Seaver

Well someone had to start a rational discussion about this. I'm a Middle Eastern Studies major, so I'm well aware about the statements disallowing depictions of Allah or the Prophet. This is what is reported to have been the main issue with the riots (even America being blamed because we apparently "lead" Denmark).

This reporting, however, is like most media atm just simply ignorant. There are HUNDREDS of paintings of Muhammad, most of them steamming from the regions most angered (Iran/Afghanistan/Pakistan).

I'm quite honestly upset at everyone involved. The newspapers that printed it should have known better, they should stand up, apologize, and fire the editor who approved it. The man who sent it to Sudan/Iran/etc should take responsibility for the deaths that have/will result. The muslims rioting should try to learn more about their own history of depictions of Muhammad and his teachings of tolerance. And finally the media reporting on it SHOULD point out the fact that muslims have a LONG history of depicting the Prophet in paintings.

Personally, after studying Islam and the Middle East for 4 years I'm constantly baffled at the level of self-ignorance or level of anger about certain topics.

Destroying the house Muhammad grew up in to build a parking lot? O.K.
Depicting Muhammad for over a thousand years? O.K.
Inventing or adopting the Harem? O.K. even for the holy 5 Caliphs
Governments that kill hundreds of thousands of their own people... so long as they oppose the U.S.? O.K.
Using 12 year old boys to clear landmines by walking in a straight line? More than O.K., it's a holy act

However...
Finding out that a Muslim extreamist tore up a copy of the Qur'an to plug up a toilet then crap on it? Death to America
Reading a cartoon satyrizing what Islam has turned into? Death to Denmark... then America

Anyone else finding themselves losing sympathy at an increasingly rapid pace to both Islam in general and especially the Media who are afraid to point it out?

**Disclaimer: I'm not anti-Islamic. I'm against what it is increasingly becoming, which is a religion that appreciates death to life and murder of civilians to anything described in the Qur'an or other Holy Texts.**

Charlatan

To my eyes a reasonably balanced view of this situation. I agree. None of this smells good and I highly doubt anything good will come of all this.

EDIT: I agree with it up to this part: While I am frustrated with the actions of many in Islam I see this more as a problem with orthodoxy in general. Anyone who is so inflexible in their views is a problem... those who take their inflexibility to the next level and try to impose it on others are even worse.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Mojo_PeiPei

Yeah I might take this too far, but all this bullshit has only further driven home to me that Islam is not this peaceful religion that people are always trying to say, I'm not one for splitting hairs. It is a hypocritical religion that is centuries behind in political and social concepts, as such I see relations between the Christian/secular West and the increasing radical Muslim East deteriorating further. Long live the Caliphate!

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

Charlatan

mojo could not the same thing be said about Christianity in the past?

I posted this as a questions elsewhere, but perhaps Islam is going through the same sort of growing pains that the Catholic church faced many years ago.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Locobot

I am firmly in support of free speech and the right for these cartoons to be published as much as I might disagree with their content or message. It's important to understand that this controversy has been caused by Muslim leaders seeking to rile their followers. The protests and violence had insured that many millions (probably billions) more people have seen these cartoons.

I too am dismayed by our media who have largely shyed away from actually displaying the cartoons. It is situations like this where our freedoms of press and speech are most important.

Perhaps Islam and Western culture are ultimately incompatible. It seems that many muslim nations envy our freedoms and rights but they must understand that they're interconnected and taken as a whole not piecemeal.

It's interesting that this controversy erupted a week after U.S. rightwing extremists, who so often occupy the same ideological ground as middle-east extremists, erupted into furor over a cartoon in the Washington Post. Although the attack on the freedom of the press was analogous, the fallout was quite a contrast. The rightwing threatened boycotts, which ultimately should prove more successful than violence.

I have respect for Condoleeza Rice for coming out and condemning middle-east leaders who are using this controversy to incite hatred and violence. Aside from her however I've seen our leaders and media exposed as cowards succumbing to violent threats.

nezmot

It's not about Islam, it's about extremists, and a tendency for the media to focus on the person currently shouting the loudest.

I personally know lots of very reasonable and rational practicing Muslims, who are as equally shocked, surprised and horrified as anyone else at the current level of fervour and attention that the lunatic fringe are capable of generating. It's politics - not religion. That people in power (i.e. the priests) can take advantage of their people by whipping them up into such incredible acts of demonstration is worrying - almost as worrying as the media's ability to convince many in the west that this is what Muslims do on a regular basis. Please don't allow yourselves to be manipulated by the priests, and please don't let yourselves be manipulated by the media barons - each has their own agenda, and it suits them all for us to close our eyes and start stereotyping.

The buck stops with you.

Charlatan

How does choosing *not* to show these images squash freedom of the press. The press continues to have every right to show them. Nobody has removed that right from them. They have chosen *not* to show the images.

To use the old saw: you don't shout fire in a movie theatre when there isn't a fire. It amounts to reckless mischief.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Dragonlich

Seaver, why should the newspaper apologize and fire the editor? Because Muslims are upset? Screw that. It's a Danish newspaper; it's published in a secular, democratic, NON-MUSLIM country. If Muslims don't like it, so be it. tough luck. I'm not willing to give up my rights just to please a bunch of extremists.

...but perhaps my feelings over this are a bit distorted; after all, I live in the Netherlands, where a film maker/columnist (Theo van Gogh) was murdered by a Muslim for "insulting Islam". So much for mutual respect...

Locobot

Well of course the media doesn't have to show the cartoons, but clearly now that it's a major news story I think it's irresponsible journalism to not show the source of the controversy to allow people to make their own judgement, especially considering how tame some of the cartoons are. The one of the artist sheilding his drawing is actually quite interesting and thought-provoking. "Stop stop we ran out of virgins" that's hilarious. The media is enabling the freedom of speech to be squashed by succumbing to threats of violence.

Charlatan

The issue isn't that they posted the images, it's that they posted them to see if it would provoke a response. It was irresponsible (if well within their rights) to publish the images.

Personally, I would have considerably less of a problem with them publishing them if it wasn't *just* to provoke a response.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

ubertuber

I think Charlatan and I are of the same mind here. Not considering legal issues, it is disingenuous for a paper to print these cartoons and act surprised by the reaction. Whether you agree with the intensity of the feelings at play here, I think a reasonable individual could have predicted a strong outrage.

On the subject of the response of the Islamic community, it is irresponsible to write their feelings off as the equivilant of "road rage" or the rantings of bloodthirsty savages. I think you have to consider that what we're seeing may be the reaction of people who feel they have no other outlet to get their concerns addressed. Those concerns range from the depiction of Muslims in the media to the bewildering array of political representation (and non-representation) happening in the Arabic world to Israel-Palestine to the lack of constructive opportunities for improving their quality of life. This is pent-up rage from people who feel they have been marginalized with no outlet for release, and it is expressing itself in a controversy over religious icons.

I have felt for some time that building bridges for people to engage their own societies and ours more effectively will go a long way towards reducing the political variants of extremism. Isolation has exacerbated this problem and will continue to do so. Even if you hate "terrorists", you should recognize that many (no, not all) of them come from people that have little hope of attention or import through other methods. Of those that come from greater means, many capitalize on the pent-up feelings of the masses.

I'm not trying to excuse blatantly violent or anti-civilizational behavior, but a view that doesn't consider "terrorism" as an expression of something is 2 dimensional at best.

__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam

Ustwo

I'm not sure why you just can't say where the real problem is and instead try to spread the blame around and speak in moral realvistic terms.

Orthodoxy is not a problem in itself.

The Amish have been rather peaceful if I recall.

The Greek Orthodox haven't made a peep in quite a while.

Fundamentalist Christians may state their opinions and vote with those ideas. The abortion clinic bombings were an aberration and the last murder was over 10 years ago. Since abortion was made legal in the united states there have been 7 murders directly tied to it. Hardly an 'impressive' showing for a group that numbers in the millions in the US alone and would point to the violence as being due to a very small minority.

Can't recall the last attack by a Mormon.

Well we could go on, but it is the culture, inspired in part by a religion that does not oppose violence to those who do not submit to the will of Allah, which we will be forced to fight. If Orthodoxy was the problem we should be having these wars and conflicts all over the place, but we don't.

Have Christians and Buddhists, and Shintoist, and Pagans, etc done bad things in the past? Sure, but who cares, this is the worlds current problem, this is what must be dealt with now, and the stakes are as high as they ever were. This is the same war we have been fighting since the first Arab invasions of the West and India starting around 600 C.E. The West seems to get ‘blamed’ for the Crusades, yet who invaded who first? We have changed, they have not.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

highthief

What I find amusing/disturbing/alarming/fucked up is that many of people protesting haven't seen the cartoons. Some imam told them to go shout "Death to Denmark! Death to America! Death the Jews and Infidels!" and they do it like little robots.

The editor of Afghanistan's largest paper, where the deadliest protests and incidents have occured, says the pictures have not been published in any paper in the country. And it's not like there's a lot of laptops or wifi in Afghanistan these days.

__________________
Si vis pacem parabellum.

Mojo_PeiPei

Two things.

First you answered your own question with your key word being "past", please don't spin this issue with Christian culpability.

Two look at the historical context of the world at the time when Christianity perpetuated said grievances. It was a completely differently world, different politics, different norms, different everything. Night and Day, has absolutely zero bearing on today.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

nezmot

Ustwo, who exactly are you talking about? Shall I start mistrusting the people I work with? Are they plotting my fiery death at the hands of a suicide attack?

No.

Please don't spread any more of this ridiculous paranoia.

Yes there are extremists. Yes there is wrong in the world. But please be careful not to tar entire populations with your paranoid racist brush. Islam does not promote violence - powerful people within Islam in certain areas however do.

And this is complete nonsense too. Just ask yourself how many invasions there have been in the last, say, 5 years...

Psycho Dad

But couldn't the media's reluctance to publish what many see as a newsworthy item (the pictures all this comotion is about) be seen by some as self-censoring? Certainly publishing the pictures in a manner to incite uproar is wrong, but a fear to publish them due to a political backlash is a problem to.

__________________
Don't always trust the opinions of experts.

The_Jazz

Here's my $0.02, for what it matters - the rest of the world is much more historically-minded than the US. We think, wait, why do I care if that guy's great grandfather invaded my country before I was born? The rest of the world remembers the slight. For the last 150 years or so, we've expected imigrants to check their baggage at the door and be good Americans. A lot of strife is gone, and you don't see too many Armenians taking potshots at Turks here, although that happens in the Middle East all the time. Pakistanis and Indians actually get along fairly well here, although there are occassional problems, just like the English and the Irish get along here for the most part.

However, if you look at the home countries the groups are at each others throats constantly. A lot of Middle Easterners still are offended by the Crusades while most Americans couldn't care less. After all, we aren't the ones that did it, just like we aren't the ones that held slaves (although some of our ancestors did). One of the basic differences between here and there is a long cultural memory. It affects basic perceptions of the world and helps create the persecution complex that a lot of Middle Eastern Muslims seem to have.

Ustwo

When the government, religion, press, and schools condone certain activities, is it the 'population' or is it just the 'extremists'?

Are only 'extremists' protesting over cartoons?

Are only 'extremists' meeting in Iran for a holocost denial convention?

How many people does it take for the 'extreme' to become 'the norm'?

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

asaris

It is interesting, I think, to compare the reaction of the press with respect to this recent controversy to the reaction of the press when something anti-Christian is published or shown as art. The first reaction seems to be "Well, freedom of the press etc., but it was irresponsible to print the cartoons...." The second reaction was "Look at those Christians up in arms...don't they believe in freedom of expression?" Perhaps the difference is that the 'up in arms' in the second statement is metaphorical...

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

The_Jazz

I think that its more that they don't want to be perceived as offending their Muslim viewers/readers. Why would you purposefully offend one of your demographics, especially if you're the mainstream media? There's footage out there of American soldiers with limbs blown off in the middle of street battles in Iraq, but the media doesn't show that because they don't want to offend the supporters of the war or people with good taste (although those two are not mutually exclusive). They don't show it because it would cause a backlash and be bad for business. The same thing applies in the cartoon situation. Why antagonize people purposefully if it could easily come back to bite you in the ass? They get to take the high road and look good to everyone.

nezmot

On the whole, I would answer yes to most of these questions. With some provisos.

If religious figures become involved in politics, the results can be dangerous. The population wouldn't give a damn about a Danish magazine if they hadn't been whipped up into a mob by religious leaders.

Iran (for example) is a split country half secular and half religious. There is a power struggle going on there, with the religious establishment having an awful lot to loose - both at home and abroad. It is in the religious leader's interests to stoke up the population against a foreign enemy, in the same way that it is in a partisan politician's interest to do the same thing here in the west.

Here in England, there are many 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th generation muslim immigrants who just can't understand the whole episode at the moment. The general consensus is that all the recent activity is politically motivated by power-hungry mullahs.

It's sad that people can be so easily manipulated.

Seaver

The newspaper should apologize because it directly led to a boycott which is crippling the Danish economy. If people lose their jobs, companies go under, and cutbacks are caused because less government income... you dont think the editor should apologize or be fired?

trickyy

this is very true. the blame has been placed on the cartoons instead of the rabble rousers. the whole issue is reduced to a "clash of civilizations" instead of any semblance of thoughtful analysis. muslim-american groups did lend a good voice to this discussion, but often they seemed more upset with the newspaper editors than the riot instigators. absolutely, and it took long enough. the initial statement by the State Dept was quite weak (perhaps out of concern for violence against our embassies/military around the world).

furthermore, it is intersting that most of this country is still too scared to print those very newsworthy images. it is an overreaction that makes the images somewhat mythical. these images are so central to this event it is weird not to publish any of them. look at the first one. how is that offensive, racist, blasphemous? i think the american public deserves to see what the commotion was about, and they will probalby utter a collective "you mean that's it?"well, the newspaper did apologize. i agree with you, though, and it's kind of an empty apology because of all the craziness that happened first. the paper did what it could to prevent further violence. the imam in Denmark also wanted an apology from the Danish president. that's ridiculous. (i really hate the analogies that are being thrown around, but i have to do it.) so far i haven't heard an apology from george bush for tom toles' recent work.

Charlatan

Perhaps you should have read to the end of my statement.

Yes, most who are orthodox in their thinking do not lash out. Doesn't change the fact that I think they are wrong-headed.

The second part, that you seem to have over-looked, is that those who would impose their orthodox views upon other are a larger problem.

In other words, I agree with your assesment (in general) that the culture of that part of the world lends itself to bringing on these sorts of protest and these sorts of responses.

Where I tend to disagree with you is in your universal condemnation that completely ignores the millions who do not engage in these horrible practices.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Charlatan

I am not attempting any spin... the fact that you believe so suggest you are looking for something that isn't there or I wasn't careful enough in my wording.

What I am trying to examine the evolution of a religion. I am musing aloud, not saying anything definitive.

What I am asking is: Is it possible that Islam is actually in crisis? That is going through growing pains? I don't know the answers, I do know that at one time, idolitry wasn't allowed in Christianity and culture in general was largely ruled with an iron fist by the preisthood.

Yes the world is a different place today for you sitting comfortably in your middle class America. How different is it in the slums of Lahore or Jakarta where they do not enjoy the freedoms and luxuries you take for granted.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Charlatan

It all depends on how you view it. On one hand you can see it as self-censorship -- information *must* be shared, we need to see it.

On the other hand, you can recognize that perhaps it's simply (at this point) in bad taste and perhaps uneccessarily inciting violence.


I am certain that every editor likely struggled long and hard with these issues.


The other thing that everyone seems to completely ignore is that you can find these images quite easily on the Internet. The editors know this and it makes their decision to not publish easier.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Mojo_PeiPei

I guess Allah afforded me a good lot, doesn't mean that these clowns can act like dinks over a few pictures, nor does it mean that I should have to accept it because some people like the color grey and can't call a spade a spade.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

Charlatan

I really suspect that you can't read.

I have yet to see anyone defend the violent protesters on this board (if I am wrong please show me where).

These people have every right to protest. Just as the papers have every right to publish the pictures. What I don't agree with is violent protest. I also don't agree that the Danish publication was using their right to freedom of expression/speech/press responsibly (the editor ran the picture with the purpose of seeing if it would draw a reaction -- that's irresponsible). Furthermore, as Seaver pointed out the Immams that took their pamphlets to the middle east to stir up more shit, and the goverments and Immams in the Middle East that have amplified their actions are also problematice.

What you see as a love of the colour grey is an attempt to look at this stupid moment in history with somthing other than the myopic gaze you seem to prefer.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Marvelous Marv

I saw someone on the news put it this way:

"You say we're a violent religion? I'll kill you for that!"

__________________
"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."
Margaret Thatcher

Marvelous Marv

Along those lines, if the rest of the world allows themselves to be forced into submission on this issue, what will be next? Will the consumption of pork in a country be grounds for violent attacks?

__________________
"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."
Margaret Thatcher

martinguerre

Uh...there are parts of N. AZ and Utah where government workers go at the risk of death. One of my friends works dispatch down at the canyon, and has told me about the Mormon separatists, not part of the official LDS church....and their rather violent history with the law enforcement in the area.

There are rhetorics that justify killing. Western Capitolist ones, Nationalist ones, Islamic ones, Christian ones...

There are rhetorics that justify killing, and there are two kinds that matter.

The kinds you argree with, and the kinds you don't.

__________________
For God so loved creation, that God sent God's only Son that whosoever believed should not perish, but have everlasting life.

-John 3:16

Ustwo

There are lots of places I wouldn't want to go for any number of reasons, and I'd rather be stuck with mormon seperatists than gang members.

I'm a bit surprised that you continue with the moral relativism. Yes we will have fanatics in the US, in Christians, in even tolerant religions like Hinduism but after posts of yours like this I'm surprised you can't see that its one thing for some individuals to be violent and intolerant, but its another thing when a population moves in that direction. We on the right call them Islamofacists for a reason, the pattern is the same.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Nancy

__________________
I have all the characteristics of a human being: blood, flesh, skin, hair; but not a single, clear, identifiable emotion, except for greed and disgust. Something horrible is happening inside of me and I don't know why. My nightly bloodlust has overflown into my days. I feel lethal, on the verge of frenzy.
I think my mask of sanity is about to slip.

Nancy

"Dutch attitudes toward Muslims immediately and dramatically hardened. A poll found 40% of the population wanting the nearly million-strong Muslim community no longer to feel at home in the Netherlands". I wonder if our attitude towards Muslims will harden that drastically as well.

__________________
I have all the characteristics of a human being: blood, flesh, skin, hair; but not a single, clear, identifiable emotion, except for greed and disgust. Something horrible is happening inside of me and I don't know why. My nightly bloodlust has overflown into my days. I feel lethal, on the verge of frenzy.
I think my mask of sanity is about to slip.

martinguerre

It's odd that you use the idea of relativism.

There are rhetorics that support killing, and some of them i agree with, and some of them i don't.

And I suspect that my ideas make about as much sense to a terrorist as theirs do to me.

__________________
For God so loved creation, that God sent God's only Son that whosoever believed should not perish, but have everlasting life.

-John 3:16

Ustwo

Yes but they wish to have you killed, do you wish to do the same to them?

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

ubertuber

Actually, the Mormon church of the mid-late 19th century is a ridiculously similar situation to current Islamic extremists. (I didn't even think of this until martineguerre's post.) There were public, bloody murders of outsiders who ventured into Mormon territory. There was a belief that Mormonism was a holy way that the entire world would have to accept, even at the sword. There were terrorist acts, insurgents, and military escalation. In fact, in 1857, the US Army was sent to Utah to invade Salt Lake City and depose someone who was seen as a blood-thirsty dictator. Then they tried to set up a democracy for people who didn't want it.

Also interesting is the fact that the military and other aggressive pressure only made the situation worse and the militants more violent. In the end, it was a legislative solution that included significant carrots that brought Utah back into the fold. As you know, today Utah is a wonderful state filled with wonderful people - a great place to visit. Some of our most influential politicians come from there.

This may have taken place 100-150 years ago, but the dynamics are so similar that it is kind of chilling. I'm taking it is a sign that engagement, incentive and understanding can bring reconciliation.

I'd write more, but I don't expect anyone to take this point seriously. Given that, please forgive me for summarizing.

If you don't believe what I've just written, look up:
The Nauvoo Legion
The Doctrine of Blood Atonement
The Utah War (1857-1858)
Mountain Meadows Massacre
George Q. Cannon
Woodruff's Manifesto (1890)
Brigham Young

__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam

Charlatan

ubertuber... I was not aware of that part of American history. Facinating.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

nezmot

Bang. There's your history repeating itself right there.

WillyPete

Add to it the fact that Missouri only repealed their law allowing the literal extermination of Mormon's in 1976.

Fact: until 1976 it was legal to shoot one on sight.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extermination_Order_(Mormonism)

Also ironic is the fact that some devout muslims who wish their kids receive a US college education look favourably upon Brigham Young university as the university's honour code is compatible with the better parts of Sharia law, with regard to alcohol, drugs, tobacco and abstinence from sex out of wedlock.

US history aside, a lot of you constantly remind us that there are a lot of 'progressive' or 'moderate' muslims in the world.
However, we could also say that the holohcaust was led by a relatively small number of German/Austrian extremists.

One of my favourite films "Boondock Saints" uses the line:
"Now, we must all fear evil men. But there is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men."

This is my fear, that the good muslims remain indifferent, as the good Germans once did.

If you think the muslim population in whatever country you reside in reacted badly and went unchallenged by your government, what do you think will happen should an Islamic state like Pakistan or Iran detonate or supply materials for a nuclear or dirty bomb in Isreal and the 3 Western Security council members retaliate in kind?
Will mob rule start to dictate the moral and security policy of your nation?