threaten the freedom of press in the west.

 

 

It was a gone-wrong attempt to say that if Islam will not repsect the freedom of press and speech in Denmark, we will not respect Islams laws.

[Darth Launch]

So Jyllandsposten gathered several known artists who werent afraid and gave them the task of drawing very provocing pictures of Mohammed in an attempt to strike back at this self-censorship that was going on because people were afraid of being the next Salman Rushdie. That, and to draw attention to the problem that fundamentalists in the middle-east threaten the freedom of press in the west.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm not directing this at you specifically Mr. Barlast, but I'm quite surprised that people continue to consider this as a whole "freedom of press" thing... there's never been true freedom of press anywhere... I'm sure that there are those educated and clever enough on this forum to be aware of that... media was created as a tool of propaganda... you're only ever going to hear what someone wants you to hear about... be it your government or religious leaders... of course, that doesn't mean I agree with the over-reacting extremists or bomb threats... I'm just sick of reading a lot of ignorant and disrespectful comments

[Colrom]

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.

[Deraldin]

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}>

 

There is a difference between expressing dissatisfaction with the cartoonists/paper that created these pictures and threatening them with death/terrorist attacks. <_<

Edited February 1, 2006 by Deraldin

[Jediphile]

So Jyllandsposten gathered several known artists who werent afraid and gave them the task of drawing very provocing pictures of Mohammed in an attempt to strike back at this self-censorship that was going on because people were afraid of being the next Salman Rushdie. That, and to draw attention to the problem that fundamentalists in the middle-east threaten the freedom of press in the west.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm not directing this at you specifically Mr. Barlast, but I'm quite surprised that people continue to consider this as a whole "freedom of press" thing... there's never been true freedom of press anywhere... I'm sure that there are those educated and clever enough on this forum to be aware of that... media was created as a tool of propaganda... you're only ever going to hear what someone wants you to hear about... be it your government or religious leaders... of course, that doesn't mean I agree with the over-reacting extremists or bomb threats... I'm just sick of reading a lot of ignorant and disrespectful comments

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

No, you're wrong if you cast all media into the same category on that basis. Sure there are media who do nothing but publish propaganda, and naturally you will read only what some people want you to. That's not the question, though. The question is who gets to decide what is published, and in the newspapers that is scarcely the politicians or religious leaders. I very much doubt that the politicians of Denmark would have supported these cartoons, because while they might not have realised this kind of outrage, they would certainly have seen little to gain from the either. And besides, if you were right, we would see very few domestic publications that criticize the leaders of the various countries, and that is just not the case - indeed, the leading politicians are far more under fire than the politicians who are not in government. A press of propaganda would not be critical of the politicians, and the press criticizes the politicians all the time.

 

I don't really like reading or hearing ignorant or disrespectful comments either, but it does raise debate that is essential to the continued existence of a healthy democracy, which means that everybody gets to express their opinions no matter how ignorant or disrespectful they are. And personally I think that is the way it should be. It may not always be pretty, but it's better than the alternatives in my book. Or as Churchill once put it, "democracy is the worst form of government except for all the other forms that have been tried from time to time." Deal with it.

[Jediphile]

And a French newspaper is printing the 12 drawings today, for reasons not exactly clear to me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

For the same reasons that they were printed in the first place, to raise a debate regarding religious censorship vs. freedom of press/speech.

 

 

This whole thing began when there was a childrens book about Islam about to be released but noone could find illustrators to draw the pictures in it because they were afraid of muslim vengeance because Islam prohibits depicting any deity or prophet. This were just supposed to have been regular illustrations, not pictures of Mohammed with a bomb-turban or similar.

 

 

So Jyllandsposten gathered several known artists who werent afraid and gave them the task of drawing very provocing pictures of Mohammed in an attempt to strike back at this self-censorship that was going on because people were afraid of being the next Salman Rushdie. That, and to draw attention to the problem that fundamentalists in the middle-east threaten the freedom of press in the west.

 

 

It was a gone-wrong attempt to say that if Islam will not repsect the freedom of press and speech in Denmark, we will not respect Islams laws.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It's not quite the same. Jyllands-posten published the cartoons as an illustration of self-sensorship (as you say), but which pertained mainly to a problem that was more of a domestic or western nature, since they didn't think the free press of the west should censor itself on a basis of what fundamentalist followers of islam did or did not like.

 

The french "France Soir" and some german newspapers have reprinted the cartoons today, because they felt it was inappropriate that the public was not informed about what had caused this problem.

 

So Jyllandsposten did it more for domestic reasons, while the newspapers today do it out of more international interests.

 

To the muslims it probably won't make much difference, though. It'll be interesting to see what happens now - whether the conflict escalates to anger against France and Germany also. I feel sorry for Sweden, though - they have nothing to do with this (whereas a newspaper in Norway did reprint the cartoons some time ago), and yet they are cast in with Denmark regardless. In my book that speaks volumes about the people behind the boycot

[mkreku]

Actually, swedish press reported yesterday that the islam fundamentalist groups have retracted their threats against Sweden, saying it was a mistake to threaten us.

 

I really hope some swedish newspaper is brave enough to print those pictures as well.

[Kaftan Barlast]

THIS JUST IN:

 

 

Apart from the french France Soir, the following european newspapers are now also publishing the drawings; Die Welt(ger), Corriere della Serra(ita), La Stampa and El Periodico(esp)

 

 

Reasons vary from showing support of The Danish Jyllandsposten to simply giving their readers a chance to see what all the fuss is about.

[Lucius]

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}>

Well at least we know whose side you're on, feel free to boycott whatever the hell you like, join in on the laughable flag burning too. Laughable because they couldn't even find real flags to burn, they had to draw some new ones.

[Darth Launch]

No, you're wrong if you cast all media into the same category on that basis. Sure there are media who do nothing but publish propaganda, and naturally you will read only what some people want you to. That's not the question, though. The question is who gets to decide what is published, and in the newspapers that is scarcely the politicians or religious leaders. I very much doubt that the politicians of Denmark would have supported these cartoons, because while they might not have realised this kind of outrage, they would certainly have seen little to gain from the either. And besides, if you were right, we would see very few domestic publications that criticize the leaders of the various countries, and that is just not the case - indeed, the leading politicians are far more under fire than the politicians who are not in government. A press of propaganda would not be critical of the politicians, and the press criticizes the politicians all the time.

 

I don't really like reading or hearing ignorant or disrespectful comments either, but it does raise debate that is essential to the continued existence of a healthy democracy, which means that everybody gets to express their opinions no matter how ignorant or disrespectful they are. And personally I think that is the way it should be. It may not always be pretty, but it's better than the alternatives in my book. Or as Churchill once put it, "democracy is the worst form of government except for all the other forms that have been tried from time to time." Deal with it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually, I'm not wrong... I've read multiple research papers on such things... and conducted research on it myself... propaganda only seems to have become more sophisticated and more widespread... but I'm not going to argue around in circles about that nor is what this is about...

 

Ignorance and disrespect does not raise debate... it hinders it if anything... and you're naive to believe otherwise... and please don't patronise me with "Deal with it."

 

The only thing I was wrong about was deciding to read this thread...

[Lucius]

THIS JUST IN:

 

 

Apart from the french France Soir, the following european newspapers are now also publishing the drawings; Die Welt(ger), Corriere della Serra(ita), La Stampa and El Periodico(esp)

 

 

Reasons vary from showing support of The Danish Jyllandsposten to simply giving their readers a chance to see what all the fuss is about.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Add Holland and Iceland to that list.

[Kaftan Barlast]

THIS JUST IN:

 

 

Apart from the french France Soir, the following european newspapers are now also publishing the drawings; Die Welt(ger), Corriere della Serra(ita), La Stampa and El Periodico(esp)

 

 

Reasons vary from showing support of The Danish Jyllandsposten to simply giving their readers a chance to see what all the fuss is about.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Add Holland and Iceland to that list.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

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)

[Lucius]

THIS JUST IN:

 

 

Apart from the french France Soir, the following european newspapers are now also publishing the drawings; Die Welt(ger), Corriere della Serra(ita), La Stampa and El Periodico(esp)

 

 

Reasons vary from showing support of The Danish Jyllandsposten to simply giving their readers a chance to see what all the fuss is about.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Add Holland and Iceland to that list.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

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}>

That would be interesting, I think that would piss off the French and Germans more than us, yeah? :D

[Jediphile]

Actually, I'm not wrong... I've read multiple research papers on such things... and conducted research on it myself... propaganda only seems to have become more sophisticated and more widespread... but I'm not going to argue around in circles about that nor is what this is about...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

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

 

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).

 

Ignorance and disrespect does not raise debate... it hinders it if anything... and you're naive to believe otherwise... and please don't patronise me with "Deal with it." 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

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?

 

The only thing I was wrong about was deciding to read this thread...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

What a well-articulated point...