Argus Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 Granted, Muslim followers get angrier than other religions. But, it can be avoided pretty easily. Just don't make disrepectful cartoons about Mohammed. Ahmadinejad had his "holocaust denier conference" to prove a point. That it should be a terrible crime to insult Muslims, even incidentally or accidentally, but that deliberately insulting Jews can be fun? That Muslims around the world are, by and large, seventh century savages who will run amock, screaming and gnashing their teeth, stabbing and killing and burning things over an alleged insult, but that Jews will just shake their heads, think you're stupid, and ignore you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 that's true. it is their right to publish what they want. however, they said they're not against islam and would publish the holocaust cartoons to show that this is about freedom of publication. later on, they went against what they said. The difference between the cartoons was that the Danish cartoons were virtually all pretty bland, and non-insulting. There was really only one - the bomb in the turban one, which could be considered as insulting, and that was clearly a very legitimate commentary on the violence in Islam today. By contrast, the Iranian cartoons had no purpose but to deliberately insult Jews and to be as offensive and ignorant as possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted January 28, 2009 Report Share Posted January 28, 2009 The difference between the cartoons was that the Danish cartoons were virtually all pretty bland, and non-insulting. There was really only one - the bomb in the turban one, which could be considered as insulting, and that was clearly a very legitimate commentary on the violence in Islam today.By contrast, the Iranian cartoons had no purpose but to deliberately insult Jews and to be as offensive and ignorant as possible. not really. the iranian cartoons were mostly a statement about the ironic situation that has been created. where a group who was so persecuted is persecuting another group. are these first and second prize winner cartoons, offensive? http://www.irancartoon.com/120/holocaust/0...llah-Morroc.jpg http://www.irancartoon.com/120/holocaust/0...Latuff-(12).jpg not really. regardless, the point that the danish paper was trying to make was that they're championing the freedom from censorship. they wanted to show they would not give into the protests of publishing the muhammed and islam cartoons. that i agreed with, but then they went and censored the holocaust cartoons even after they said they would publish them to show that this was all about freedom from censorship. maybe they had an ulterior motive? after looking at the people around the danish paper, i've come to the conclusion that their intentions were different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 not really.the iranian cartoons were mostly a statement about the ironic situation that has been created. where a group who was so persecuted is persecuting another group. are these first and second prize winner cartoons, offensive? Hypocritical, dishonest and stupid, maybe, but not particularly offensive. Others were, however. In reality, the Israelis are less into persecution than most of the Arab world. You can say pretty much whatever you want about the Israeli govenrment, and as long as you're not plotting to blow people up they'll ignore you. Not so the Iranian government, who routinely imprison, torture, and murder non-violent political opponents. There is a free press in Israel. None in Iran. For that matter, most Muslim states do not tolerate any criticism of the government, and all of them practice torture. As for Israel's "bloodthirsty" persecution. Hell, it's neighbour, Syria, faced an intifada a couple of decades back. The Syrian govenrment simply lined up artillery and bombarded the entire city, killing tens of thousands in a few days. Thus ended any religious uprising against Syria. The world shrugged. regardless, the point that the danish paper was trying to make was that they're championing the freedom from censorship. Censorship is when you're prevented from printing or saying what you want do to threats. No censorship means printing or saying what you want. That does not give you the obligation to print or say things you don't approve of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Hypocritical, dishonest and stupid, maybe, but not particularly offensive. Others were, however. that's your opinion. i found a lot of those cartoons to be very well done. it showed the irony of the situation quite well. a once persecuted people are now engaged in persecuting others. In reality, the Israelis are less into persecution than most of the Arab world. You can say pretty much whatever you want about the Israeli govenrment, and as long as you're not plotting to blow people up they'll ignore you. Not so the Iranian government, who routinely imprison, torture, and murder non-violent political opponents. There is a free press in Israel. None in Iran. For that matter, most Muslim states do not tolerate any criticism of the government, and all of them practice torture. As for Israel's "bloodthirsty" persecution. Hell, it's neighbour, Syria, faced an intifada a couple of decades back. The Syrian govenrment simply lined up artillery and bombarded the entire city, killing tens of thousands in a few days. Thus ended any religious uprising against Syria. The world shrugged. there are a lot of shitty things that are happening in the arab world and other parts of the world, but that still does not excuse what we do. this is like a rapist trying to excuse what he does by saying what he does is not as bad what the killer does. Censorship is when you're prevented from printing or saying what you want do to threats. No censorship means printing or saying what you want. That does not give you the obligation to print or say things you don't approve of. an editor of a newspaper can censor material being published. this is what the danish newspaper did after declining to publish the holocaust cartoons, even though they announced that they would publish them to show that they're about publishing news and not pushing an agenda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 that's your opinion. i found a lot of those cartoons to be very well done. it showed the irony of the situation quite well. a once persecuted people are now engaged in persecuting others. Your definition of "persecute" seems pretty elastic. there are a lot of shitty things that are happening in the arab world and other parts of the world, but that still does not excuse what we do.this is like a rapist trying to excuse what he does by saying what he does is not as bad what the killer does. Except it's the killers making the accusation. And realistically, how are the Palestinian people less free than Iranians? Remove all the anti-Israeli violence, and thus the violence Israel metes out in response, and how many freedoms to Iranians have that Palestinians don't? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Your definition of "persecute" seems pretty elastic.Except it's the killers making the accusation. And realistically, how are the Palestinian people less free than Iranians? Remove all the anti-Israeli violence, and thus the violence Israel metes out in response, and how many freedoms to Iranians have that Palestinians don't? Well, they have the freedom to defend themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Well, they have the freedom to defend themselves. they have the freedom, just not the intelligence, tactics or strategy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 they have the freedom, just not the intelligence, tactics or strategy. Thanks for acknowledging my point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Thanks for acknowledging my point. I was talking about the palestinians. They have the freedom to defend themselves just like anyone else. Unfortunately for them, they are too stupid to know when or what defense is or can be. The roebuck has the freedom to defend itself from the lion...still, the roebuck isn't stupid enough to poke the sleeping lion with it's prongs. The palestinians on the otherhand are stupid enough to try it repeatedly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Well, they have the freedom to defend themselves. Iranians can do that too, only they would die much faster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 I was talking about the palestinians. They have the freedom to defend themselves just like anyone else. Unfortunately for them, they are too stupid to know when or what defense is or can be. The roebuck has the freedom to defend itself from the lion...still, the roebuck isn't stupid enough to poke the sleeping lion with it's prongs. The palestinians on the otherhand are stupid enough to try it repeatedly. Love that analogy. --------------------- We plan to eliminate the state of Israel and establish a purely Palestinian state. We will make life unbearable for Jews by psychological warfare and population explosion. We Palestinians will take over everything, including all of Jerusalem. ---Yasser Arafat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 I was talking about the palestinians. They have the freedom to defend themselves just like anyone else. Unfortunately for them, they are too stupid to know when or what defense is or can be. The roebuck has the freedom to defend itself from the lion...still, the roebuck isn't stupid enough to poke the sleeping lion with it's prongs. The palestinians on the otherhand are stupid enough to try it repeatedly. The rules of grammar indicate that by following my "they" with a response using "they", you are adopting my context - i.e. they = Iranians. In any case, if the Palestinians had the freedom to defend their land, you would not be seeing articles like this in Ha'aretz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 In any case, if the Palestinians had the freedom to defend their land, you would not be seeing articles like this in Ha'aretz That is a non sequitor. Having the right is one thing, having the brains and ability is quite another. The palestinians have neither. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 (edited) That is a non sequitor. The palestinians have neither. Naturally, you're referring to your context violation... Having the right is one thing, having the brains and ability is quite another. And having American funded weapons programs is yet another. But of course, we all have to bow down to Israel's record in Lebanon LOL... Edited January 30, 2009 by Higgly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Naturally, you're referring to your context violation...And having American funded weapons programs is yet another. But of course, we all have to bow down to Israel's record in Lebanon LOL... If you are going to mangle posts, a least attempt to be coherent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 If you are going to mangle posts, a least attempt to be coherent Sure. Why don't we all go back to "they". You're losing your touch, Dancer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.