Denmark warns of new cartoon crisis with Muslims

[SlowwHand]

You mean like Jesus Christ on a pogo stick?

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Youre the only one who so cited it. In fact youre the only one whos implied that its relevant to this thread. I would suggest that it is not, and that this is not the place for a debate on the details of that situation.

Fair enough, I don't want to debate it here either. Actually it wasn't me who first mentioned the Balkans, I was referring to the general case, including the likes of Somalia.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
By trivialization I think he means that most Westerners consider such beliefs, against portraying religious leaders, to be stupid (at least most I've talked to believe it so).

Traditional Jews, as a general rule, dont make images of Moses or King David. (Reform Jews do, and in recent years Conservative Jews go pretty lax on this, but Orthodox Jews usually dont) In fact the traditional Jewish Hagaddah, the service for the Passover Seder, tells the story of exodus without mentioning the name of Moses. Somehow no one is even aware of this, cause we dont object to OTHER people making such images. Also note that historically strict Calvinists didnt think much of images. (BTW, this makes it a heckuva lot easier to borrow say, a Congregationalist church for a Jewish service than a Catholic church) While the extreme restrictions on the representation of Muhammed do go beyond anything in Judaism or Calvinism, and are positively alien to non-Calvinist Christians, I cant recall anyone mocking the limitation until it seemed that muslims expected non-muslims to follow it.

[Arrian]

Somehow no one is even aware of this, cause we dont object to OTHER people making such images.

That is a key difference. Although I do think it's mainly about the vehemence (and violence!) of the reaction... if someone made cartoons of Moses depicting the prophet is a less than flattering fashion (let's say some of the bloodier bits from the Torah, wherein Moses kicks some [insert non-jews here] ass), I would imagine that Jews (and Christians) might object. I doubt there would be firebombs thrown at embassies, though.

-Arrian

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
If you want to argue that X is not an example of ethnic cleansing, fine. Same way one could argue that Y is not in fact a blasphemous cartoon. But we arent in fact denying that certain cartoons are blasphemous, but that its wrong to allow Islam to impose its dislike of blasphemy on the west. Claiming a "mirror" implies that you think its just as wrong for the West to impose its dislike of ethnic cleansing elsewhere. Acknowledging that the abolition of ethnic cleansing should be a universal value, but that in a certain instance it was applied unfairly, is a far different arguement, and not relevant to the thread at hand. Nations have lied about, say, border infringements. Does that mean that responding to border infringements is an imposition of values that mirrors what Islamism is doing?

{Warning : Off-topic post, please move along if you don't want to hear a comment on the concept of internationalism in Western and Islamist interventionism over the last two decades.}

Let me try and explain my mirror metaphor a bit better. I'm not trying to draw a moral equivalence between specific actions, but noting the parallel rise of the interventionist spirit - be it right or wrong - in both camps.

A distinctive element of the modern Jihadist is the cross-border internationalism. This was born in during the days when the Muj were assisted in their campaign against the USSR in Afghanistan. AIUI, this was the first manifestation of the international holy warrior, who went on to fight in Chechnya, the Balkans, and now the Middle East and various assorted terrorist targets throughout the world. All this counts as international intervention - and doing what they believe to be the right thing according to their beliefs.

The Gulf War in 90-91 was the first interventionist move by the west in the post cold-war period. Prior to then, all border disputes would normally be dealt with in accordance with cold war structures, but the Gulf War was the first to be sold (at least in the UK) as a humanitarian venture. This strand has continued through Somalia, the Balkans, Sierra Leone, Afghanistan and Iraq. Yes, despite arguments of self-defence and WMD, Tony Blair always took pains to paint Afghanistan and Iraq as humanitarian undertakings.

Leaving aside the reasons, outcomes, and moral platform of specific actions, I think that the principle of internationalist action for a noble cause is shared by both sides.

If I had used the word symetry, rather than mirror, it might have been a better picture.

[Sandman]

In Tehran, dozens of Iranian protesters pelted the Danish embassy with stones and petrol bombs, witnesses said. Riot police guarded the embassy.

Oh no, dozens!

It's a non-event.

[SlowwHand]

Let's see how you react to a mere dozens outside your home, tossing gas bombs and other debris.

[Sandman]

I wouldn't expect it to be world news.

[Elok]

If these ignorant Iranian villagers somehow managed to teleport to your front yard (assuming you're not typing from Iran), I'd certainly be interested in hearing how they did it.

[Lord Avalon]

Originally posted by Elok
If these ignorant Iranian villagers somehow managed to teleport to your front yard (assuming you're not typing from Iran), I'd certainly be interested in hearing how they did it.

It would be the will of Allah, naturally.

[Elok]

I think the will of Allah would have better things to do. Like getting some more rational followers to replace a lot of the third-string personality-cult rejects He's got now.

[atawa]

Its the same old story, ANY criticism whatsoever on islam and its god/profet is forbidden and should be punished by death, its an insult as allah and mo are always right.

As you migth remember our filmmaker Theo van Gogh, maker of Submission, originaly written by Ayaan Hirsi Ali/Magan was killed for calling allah a pig. (As declared by the goat****er who killed him in court.) Currently Ayaan is living in the states but is still under 24/7 protection.

Islam means submission, everyone shall submit to the laws of islam or face a fatwa and have religious idiots on your back out to kill you, becouse the holy book said so. In my country there is a law against printing or selling Mein Kampf, but having read both books I realy cant see any reason why one is banned and the other is not.

[Elok]

Godwin sighting. And to be fair, does Mein Kampf include stuff about taking care of widows and orphans?

[Combat Ingrid]

Originally posted by atawa
Islam means submission, everyone shall submit to the laws of islam or face a fatwa and have religious idiots on your back out to kill you, becouse the holy book said so. In my country there is a law against printing or selling Mein Kampf, but having read both books I realy cant see any reason why one is banned and the other is not.

One of the books contains the words of a dork, while the other one contains the words of an imaginary dork. I'm just speculating, but perhaps that's the reason.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by VJ

As long as Europe keeps compromising and refusing to confront aggression, it keeps on increasing. Why do you think there aren't any protests against the US over the drawings of American invididuals? The followers of Islam, recognizing cowardice and decay, are trying to end freedom of speech in Europe.

They're succeeding.

Bingo. They've found someone who apparently is willing to let themself get bullied. Hopefully, you'll decide to stop putting up with it.