I apologize to you on behalf of 'Muslims'

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Oerdin
How much better would it have been if these Imams had followed in the foot steps of Gandi or Martin Lurther King Jr? Those two leaders did not use violence but instead shamed the opposition by forcing common people to see the injustice which was occuring. The beat their enemies through the moral superiority of their words and of their cause.

Yes, if only.

What happens when both sides of a conflict fully believe that they are morally superior?

[notyoueither]

Wars.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by Vince278


Yes, if only.

What happens when both sides of a conflict fully believe that they are morally superior?

As Oerdin said, that was the beauty of Ghandi's and MLK's methods. They shined light on those differences. They made it impossible for the other side to feel morally superior.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Spiffor
(edit: as a nuance, I'd like to add that the philosopher Alain Finkielkraut who ranted against the Blacks, Arabs and Muslims after the "ethnico-religious" riots of sepember, has been burnt - he escaped conviction because he apologized before the trial could occur, prompting the plaintiffs to stop the process, but he was savagely burnt by the press).

Or maybe not.

Finkielkraut wrote a column today in Libération about the cartoons, titled "Fanatics Without Borders". His column was nothing like the rant he got burnt for, but I see he isn't as ostracized as I thought.

Also, his being published might also come from the broad range of opinions the newspaper publishes in that particular matter (Muslim intellectual Tariq Ramadan wrote a column yesterday, despite his reputation as a "softcore fanatic")

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by notyoueither
If he were trying to illustrate a hostile environment to Muslims in Northern Europe, hate mail might serve as a prop.

When jews were complaining about antisemitism in europe, they focused on cartoons and other items in the press. (and actual acts of violence, of course) If they had included every item sent in a hatemail to a jewish organization, im sure they would have presented a different picture. In fact Im sure you could present a picture of rampant antisemitism in the US and Canada if you focused on hatemail sent to Jewish organizations.

[lord of the mark]

do we have any danish lawyers here, who can respond to IS statements? How is denmarks hate crimes law normally enforced, what kinds of items are normally covered by it, etc.

[lord of the mark]

according to wiki

Section 140 of the Danish Penal Code prohibits blasphemy. However, this law has not been enforced since 1938.[34] Section 266b of the Danish Penal Code prohibits expressions that threaten, deride or degrade on the grounds of race, colour, national or ethnic origin, belief or sexual orientation. The Danish public prosecutor determined that the Muhammad cartoons did not constitute blasphemy under Danish law.[9]

Jesus and other religious figures are often portrayed in Denmark in ways that many other societies would consider illegal blasphemy. In 1984 the artist Jens Jørgen Thorsen was commissioned by a local art club to paint the wall of a railway station. The work displayed a naked Jesus with an erect penis.[35] In 1992 Thorsen directed the film Jesus vender tilbage which showed Jesus as sexually active and involved with a terrorist group.[36][37] While Thorsen’s work provoked much public debate and his painting was removed from the public building, he was not charged with any legal offence.

Danish newspapers are privately owned and independent from the government. There are no restrictions on the political viewpoints that may be published. There are frequent caricatures of priests and politicians as well as of Queen Margrethe II.[38]


And by the way, apparently someones attempted to sabotage this wiki page.

Its not just the Prophet that some dont want us to speak about. Even the debate about free speech itself is to be censored.

[Imran Siddiqui]

140 also prohibits ridiculing and insulting the beliefs of a religion, aside from blasphamy.

I also found something else of interest on the wiki page:

Although the Danish press is free to satirise, a 2004 report by the European Network Against Racism concluded that a disproportionate amount of editorial space is devoted to negative reporting on ethnic minorities. [39]

I wonder if part of the clerics' motivations were a result of frustration against Danish newspapers.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
140 also prohibits ridiculing and insulting the beliefs of a religion, aside from blasphamy.

and still hasnt been enforced since 1938.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
140 also prohibits ridiculing and insulting the beliefs of a religion, aside from blasphamy.

I also found something else of interest on the wiki page:

Although the Danish press is free to satirise, a 2004 report by the European Network Against Racism concluded that a disproportionate amount of editorial space is devoted to negative reporting on ethnic minorities. [39]

I wonder if part of the clerics' motivations were a result of frustration against Danish newspapers.

and according the European Network for Atlanticism, a disproportionate amount of space has been devotd to negative coverage of the United States.

Not to equate the US with minorities. But what the hell is disproportionate coverage, and why would we expect an advocacy group, (however well meaning) to be unbiased in measuring it?

[Imran Siddiqui]

I note that you didn't refer to Section 266b

A report by the European Monitoring Centre and Racism and Xenopobia on Anti-Semitism in the EU from 2002-2003 (part on Demark)

http://eumc.eu.int/eumc/material/pub/AS/AS-Country-DA.pdf

Look at page 8-9. In 2003, A flyer which was found degrading, insulting, and threatening to Jews was punished with a suspended sentance of 60 days in jail. And (also in 2003) a website marching band song which was degrading to Jews and Turks led to a fine of 1000 DKK against the owner.

If those violate section 266b, how does this escape?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I note that you didn't refer to Section 266b

A report by the European Monitoring Centre and Racism and Xenopobia on Anti-Semitism in the EU from 2002-2003 (part on Demark)

http://eumc.eu.int/eumc/material/pub/AS/AS-Country-DA.pdf

Look at page 8-9. In 2003, A flyer which was found degrading, insulting, and threatening to Jews was punished with a suspended sentance of 60 days in jail. And (also in 2003) a website marching band song which was degrading to Jews and Turks led to a fine of 1000 DKK against the owner.

If those violate section 266b, how does this escape?

If you look at the earlier pages, you'll see that the flyer in question called for jews to be killed.

page 6, section B, 5 bullet, i think, (damned PDF)

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
If you look at the earlier pages, you'll see that the flyer in question called for jews to be killed.

page 6, section B, 5 bullet, i think, (damned PDF)

And at the same time you have a party in the Danish Parliament (DPP) which calls for a Denmark free of Muslims.

http://www.slate.com/default.aspx?id=2064776

Pia Kjaersgaard, the housewife leader of the Danish People's Party, wants the Muslims in Denmark to "go home": "They must not be allowed to integrate into Danish society."

Do you not consider that a threating remark? Basically saying, get out or we'll find a way to stop you from integrating? Yet, they get to sit in Parliament.

Btw, Did the marching band song also do the same?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


And at the same time you have a party in the Danish Parliament (DPP) which calls for a Denmark free of Muslims.

http://www.slate.com/default.aspx?id=2064776

Pia Kjaersgaard, the housewife leader of the Danish People's Party, wants the Muslims in Denmark to "go home": "They must not be allowed to integrate into Danish society."

Do you not consider that a threating remark? Basically saying, get out or we'll find a way to stop you from integrating? Yet, they get to sit in Parliament.

Btw, Did the marching band song also do the same?

Was that published in a flyer? Or was it a private remark (explicity excluded from the law) or was it an offhand remark to a reporter? And saying they must not be allowed to integrate is exactly what some muslim groups are saying. You can interprate it as a call for expulsion, or even as a call for death. The flyer that was punished was an explicit call for people to be killed.

as to the marching band i have no idea, as the source you provided does not show the lyrics.

[BlackCat]

Ohohhhh... My arabic isn't that good, so are there someone that can translate ?

http://egyptiansandmonkey.blogspot.com/2006/02/boycott-egypt.html

Are egyptians now supposed to boycot egypt products ?