Danish embassy invaded - Part II

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Pekka
Putin TOTALLY sold out Europe.

Well, he merely imitates Bush and Blair. Admittedly, those two only slod out Denmark.

[Pekka]

yeah, they sold out too.

[Krill]

1. that was Putin. Russia does not have completely free presses, so what do you expect?
   
2. I would say that the rest of Europe out to relax those laws regarding Free Speech, but Holocaust Denial? I'm sorry, but can someone tell me how the right to take the piss out of religion is connected to saying that six million people never existed? Why don't we just go and say that the Crusades never happened either? If you deny the Holocasut, you are not exercising Free Speech, you're exercising ignorance.
   
3. I don't see anything wrong with printing cartoons including Jesus in, or taking the piss out of Jews, or Sikhs, or any religion. If they had a point or were funny, they would be welcome additions, IMV.
   
4. Mohammad and the bomb...yes, we know there are moderate muslims, but can you deny that Islam, or at least certein interpretations of Islam, is inherentally violent? No, you can't...so it is a fair point. But then, I would not blow a gasket if some cartoons took the piss out of a fanatical Christian sect, so I suppose it is a moot point...

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Are you saying that a portrayal of an ordinary muslim holding a bomb would also create the same cries for censorship? Would a text statement "Most muslims support terrorism" be banned? Would a poll that shows that the majority in some particular muslim country supports OBL be banned?

The symbolism of Muhammed with a bomb turban is far worse than saying Muslims support terrorism or showing one with a bomb. It's saying that Islam is inherantly a violent religion and this violence has nothing to do with context (such as terrorism these days), but because Muhammed and his ilk wanted to kill people.

The symbolism of a negative portrayl of a leader of a religion is far greater than simply saying something. Saying most Catholics priests molest boys and showing Jesus do the same are vastly different things and would result in vastly different outcomes. Or Hell, look at what happened when a play had a gay Jesus.

Hmmm... I had always thought that Islam prohibits representation of divine icons. I have also always assumed that any picture of Mohammad was forbidden, and that it was the main issue. But perhaps I was wrong.

[Krill]

And with regard to how Britain handled the situation... we should have published the cartoons in a major newspaper...if anyone had tried to sue over it, then the government would have had a really fun time trying to sort it out, especially because of the legislation they have tried to shove through parliament recently.

[Imran Siddiqui]

[q=Krill]I would say that the rest of Europe out to relax those laws regarding Free Speech, but Holocaust Denial? I'm sorry, but can someone tell me how the right to take the piss out of religion is connected to saying that six million people never existed? Why don't we just go and say that the Crusades never happened either? If you deny the Holocasut, you are not exercising Free Speech, you're exercising ignorance.[/q]

Well in Germany and France (for the two main countries), even disputing that 6 mil Jews were killed (and saying, say, it was 5 million or something) is holocaust denial and is a crime.

And how can you say that if you deny the holocaust it isn't free speech? If someone did deny the Crusades, for example, would you say that statement can be banned because it isn't free speech, its ignorance?

[q=Oncle Boris]Hmmm... I had always thought that Islam prohibits representation of divine icons. I have also always assumed that any picture of Mohammad was forbidden, and that it was the main issue. But perhaps I was wrong.[/q]

Some sects say you can't show Mohammed, but most Muslim don't get their underwear in knots over it. They do get pissed over insulting portrayls, but just a drawing of him (as in a textbook) wouldn't draw much ire.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Well, he merely imitates Bush and Blair. Admittedly, those two only slod out Denmark.

what exactly did Bush say that you disagree with?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
[q=Krill]I would say that the rest of Europe out to relax those laws regarding Free Speech, but Holocaust Denial? I'm sorry, but can someone tell me how the right to take the piss out of religion is connected to saying that six million people never existed? Why don't we just go and say that the Crusades never happened either? If you deny the Holocasut, you are not exercising Free Speech, you're exercising ignorance.[/q]

Well in Germany and France (for the two main countries), even disputing that 6 mil Jews were killed (and saying, say, it was 5 million or something) is holocaust denial and is a crime.

Considering that most standard histories say it was somewhere between 5 and 6 million, including Hilberg, IIRC, Im skeptical of your statement of the law. Perhaps they have prosecuted some of the Deniers-lite who claim only a couple of hundred thousand were killed?

[lord of the mark]

and Im not sure exactly why showing mohammed with a bomb is insulting.

Mohammed is shown in the Koran, IIUC, as a leader in war. A bomb is just a modern day war technology, not necessarily the weapon of a terrorist.

and suppose the cartoonist had specified (which he did not) that the bomb was used to kill civilians. Many muslim authorities, including ones who oppose Al Qaeeda and bin ladenism, have stated that attacks on civilians in Israel are licit, and part of the legitimate right of resistance. If carrying a bomb into a disco in Tel Aviv, or into a settlement on the West Bank for that matter, is legitimate resistance, then why is the portrayal of Mohammed doing that insulting?

Some have said that the American revolutionaries were terrorists, and no different from Hamas. Would portraying Mohammed in a tricornered hat, with a flintlock musket, and captioning it "yankee doodle muhammed" be similarly insulting?

[Pekka]

LOTM, it's not what he said, more importantly it was what he didn't say. Like, strong support. Like, practice what you preach.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Pekka
LOTM, it's not what he said, more importantly it was what he didn't say. Like, strong support. Like, practice what you preach.

did even the PM of Denmark say that?

[Pekka]

say what?

[Arrian]

Im not sure exactly why showing mohammed with a bomb is insulting.

Surely you jest.

The implication is clear: Islam is a religion of bombers - sucide bombers, even. Sure, that's not all spelled out in the cartoon, but it's not too hard to see that message.

-Arrian

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
what exactly did Bush say that you disagree with?

Bush and Blair both condemned the cartoons, without the "freedom of expression" caveat, lectured Denmark about responsibility, and didn't show support to Denmark in this ordeal that is way too big for that small country.

There is quite a feeling of abandonment in Denmark because of this.

[germanos]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Bush and Blair both condemned the cartoons, without the "freedom of expression" caveat, lectured Denmark about responsibility, and didn't show support to Denmark in this ordeal that is way too big for that small country.

There is quite a feeling of abandonment in Denmark because of this.

In my experience, the Danes are staunch supporters of their independence, and they have shown little enthousiasm for either the European Union or other multinational issues.

For example, AFAIK they are not members of 'Schengen', and they still hold their own currency.

I think the feeling of abandonment is mutual.