More about the danish cartoonists...

welllll..

Maybe. But I bet Danish law has something to say about defamation, so maybe legal action would have been possible and maybe not. But my point was they lacked damages, so they lacked standing, so in the end, the rioters could NOT take anybody to court. But for good reason. Their beef was silly.

While it might be within cleric law to ask for somebody's head on a platter, I'd be curious to know whether it's a violation of international law to actually put up a bounty on the cartoonists.

I'd be all for seeing the UN arresting the idiot.
 
Maybe he should purchase his very own Infidel T Shirt..

put the phrase the path to paradise begins here with crosshairs :eek:
 
JerryM

Your reasoning is not without logic, in a bizzare kind of way. I can't help but seek analogy: if your neighbor gets robbed and beaten or killed in a bad part of town, would you be making case - and I'm talking about legal case rather than offline comment - that it's his own fault for instigating the assault by showing up there? If this analogy doesn't make sense to you, or seems to be taken out of context, or to be exaggerate, let me explain why it comes to mind.

See, it's all about double standards. Picturing a religious figure of the western world in grotesque way would - and did, including in muslim media - cause no stir; possibly few comments here and there if the cartoon originated in a well recognized source and were completely tasteless. That's what would be expected, that's what would've - and have - happened. Much like you wouldn't expect to be mugged going for a walk in a good neighborhood. Furthermore, you state yourself that the outcome of the Danish experiment was well predictable and that the riots among Muslim community were seen miles away well ahead of time. Agreed here as well, just like with a theoretical unarmed slender guy wearing glasses and business suit in projects who's "just asking for it".

There is, however, a little logical trick that mind might be playing on you. It equalizes, or at the very least brings closer together, concepts of "predictable" and "justified", thus making the whole picture well balanced and thus not requiring outside intervention. Well, they are not equivalent. They are not close. They have no common roots. They belong to completely different plains, and any attempt to even partially rationalize one with another is excersize in futility. A criminal is still a criminal, and "instigation" in both cases is just a convenient occasion to show the true face.

I personally admire Danish cartoonists even more if they realized what exactly they were doing. They sacrificed their own piece of mind, possibly for lifetime, to show the startling differences between the cultures. For many westerners, it took to see these riots to fully realize the magnitude of this "us" against "them" proposition. How did it go? "Islam is a religion of piece, behead those against it", or was it a different wording?

It's just about time to wake up.
 
invention_45 wrote:

BabaLouie: I'm not familiar with the story, but the murderer should be practicing his religion on a death row somewhere.

--------------------

Holland, like the rest of Europe, so far as I know anyhow, does not have the death penalty. I believe that the Dutch did sentence the POS who killed Van Gough to LIFE.
 
Point of order: How can this fatwah be "binding on all Muslims"? Are Muslims in fact organized into a scrict heirarchical organization like the Catholic Church and Mormon Church? If not, I don't see how it can be binding on the Muslims who happen to not be, ya know, insane.

.______.
(/\/\/\/\)
(\/\/\/\/)
(______)
(..^..^ .)
(....*....)
.(...\....)
...~~~

This is Mohammed smoking a doob just after coital relations with his own sister. Deal with it, you freaks.
 
I can't believe some of the posters replies. Ohh, cater to the bad smelling men in man dresses. BS. These guys get all upset that someone drew a cartoon of the "prophet" mohamed, but then go burning and murdering people that have absolutely nothing to do with the cartoon. You tell me what is wrong with this F'd up religion.
 
I'm tired of the double standard. If someone were to draw a cartoon depicting Jesus in a negative way and I went out and burned down a building, beat someone in the street, and put a contract out on the cartoonists life, I'd be arrested, charged with arson, assault and battery, and conspiracy to commit murder. I would also be condemned as a psychotic radical cult member and rightfully so. However, the people rioting over this cartoons just sort of get looked at as people who get caught up in the moment and aren't really responsible for their actions. But it's not politically correct to say that they're extremists and psychos because they happen to be a minority in our country. You can be sure that if the tables were turned they would not be so understanding of our anger.
 
[You seem to absolve the rioters of guilt in this case. This is not an issue of yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre. Apples to oranges.]
Click to expand...

No at all. The rioters are responsible for their actions whatever the provocation. However, I continue to be persuaded that one who is an instigator also is responsible. It is not too different from yelling "Fire."
Click to expand...

There is a vast difference between a political cartoon and yelling "fire" in a crowded theater. One incites panic that might cause otherwise peacable people to crush other otherwise peacable people in a frenzy to escape something that isn't there. The other gives fringe lunatics the "excuse" to go forth and terrorize and kill and burn. Hard not to see that distinction.

If I do something that makes you angry at someone else, and you were to harm them, then I am also responsible. You are not excused from your own actions, and must suffer the consequences, but I am also guilty.
Click to expand...

Only in your own mind. And I'm sorry, but I just can't believe that you believe that yourself, else you would be afraid to post anything or speak in public on any subject, lest someone should become angered by something you said and then sally forth and take their ire out on their spouse, children, pets, or whatever. These days, it is very difficult not to say anything that isn't going to anger someone in some way.

Some time ago someone wrote a book that stirred up the Muslims, and they put a price on his head, if I remember correctly.
Click to expand...

Salman Rushdie. And, if you can stir your memory a bit more, you would be able to recall some of the abolishionist's cartoons (from history class, of course) that depicted slave owners in a pretty bad light. If I recall correctly, that led to some pretty widespread violence as well. Sometimes lampooning is a very useful tool, and a necessary one, too.

Is it not obvious that if you insult their religion in such a high profile way they are going to retaliate with violence?
Click to expand...

Not if you believe all of the claims by the mainstream Muslims.
 
I'd like to see these "cartoons" to figure out why these people are so insanely Pissed Off.

I wish South Park would do an episode about their Prophet
Click to expand...

One thing's for certain. The people who do "South Park" don't hesitate for one moment to ridicule Jesus Christ.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top