Actually, as a civil libertarian I would Muslims (or Christians, or Jews, or atheists, or feminists, Republicans, liberals, etc.) may criticize all they want; but censorship, by government action or mob violence, is absolutely unacceptable.
Sure. For example, I have no problems with some Muslims wanting to organize boycotts of certain publications over this. That’s also free expression.
But so far today we’ve had the burning of the Norwegian and Danish embassies in Syria, and marches in which people are carrying signs saying, “behead the infidels” and “Exterminate the infidels”. At least one Imam has already called for the death of anyone associated with printing these cartoons. And knowing how many radical nutbars are running around in Europe, I suspect there’s a good possibility that that’s exactly what will happen. And that will have a chilling effect on anyone else wanting to express themselves in ways that Muslims don’t like.
Sam, there’s many of us who feel the same way.
I’m trying hard to keep in mind that all Muslims do not support these activities, but it’s getting harder and harder every day when all you hear is the hate mongers doing their best to invoke an all out jihad while the true followers of Mohammad do nothing to protest their behavior (at least that I’ve seen covered by the media - could be that’s a media problem, but I wouldn’t wager on it).
That was my point too. The radical Islamists may be the ones most likely to get offended by the pictures of Mohammed, but they are also the ones most likely to be racist, anti-semetic, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, religiously intolerant and ok with violence against civilians. If people would be upset with that too and willing to riot in the streets to stop it then that would be great.
You think people should riot to prevent rioting?
The cleanest solution by far would be for a faction within Islam to rise up and clean their own house of the hate mongers and violent fanatics. Too bad, I don’t see a chance of that happening.
Thank you for trying, and please keep on doing so. The situation is pretty awful, but nowhere near as widespread as the impression the media gives. Imagine if all we foreigners had to go on about the US was Hollywood, the news, and GWB. In equivalence, you’ve only got the news.
Seems pretty widespread to me. Two embassies burned in Syria. The Danish embassy stormed in Indonesia. 10,000 people marching in Ramallah chanting, “Bin Laden, bomb Denmark”. An Imam in Europe calling for the death of anyone involved in making and publishing the cartoon. Protests and marches around the world.
This isn’t just a handful of crazies.
Christopher Hitchens on the cartoons and the violence.
A great article, thanks for linking to it. The more I hear about events like this the more I’m forced to wonder if we’re not already in the Third World War, but that it’s a war being fought with culture and threats of violence and infiltration rather than neuclear weapons.
It’s been a while since I said this, but way to go, Hitchens.
That was a fine article. Perfectly summed up what is at issue here.
Christ. They burned the consulate over this. I’m glad god is watching over us. :rolleyes: Let’s have another round of applause for the believers.
Thankyou Sam.
Right. And the Harlem Riot of 1964, the Watts Riot of 1965, and the Detroit Riot of 1967 indicates the foolishness of black people wanting equal rights in 1960s America… :rolleyes:
The fact that people are passionate about a situation and some may demonstrate in a violent manner does not indicate the wisdom or foolishness of being in the movement itself.
Does the fact that a few hammerheads rioted in protest of the WTO when they met in Seattle mean there are not legitimate concerns regarding the impact of WTO?
I look forward to your response, but I will not hold my breath.
We’re talking about the difference between rioting about things that exist vs. imaginary icons and a cartoon, fercrissakes. You can’t compare the two.
Exactly. But you cannot, as Clothahump posted, decide the validity or righteous ness of a cause by wether they riot or not…
I think the difference here is that these Muslim extremists are protesting the right of someone in ANOTHER COUNTRY of ANOTHER FAITH to express themselves in a way that offends them. I personally am an athiest. If a simple cartoon offends them, how about my expression that Allah, God, FSM, et al do not exist at all, and are rather imaginary figures that are used as tools of manipulation and fear by the rich and powerful over the ignorant and naive? Now that Ive said that…should they be justified in rioting, burning, and blowing innocent people up because of the Watts and Harlem Riots? Should we allow a relatively small group of extremists tell us what we can and cannot say by threat of totally inexcusable violence? Burn a flag, write a letter etc. but calling for Beheading, asking Bin Laden to bomb innocent people, and burning down the Danish consolates and others is wrong and we should protest by making statements that do not support their extremist actions, and Muslim leadership should condemn any threat of or violence against people who have a different view that those of Islamic faith. Otherwise, prepare to turn Muslim, because you eventually wont be allowed to not be muslim on pain of beheading if we allow this to continue.
That’s true. But you can start by trying to determine if the cause is real or imaginary. They’re rioting over a guy’s cartoon depicting an imaginary character. It’s just too bizarre. These people are way too touchy. The cartoon didn’t threaten anyone’s freedom to believe. It was merely an insult.
You completely missed my point.