Army Guy

Betsy: Are you now saying that the all Muslims within Canada are not doing this. Because some of them are not, and have threaten violence, but have not acted on it as of yet. But then again this is not really about those living here is it. Betsy before you pass judgement on me read those links i've provided, Again i am not NOT asking anyone to tweak or modify any of our current freedoms. And then tell me if you still think that your current freedoms as broad as you think they are. That your freedom of speech allows you to say what ever you want when ever you want. As am I, but my sympathy lies in what is right or wrong, not with "the other group" and yes i believe they think "Moderate muslims" have been terribly insulted. And i am not calling for any of your freedoms to be modifed to met anyones approval. We do have laws in existance now that limit our freedoms, and they are not as broad as you or argus believe they are "to which you've not proven yet". So educate me prove to me that our basic freedoms have no limitations to them The root of the problem is that the radical muslims who represent a small portion of the muslim population have pissed all of us off, and now we are punishing or blaming all the muslim population for thier actions. That is what i find wrong, that cartoon could have said every thing we wanted to say if it had depicted bin laden. But i guess i'm the only one that sees that.

Below are a few links that show some restrictions to our current freedoms, there are plenty more but "you" can research them. I do not not know which over ride what as i'm not a lawyer. Once again i'm am not advocating anything just informing you that your freedoms are not as broad as you seem to think. My Webpage 12. It is a discriminatory practice to publish or display before the public or to cause to be published or displayed before the public any notice, sign, symbol, emblem or other representation that (a) expresses or implies discrimination or an intention to discriminate, or ( incites or is calculated to incite others to discriminate if the discrimination expressed or implied, intended to be expressed or implied or incited or calculated to be incited would otherwise, if engaged in, be a discriminatory practice described in any of sections 5 to 11 or in section 14. 1976-77, c. 33, s. 12; 1980-81-82-83, c. 143, s. 6. Hate messages 13. (1) It is a discriminatory practice for a person or a group of persons acting in concert to communicate telephonically or to cause to be so communicated, repeatedly, in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking within the legislative authority of Parliament, any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that that person or those persons are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination. Interpretation (2) For greater certainty, subsection (1) applies in respect of a matter that is communicated by means of a computer or a group of interconnected or related computers, including the Internet, or any similar means of communication, but does not apply in respect of a matter that is communicated in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a broadcasting undertaking. Interpretation (3) For the purposes of this section, no owner or operator of a telecommunication undertaking communicates or causes to be communicated any matter described in subsection (1) by reason only that the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking owned or operated by that person are used by other persons for the transmission of that matter. DND's definition of harassment. 1.3 Definitions Harassment is any improper conduct by an individual that is directed at and offensive to another person or persons and which the individual knew or ought reasonably to have known would cause offence or harm. It comprises any objectionable act, comment or display that demeans, belittles or causes personal humiliation or embarrassment, or any act of intimidation or threat. It includes harassment within the meaning of the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA). My Webpage Criminal Code s. 181 181. Every one who wilfully publishes a statement, tale or news that he knows is false and that causes or is likely to cause injury or mischief to a public interest is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years. Freedom of Expression and Violence: Separating Form from Content Expression can include words, acts, gestures, and pictures. Section 2( of the charter, a guarantee of freedom of expression, protects all communications which convey or attempt to convey meaning including, it appears, violent meaning. But when the physical form by which the communication is made is violent, it is not protected by section 2(. For instance, advocating violence against Country X in a newspaper article would be protected. But throwing a rock through the window of Country X's embassy would not be protected. Both actions convey similar meaning, but the actual form of the second communication is violent. My Webpage What can i say Argus, your the man, is this your way of proving that Canadians need to insult people to make thier piont. Does this mean your more Canadian than i am, guess so . I must have hit a nerve and pissed in your corn flakes. I can see you have a high opinion of those that serve this country. So your basing your judgement on a entire group, because you know a few people. Let me ask you this have you served in the Military, have you study the current military, do you have anything to do with the military, wait a minute your not a ex liberal defense minister are you. So really what you are saying is your basing your opinion on "you know a few people" and here say. And what is it that you do that allows you to sit in your perch and pass judgement on entire groups, "other than work for NASA" and what kind of educational back ground do you have that puts you above the grade. Why don't you post some facts or a few links backing up your claim. Ya you've convinced me, i always start out with comments like yours, and then end it with i do respect the military. Give me a break, But then again we could say the same about most trades, jobs, or postions within this country could we not. Thier views on the world may not be up to your lofty standards, but those kids have seen war and it's effects first hand, and i would value there opinons on those topics more than a self proclaimed armchair critic. But then again i don't judge entire groups on the actions of a few. Perhaps you can show me just where in the post below did i indicate "anyone" who believes in freedom of speech is a redneck. "First of all infantry are the ultimate rednecks and always have been," you basing this one what actual experiance or just here say. The is always a red neck in the crowd who firmly believes it is his or her god given right to say what ever comes to mind without consquence and to hide behind "it is our freedom of speech" it's always these people who demand these freedoms be defended at the cost of someone elses life. "defend me or get another job" Like i told betsy get down to the recruiting centers they got lots of boots your size I think you've been reading to much of Scott Taylor's material, perhaps you could produce a link or two to back up your claim.

Wilber: You'll have to excuse me wilber, i'm a moron, with little education. I've read your site and yes those pictures are insulting. but then again that is what you expected me to say was it not. And if we were on the play ground where trading names or insults was exceptable then i could see your piont. However we are not, we are supposed to be responsible adults. Do you think we are justified to sink to thier level and start trading insults in our media...what next do we start burning buildings ,killing people. Perhaps we as a nation could respond to those moderates in such a way that is not insulting. So that they may try to take action to get thier extremist under control. or atleast distance themselfs from thier actions. Instead we have chosen to insult them all ensuring that further violence happens or driving the moderates into thinking that "we" the west are no better, and perhaps violence is the right way to solve this.

Argus: Close, what i said is our freedoms have restrictions and limitations already in law here in Canada. And that we can still discuss any topic without insulting an entire group,race or culture of people by using common sense and still preserve our freedoms. Perhaps you can show me in print where our freedoms of speech actually quote that we are free to insult or say anything we wish, when ever we wish, and that we are not to be held accountable.

Argus: Perhaps you should do some research on the topic first, those laws are already in place they are already restricting your freedoms. And when did i ever imply or say i wanted more of these laws. or are you just making this up as you go along. We do have many more laws, already here in Canada. and again i am not advocating more laws. Lets make something clear, you don't pay me period.... Because if you did, that would make "you" my employer, and "you" would be responsable for ensuring we had the right equipment for the job. and that "you" would have a say in where i was employed. And the government could not call it's army out on it's citizens because "they" would be our employers. What can i say Argus, your the man, is this your way of proving that Canadians need to insult people to make thier piont. Does this mean your more Canadian than i am, guess so . I must have hit a nerve and pissed in your corn flakes. I can see you have a high opinion of those that serve this country. well it's true that we all do not work at NASA as you do. But as the CDS has said DND is made up of the best this country has to offer. Sorry you did'nt make the cut. I have not asked you to bow down before me, and yes i have claimed to have served in Afgan, Sniveling i thought we were discussing something. but then again my opinion differs from yours so i must be sniveling. Perhaps you can take a few miniutes out of your day and show a moron just were it is printed that you have all these rights that you claim, that they are not restricted as you claim. that you or the media are not accountable for what you or they say. Because i have researched it and have found that they are restricted. but then again i'm just a moron and i could have missed something. and i thought you said i wanted you to bow before me, I did not suggest bowing before anyone or cringing away from confrontation. but rather picking my battles and using a little common sense. I don't recall saying i did make any decisions.

Betsy: What are you trying to say that you and the others can not discuss a topic with out showing a little respect or common sense. That you need to insult someone or a group to make a piont. That Canadains are not capable of having a normal conversation or expressing thier ideas without insults. And then try to hide behind freedom of speech. What are the demanding? other than for us to show them some respect, no more than what is shown other europeans. It was the european muslims that after all that showed restraint and express thier concern and told the press that the cartoons were insulting without violence. And how where they rewarded, we came back and insulted them again, and then told them it was our right to. You want someone to blame , Blame the radicals to the entire religion. I've re-read all the posts on this topic, show me were i've told you to shut-up., that i did not want to hear your opinions. Where do you get all this from, i have never said that i was judging or deciding for everyone. Or for that matter did i ever say i wanted to eliminate any of your freedoms. Perhaps you can show me on any of my posts that your getting this info from. Those freedoms you keep refering to are already clipped and already have limations, i did not put those limitations there our government did. like it or not it is already written in stone. so stop shooting the messager and do some research yourselfs. Are you saying that we as Canadains cannot express ourselfs without insulting anyone. that we must now insult everyone to protect our freedoms. That this entire story had to be told, that it had to be told with those cartoons, there was no other way.

Wilber: I'm curious Wilber what crap would that be. have you even read the posts i've been printing or are you just jumping on someones band wagon.

Betsy: That was not the question, Are you willing to put your life in danger because of a cartoon. Whether we say anything or not does not matter. And what i'm saying is it does matter, as the extremist are using this cartoon for thier benifit as well, for an excuse to act out again'st western interests, and to further thier recruitment. If that is what you think i'm doing your wrong, How am i appeasing anyone, by saying it is wrong to insult an entire religion. And is that what you think i'm doing trying to guarantee my safety. Have you been to Afgan, there is no safety anywhere. How do you get the impresion that i'm scared. i've told you already that i've been in these situations 8 times todate and am training for another. If i was truely "SCARED" i think once would have been enough, even say i was alittle slow 3 or 4 times would have been enough. but 8 times give me a break. Personally i don't care what you call the extremists or taliban,as i have called them a few chioce names myself. but that is not what was done here instead we insulted the entire Muslim religion. Billions of people over the actions of what a couple million tops. we've balled them all together and branded them with the same iron. F--k them all, lets piss them all off, who cares....It concerns me that i may have to escort a dead Canadian soldier back to Canada over a cartoon. scared NO, pissed off yes. The Taliban don't take prisoners for very long nor do they spare anyone, Nato soldiers are all viewed the same, we are western infidel dogs to be shown no mercy. And yet knowing that we (the western world ) agree to show them and abide by the laws of conflict and the laws set out in Canada. So while we are trying to win hearts and minds of the locals, our media at the same time are saying to the same locals we don't care about your religion we p*ss on it freely because of our freedoms. something they(the locals) know nothing about. And all i'm asking is some common sense to be used, apparently thats to much to ask.And if we can not use our common sense and respect, how do we except to convince other nations to follow our lead and example.

Hicksey: By "They" you mean the extremist muslim, because the moderate muslims in Denmark had already informed the media that they did in fact find it offensive the day after it was printed. So we already established the media already knew that this cartoon was offensive. Months later it, the extremist muslims get a hold of it, and creates another outburst, riots etc...the west response is to print it again and again. This time they print it knowing full well it was offensive. I'm confused here are you saying "these people" meaning "ALL Muslims" are using violence to solve thier problems, and what of the Muslims in the US or Canada, have they used violence to solve thier problems. But because they fall under one religion we have branded them with the same iron. Because what i am saying is "All muslims" find these cartoons offensive, not just the bad ones but the good ones as well. And has the Canadian or US muslims peaceful requests shown progress, has it stopped the presses from printing those cartoons. So your comment of "Once they show us they can solve their problems using diplomacy instead of homocide bombers and destruction of property, then maybe they deserve to be shown the respect that we afford the rest of the world." HOLDS NO WATER DOES IT. I've re read all the posts find me one that makes excuses for the Behavior of the Radical Muslims. It's been stated in many posts that there is no excuses for thier behavior...What you are doing is making excuses for the media for not using common sense or repect. Because i think it is wrong to blame an entire religion on the actions of a few extremists ,now i branded an apologist. would we be having this conversations if you were to insert the words Black man,jew,white Canadian into those spaces occupied by Muslim. Would it be all right if we published an extremily offensive cartoons about these guys...

Argus: No your right it's not based on religion, Muslims attack the christains, christians attack the muslims, it just a concidence that they are of the same religion. It's also a concidence that they only killed the opposite religion. And if you actually had been following the story it was inspired by those stupid cartoons, but that will not matter in a few weeks will it, because they will be killing each other to get even tit for tat. and the only ones that will know is us, the ones that printed the cartoons. Ya your right it has nevered worked, then perhaps you can inform the crowd here on why we have censorship, why i can bring you to court over something you have said or written because i find it offending. why we have laws on racism, hate, etc,etc. When in reality your freedom of speech already has limitations to it. and is passed into law. Are you protesting those laws is this what all this is about. Or are just again'st using common sense or respect. and are unable to communicate without offending anyone. The is always a red neck in the crowd who firmly believes it is his or her god given right to say what ever comes to mind without consquence and to hide behind "it is our freedom of speech" it's always these people who demand these freedoms be defended at the cost of someone elses life. "defend me or get another job" Like i told betsy get down to the recruiting centers they got lots of boots your size. I and many others in uniform think our lifes are worth more than a cartoon. If your not happy with the current scope of the War on terrorism write your MP, explain to him that you want it to include all radical muslims everywhere so that you will not feel threaten, or scared when you decide to call them what ever comes to your mind. Hey while your at it, lets include anyone that takes offense to your remarks and may punch you in the lips because you can not use common sense or respect. Your freedoms are restricted, and it is in Law in Canada. perhaps you can provide us a sample of current Canadian law that states you can say or express what ever you wish, when ever you wish. And yes, you can provide it is used with common sense and respect.

Betsy: Yes lets talk about reprisals for a minute. If we had used our common sense and shown alittle respect in the first place there would not have been any need for "reprisals" would there. Once reprisals start, they don't stop it's tit for tat, so again what price are we willing to pay to exericise our so called freedom of speech. So this is not about freedom of speech, it's about you being tired of threats and intimidations and down right terrorism, and this incident is just the straw that broke the camels back. And now your just waking-up, So where were you when the west slamed it's fist on the table and decided to declare WAR on terrorism. Yes it's easy to sit in your armchair and post "we are making a stand" we're tired of being pushed around. But what price are you willing to pay in making your stand, are you willing to pay with your life. Are you willing to die, are you willing to die over a cartoon. As for me boosting the moral of these terrorists, I'm sorry but where were you when i was patroling the hills of Kabul looking to put a round in one of those terrorist. i thought you looked familar, oh wait , nope i don't recogize the arm chair. You see i've been there, i know first hand what these people are capable of. These radical muslims don't need very much of an excuse to get worked into a frenzy. SO while your here back in Canada spouting of about your freedom of rights "we can print what the F**k we want, your actually helping them(the Terrorist) convince those moderate Muslims(non Terrorist) to join thier cause. So when the snow leaves the mountains in Afgan soon, all the work, all the death and destruction will be for nothing because thier ranks would have swelled in numbers because of you recruiting efforts. Because you wanted to print a few cartoons. So when a few army guys print those storys or inform you that we are not scared, but concerned over your actions, maybe would should have another look at what you are doing. Or maybe before you decide to broaden the conflict, that will produce more Canadian casualities you should take a more direct approach by going down to your local recruiting station and strapping on a pair of boots. because i could use some more company when i'm out there again in late 06.

Wiber: What is it your trying to say we should broaden the WAR on terrorism, to include all muslims, better yet why not include all those that do not see the world as we do.

Wilber: It was'nt aimed at just those radical muslims, it was aimed at all muslims and thier religion something they believe deeply in. These cartoons are proving to be just as deadly as any bomb planted by those radical muslims. And it is being used by both sides. By the west for profits and what some think as promoting "freedom of speech" and by the radicals to incite violence and recruitment. and until one side backs down it will continue to boil over. The question is ,is it all worth it? And if it is all worth it why wait why show control why show common sense and respect "thats for the weak" lets crank up the presses and pump this shit out every where lets really stir the pot, get them really worked up. or better yet screw the middle man lets just bomb something. Because it's all about our freedom to insult "sorry" our freedom of speech.

Is there not a double standard here, those bilingual postions were created in ont so that Canadians could be provided with services in both offical languages. Correct me if i'm wrong. but i thought this whole program of providing all government services in both languages was created so that ALL Canadians both french and english could be served in thier mother tongues. Is this a private Hospital, is it funded by any level of goverment?. Are those postions in that hospital Bilingual? sounds like a form of discrimination to me.

Betsy: I'm assuming your talking about Canadain christians and not the christians mention in the Below link. My Webpage So when this is all over ,and said and done they are going to be sitting down trying to figure out just all this got started. and recorded in history it will read that the begining of this conflict was started with the printing of a cartoon. yes ladies and gentlemen a cartoon. And The survivors will be sitting on top of a pile of dead buddies saying we showed them bastards did'nt we. Them muslim dinks, what a bunch of cry babies. burn my church down will ya. And we will be shouting from the roof tops, Martha grab me my shotgun were going hunting.

I hope he does commit to it, Not only will it be a great for moral of the troops, but he'll be able to see for himself the problems in Afgan and perhaps that will reflect in future decisions of Aid packages, re-constrution measures or even military equipment needed for the job. How that equates into war mongering i don't know. Whats wrong with shaking a few soldiers hands, and allow them to meet the man that holds thier furture in his hands. Or for that matter give him a better picture of whats going on in Afgan. Thats not war mongering just showing good leadership. As for security, aside from his JTF escort he'll have a good portion of those 2200 armed military personal securing the area, he'll be safer there than in is own living room. But then again nothing is 100 % secure is it.

Another view. My Webpage And who said there is no profit to be made from cartons. My Webpage

Betsy: No, they are not claiming to talk for the whole army, just themselfs. i did post the links in previous posts, but if your having troubles with the link feature here is the whole story below. I'm sure if you really tried you could find more. Story number one. RUSSELL D STORRING: Canadian soldiers and the cartoon controversy CBC News Viewpoint | February 14, 2006 | More from Russell D. Storring -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Russell Storring is a Master Corporal with the Canadian Army, and has been a signals operator for the 14 years he has been in the military. He recently returned from his second tour of duty in Afghanistan, having served there previously in 2003, and with the UN in Rwanda in 1994. His columns give a first-person account from the field and the life of a soldier. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Like many people in Canada and around the world, I have watched in horror and disbelief as Islamic riots are waged over the printing of cartoons of Muhammad. From Europe to the Middle East, Africa to Indonesia, thousands of protests have been staged; many becoming violent as Muslims denounce what they believe is the defamation of their Prophet Muhammad. In Afghanistan, upwards of ten people have been killed with scores injured (including NATO soldiers), as police battle unruly crowds in an effort to protect foreign embassies, personnel and NATO bases. The Taliban have gone so far as to place bounties of gold on the heads of the cartoonists and NATO soldiers from Denmark, Norway and Germany -- those they consider the chief offenders in this controversy. Having served two tours of duty in Afghanistan with the military, I have seen first hand how people often do not actually associate a flag with a nation. Rather, all western soldiers are viewed as exactly that – "western soldiers." Sure, once people had an opportunity to talk to us, they recognized that we were Canadian -- but the difference might be moot in a frenzied moment. When someone is looking for a target to hit, whether with an improvised explosive device, a suicide bomb, or something as simple as a well-aimed rock, they are looking for a "western soldier." Whoever generally matches their target ends up their prey. I had hoped that Canadians serving overseas would avoid most of the brunt of this cartoon controversy as mainstream Canadian media opted not to run the controversial cartoons. Everyday life can often be risky enough for our soldiers (at least in Afghanistan). I followed the flow of comments about freedom of the press, freedom of speech, freedom of expression and how western countries shouldn't be afraid of protesting or rioting Muslims; that it's our inherent right to print those cartoons. But I couldn't help noting that this slew of "freedoms" come from people who take for granted what our fathers and grandfathers paid for in blood, and what our own soldiers pay for today. Freedoms are something many people here in Canada and around the world take for granted; the minute someone perceives that those freedoms are being infringed upon, a whole movement begins that can quickly snowball out of control. I am a soldier that believes deeply in freedom, and by virtue of service for my country I have and am willing to put my life on the line for what my country believes in. With freedom of anything comes the responsibility to make sound decisions and common-sense choices. Deciding to not print those controversial cartoons has nothing to do with being cowed by fear of Islamic retribution; it has everything to do with respecting another person's beliefs and the common sense that Canadians have always been known for around the world. When we as soldiers move into another country, whether to keep or enforce the peace, we respect the fact that the host country is unique in its beliefs and culture. We try to leave the country (at some point) with minimal cultural impact. We respect their holidays and events; we go so far as to try not to eat or drink in front of Muslims during Ramadan out of respect for their culture, even while in our own camp. This has nothing to do with fear of offending them, but has to do with respect and our ability to live in a multi-cultural environment -- whether overseas or here in Canada. Some publishers here in Canada have used their "freedoms" to inflame an already volatile situation in order, they say, to make a point. If now, like so many European countries, our troops become targets over what boils down to so-called freedoms of press or expression, where will be the position of those Canadian publishers then? If one of our troops is killed as a target of "blasphemy," I highly doubt those publishers will thank the soldier's family for allowing their magazine to express their belief. Canada has always been a country of tolerance, a country of compassion and a country of moral standards. Now we risk all that for the sake of a few cartoons. I have my doubts that any media organization here in Canada would run a series of anti-Catholic cartoons that the Vatican felt were strongly offensive. By infringing on other people's freedoms of belief, religion or thought, as an expression of our own freedoms -- what have we accomplished? I truly hope that this isn't the kind of society that we are becoming. Story number two. Making it worse -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I completed a seven-month tour of duty in Afghanistan and we in the Western world are not well liked there. We are in enough danger as it is, and this little publicity stunt by the Western Standard is probably going to get more of our soldiers killed. The current threats our troops face on a daily basis in the new region, which is now in the middle of the Taliban and al-Qaeda resistance, is already enough risk without adding more fuel to the fire. If publisher Ezra Levant is so brave to publish the cartoons, why does he now need personal security? If this is just freedom of expression, why is he scared? I hope his stunt was worth it. Sgt. Stephen Piccolo, Edmonton How you got that out of what i said i don't know. But heres the mental picture i got some soldier being pulled out of a burning veh because some radical muslim decided to put an RPG round into the side of it. Because he's be inflamed by some cartoon. I'm sure his buddie who his busy stuffing his best friends guts back in his belly will feel better that you and the media are keeping up the fight back home. when it all started over some stupid cartoon. Here is a few links below, maybe it will paint another picture other than the one of a soldier pissing his pants. there are dozens more if you want them. My Webpage My Webpage My Webpage My Webpage

Argus: You have a piont, i'll give you that one, as i don't have that info and my comment was base on opinion. but it works both ways you've said they the media was united and standing -up for our freedom of speech, when in fact not every media outlet in Europe or for that matter in Denmark published those cartoons, so they are not united and not all of them believe it's a freedom of speech issue. At no time did have i said that any of our freedoms are not worth fighting over or preserving. And if you actually read the above quote it clearly suggests that our soldiers are not in Afgan for the money but because they believe in freedom and what they are doing in Afgan. Why don't you read those links i gave you they were written by soldiers who don't think that this "so called errosion of our freedoms" as you have suggested are worth the risk as they don't see it as a errosion but a media stunt to earn more dollars. As for me not thinking our freedoms are worth a nickel, thats your opinion. I have served this country for 26 years and am still serving ,I've have been on 8 tours of world shitholes. I've seen first hand the aftermath of caused by men fighting over freedoms.(real problems) So when i say that one Candian soldiers life is worth more than one damn cartoon or what some precieve as an errosion of our freedom of speech i think i know what i'm talking about. But hey thats my opinion, and thier like A$$holes everyone has got one. QUOTE(Army Guy @ Feb 22 2006, 11:49 AM) QUOTE I disagree that the European newspapers which published the cartoons were doing so in order to sell newspapers. I don't see the likelihood of major profits in this, and if there were, I think more would have done so. No, I believe that those few media outlets which saw the controversy, saw the attacks on the Danes, honestly wanted to stand up for freedom of the press, in solidarity with the Danes, and tell the Muslims that here in the West we believe in freedom of speech - so if you're going to attack the Danes, you're going to have to attack us all. The media is a business, like any business it is driven by profit. not some noble idea of keeping us informed, that is a by product. If the news does not sell papers it's not going to recieve the same coverage. That is too cheap and pat an answer. Yes, the media is a business. That does not mean that no one involved thinks of it as more than just a profit generating enterprise. Perhaps journalists and editors do not always do enough to live up to it, but there is a concept of journalistic bravery, integrity and freedom which many of them ascribe to. Is it a cheap and pat answer, i will agree that there are editors and journalist that do live up to those ideals you have discribe. and perhaps i've become jaded with my experiances with journalist in a war zone, who's only interest was getting the graphic story or pictures that sells papers. they want to see bodies not the re building of schools or hospitals. So common sense and respect play no role in thier decision, Just fear.

Argus: Actually, it is a very normal response to push back when you're being bullied So you agree that it is OK to say or print something offensive to someone or group when ever you want but when they throw a trantrum or take action again'st you, "you call them a bully." and you would consider it a normal response to push back. Sounds like something kids do on the play ground. It's not the actions of a grown-up or for that matter a media outlet who should be held to a higher standard than the rest of us normal citizens. I'm i really being self- righteous when i and other soldiers "you know the group of large armed men" have said that they do not appriaciate the added dangers that we will have to face because of some stupid cartoon. printed to provoke a response. Because the some of the media has not shown alittle common sense and respect. These are the same men and women who hold the line and defend your freedom of rights daily. And when these radical muslims actually do restrict any of your freedoms they will gladly take the fight to them no questions asked. Yes they were dying well before the cartoon broke out, but all those riots,killings that are happening right now that can be directly linked to the publishing of these cartoons directly have an impact on our Soldiers that are serving in Afgan right now. So ask a soldier serving over there now does he think all this grief is worth a few cartoons so some dick head can put a few more dollars in his pocket. We don't need to unnessicarily give these crack head radical muslims any more of an excuses to kill than they already have. What have these media god's done except re-publish the same cartoons for profits. Ya that 's it i've had enough of this shit re-publish the cartoons that will show them we are serious No i'm not frightened, more like very concerned that a Canadian soldier may have to pay with his life, because some stupid cartoon enraged some radical muslim, and i don't think that price would be worth a cartoon, just so we could prove a piont.

Betsy: So you agree that it is OK to say or print something offensive to someone or group when ever you want but when they throw a trantrum or take action again'st you, "you call them a bully." and you would consider it a normal response to push back. Sounds like something kids do on the play ground. It's not the actions of a grown-up or for that matter a media outlet who should be held to a higher standard than the rest of us normal citizens. No actually my piont was that those media outlets were not standing -up for our rights, they were not protecting our freedom of speech or some other noble deed. They did what they did because of the bottom line "money". and strung along their readers by hiding behind Our freedom of speech. Thats the real beauty about free enterprise is'nt it. it's all about the money not about what is right or wrong. Yes they were dying well before the cartoon broke out, but all those riots,killings that are happening right now that can be directly linked to the publishing of these cartoons directly have an impact on our Soldiers that are serving in Afgan right now. So ask a soldier serving over there now does he think all this grief is worth a few cartoons so some dick head can put a few more dollars in his pocket. We don't need to unnessicarily give these crack head radical muslims any more of an excuses to kill than they already have. What have these media god's done except re-publish the same cartoons for profits. Ya that 's it i've had enough of this shit re-publish the cartoons that will show them we are serious. Why don't you read a few comments made by soldiers, the same soldiers that have sacraficed so much for those freedoms you only talk about. These are the thoughts of a few of those that are serving over there now or who have recently returned from Afgan. None of our current freedoms are in danger or being dismantled. My Webpage My Webpage You have still not answer the question do you think they are news worthy, or where they printed to provoke a group. Can anyone out there educate me on why these cartoons are news worthy when they were first printed , or do you think they were printed to provoke a response.

Betsy: And ? have you been following along here, Argus piont was that he seen it as the Media standing-up in solidarity for thiers and ours, freedom of speech, bullshit.... they did it for profit. What is not dollar driven, The soldiers that are actually standing the line, overseas right now are not dollar driven "because if you think the pay is worth plus 45 degrees in an hostile enviroment your wrong." The same soldiers who's lives have been put in greater danger because some dick head decisded he and his paper could make a few dollars. Lets not forget the every day average citizen who may be taken hostage or worse killed so that some radical may prove his piont. All this over a stupid carton is it worth it. Tell us all how you have suffered. tell us how anyone in Canada has suffered. Perhaps you can educate me , explain to me how those cartoons are news worthy, perhaps you can explain to me what was the piont in printing them if not to provoke the muslims. I don't recall speaking for you,or deciding anything for you, or for that matter making any judgements for you. I have been quoted in saying most normal Canadians perhaps you don't fit into that catagory. But then again freedom of speech is only good if we all comply to your way of thinking. That we can insult anyone ,anytime because it's falls under our freedom of speech. You can call them what ever you want, however as i pionted out a million times that your freedom speech has limitations. and yes there are laws governing what you can't say, I've mentioned before that some of those laws are covered under the harrasment laws which have a broad spectrum of Interputation "harrassment is anything that one individual percieves to be offensive, degrading,etc etc " it does not have to be directed at you, it could be part of a privite conversation you are not meant to hear. all that is need is for that on individual to say i find that offensive and you may find yourself in court. I did not write the laws or regulations i just passed on that info.

Argus: The media is a business, like any business it is driven by profit. not some noble idea of keeping us informed, that is a by product. If the news does not sell papers it's not going to recieve the same coverage. By using your logic if all europe had seen it as you do then why did they not all stand-up in solidarity, Why did'nt the european union stand-up and say enough is enough. because they are not united on this issue. First off it was a cartoon, it had nothing to do with presenting a news worthy story, it's intention was to make fun of or show in a bad light a certain ethinic group. You've been defending your right to insult someone, or group when ever you want, and declaring your justified under freedom of speech. If i as an individual say or do something that is offensive to someone or some group and that person or group of people inform me that it is offensive a "normal" person would chalk that up to a learning experiance and not repeat it. IE telling ethinic jokes in front of that ethinic group, either you did not know it was offensive or you are looking to provoke something. Are you telling me that the media are not capable of express or reporting news without being offensive. Yes we are human and make mistakes or use bad judgement, we admit that and carry on with our lives. Most normal people do not continue to be offensive unless they are looking to provoke a response. There is a big difference between calmly discussing things of substance or trying to make a piont through insults. Because we both know that in this country we are capable of sitting down and discussing almost any topic without being offensive towards both sides. Would we be able to have the same conversation if a news paper depicted a cartoon depicting naked gay man bent over a table with a wedding gown on and another gay man jamming him up the arse with a tuxedo on.

I've said in previous posts that i am not making excuses for the muslims actions, and like you agree that they have gone way overboard. However, the danes Muslim community have told them at the very start of this chain of events that they find these cartoons offensive, (this is where it should have stopped) that would have been the common sense thing to do. But that is not what happens because it does not sell papers. Thats not what i'm getting from some of the remarks. You mean the same way you would react to a total stranger commenting on your wifes chest, or some other remark that you find extremely offensive. who are we to say how they should react, when we don't know just how offensive the remark is to them. We have already proven that we as Canadians can and will react to remarks we find offensive perhaps not burning down buildings or death threats but exchange physical blows with those responsable. It's easy for us to sit in our easy chairs and comment on our freedoms and to preach to those that we think are not acting the way we want them to. And then tell them in the same breath i can make any comments i'd like because it's my right, and if you don't like it F--k you. and then to think we are not escalating the whole problem. I think respect is a two way street, and if we want to sit in our chairs and pass judgement on others then we should be setting the example for them to follow. Not telling them it's my right to insult you, when i want , however i want. Shut the f--k -up. Because that is what we have done, but will it solve anything. Will it bring the world closer to being able to function the way we want them to. or is it only going to escalate things.

Argus: perhaps i am confused, I will agree with you the "first time the cartoon appeared" it could have been incidental, and perhaps they did not know it was offensive( Unlikely,but for sake of augument) after the cartoon was shown for the first time the muslim community in europe had told the media that it was offensive to thier culture. ( My piont is that this is when the publishing of these cartoons should have stopped, once it is found it is offensive) But that does not sell papers, they continued to publish the cartoons, quoting it was thier right under freedom of speach. The continues publishing of these cartoons were deliberate and understandably offensive conduct directed at specific group within thier communities. Because it may not be offensive to me or you does not mean it may not be offensive to others, and they do see it as a challenge that will incite a violent reaction. As we have already seen on the media. It's aimed at no one Give me a break, what group of people do you think it was aimed at, what ethinic group first poped into your mind. OK i agree, but what is your piont one can use common sense and respect at the bar, but not on the internet or in this case the media because you fell safe from physical violence. Nobody is saying "we must obey" anything it is after all our freedom of speach, what I'm saying is that freedom has limitations and in using that freedom wantonly there are consquences. I don't see the big deal here we as Canadians use common sense and respect when we deal with different minorities in our every day lives, why should we then not make our media do the same. Do they have different rights and freedoms than we do. Or are you saying that it is impossiable to report on world affairs without using common sense and respect. and what does the showing of cartoons have to do with the reporting of the news, other than to poke fun at an ethinic group. This is not about freedom of speech, it's about selling news papers, and headlines...Since when does the Media care about your freedoms. for them It's all about money it always has been... Freedom of speech does not allow you to say what ever you want, when you want without consquences . and if you don't like that: tough.. Yes it is, for good reason be it censorship in the media or self censorship it's here and has been forever, and is not likely to go anytime soon.