Muslims angered over cartoons? These?!?
 

As many of you probably already know, Muslims are attacking embassies, protesting...etc. over 12 Danish cartoons about Muhammad. Ummm.... I don't get it. Here they are (and it took awhile to find them- and this from someone who can easily find stuff on the web - bunnies in cups..etc)

Sorry, but I just don't see why they are SO upset. :shrug: I mean, okay these maybe slightly offensive, but come on..... All this fuss over THESE??? I have seen far worse about other people and religions in the opinion section of the local newspaper. A bit TOUCHY aren't they. Can someone clue me in? What am I missing?



Here are all of them for the curious:

http://blog.newspaperindex.com/2005/...posten-racism/

my information was that Mohammed's turban was actually in the shape of a bomb. The problem is, as I understand it, in Muslim religion, you were not supposed to represent Mohammed's image. to be continued.

I just love how the Danish PM is warning of a "global crisis" over drawings. Gee, when Muslims burn the flag of Denmark it's called a "global crisis." When Muslims burn the American Flag, it's called "Thursday."

This is a big big thing over here at the moment. Irishgrl is spot on - the main point of contention was the cartoon with Mohammed's head shaped like a bomb - and it's a big no-no to actually draw an image of Mohammed anyway.

In London we had people marching about calling for the slaying of those who insult Islam, beheadings, assassinations, the destruction of Europe, you name it. We had our usual reaction of "Well, now look here chaps, this is really rather bad form - do you think you could tone it down a touch?" But some other people took it rather badly. It constitutes incitement to murder / terrorism, and Parliament wants the police to make retrospective arrests on these grounds.

The thing is that these people protesting don't represent the Muslim community as a whole - as usual, we only hear from the ones with the biggest mouths, but it is certainly possible this could blow up into a big thing. Today we jailed a Muslim fundamentalist for 7 years for inciting terrorism, and things do seem to be progressing in an ugly direction. We had a guy on a News Talk programme saying that he wanted Britain to be ruled by Sharia Law... popular stuff among the locals, that :rolleyes:

As for flag burning, well little Denmark isn't used to that kind of thing, and they're also not used to being told they can't express themselves as they wish because it offends people in foreign countries. The irony is that by calling for the death penalty for the cartoonist, the fundamentalists are committing the same crime as the cartoonist - that is, upsetting people using the freedom of speech laws.

Of course this could blow up into a big thing. the sad thing is, similar issues have blown up in the past, but you dont see the Christians getting all blown out of shape merely for a depiction of Christ or God or Mary or whatever....especially when you factor in the fact that certain factions of Islam allow pictorial representations. Its all very convenient that the radical element can get themselves puffed all out of proportion over "nothing".
Personally, I cant see that they have any real crediblity...and they never did, IMO.

I'm not sure it was too good of an idea to depict mohammed's turban as a bomb. That being said, and it's easy for me to say, these people are wayy overreacting.

I have to say as an outsider, I am glad that doofus got 7 years. What a maroon. I know that the Muslim community thinks (key word: THINKS) they have reason to rebel......but the sad fact is, they DONT. They are laboring under the mistaken notion that they stlll rule the world thru their math and science ablities.......I am here to tell them, they do NOT. The reality is, the Muslim world lost their claim to dominance many many years ago. I have already hinted at my particular bias in another thread. im going now.

Ok. I ask you. If you had depicted Jesus wearing a turbin shaped like a bomb, would you use it as an excuse to wreak havoc on other nations/people?

Nope. Southpark made Stevie into a goat and the ledgies didn't attack any embassies..... (I know, but it sounds just as silly to me to get all bent out of shape over this:)



Can you imagine what would happen if the film "Last temptation of Mohammed" was made? :eek: :shocked:

Nope. I would be offended, though. I don't it's bad at all to have some respect for the various different religions. It's the way these people protest that I find out of proportion. I think it's good to make that distinction.

As irishgrl said, many Muslims believe that Mohammed's image should never be represented out of respect.

My favorite part of this ordeal: Iran is now holding a contest for cartoons about the Holocaust. The best ones submitted will be printed in the major Iranian newspaper, in order to see how Westerners like it when their "sacred cows" are made light of.

So foreign cultural policy has officially reached the level of "Your mom!" Fantastic.

Omigod. The Holocaust is just not funny and it is not even similar to depicting Mohammed in a cartoon. :confused: :distressed: The Koran forbids murder. I think that god would be a bit less happy with murder than a cartoon.

Explain? What makes them so dissimilar? The publishing of the Mohammed cartoons was was more or less a deliberate slap in the face to Muslims. They were specifically designed to provoke by showing disrespect to something that the Muslim world takes very seriously and reverently. Responding with a series of cartoons about the Holocaust, something the Western world takes just as seriously, seems pretty spot-on to me, albeit just as childish.

Personally, I'm pretty excited to see the cartoons. I doubt they'll actually be funny, but it will be interesting to see what people come up with.

Personally, I think this is a way to portray Iran as a nation of fanatics. This is just the begining of the campaign to sell whatever atrocity we're about to commit against Iran.
Am I wearing a tin foil hat? You bet.

Well, one is a subject about millions of people being murdered. The other depicts the god of a group that has bastardized their religion. The latter are still alive, the former are no longer here to speak for themselves.

:laugh: I wouldn't doubt it. It is a small percentage of Islam that are fanatics. Unfortunately their tactics get them alot of press.

Couple this with the fact that Iran actually attacked us (hostages in the 80's ) and the West's in general hatred of all Muslims over there and the situation needs little prompting by anyone to lead to a war. I truly think most Americans and many Europeans would just as well see every singly Arab dead right now and they do not care that so many will die. The reason I say this is though the facts are clear we went to war on false pretenses and we executed the war in a poor manner, most Americans do not care becuase they do not care about those people; rather, they loath all of them.

That pretty much sums it up.

Yup. My roommate told me flat out she hates them. :rolleyes:

does that improve yer reception my dear? do you get A&E that way?

That doesn't make a lick of sense.

First off, the issue of the original cartoons has nothing to do with Iran directly (except for the fact that Iran is a Muslim state), and even less to do with the United States - only European newspapers have printed the cartoons; most American publications and news programs have refused to print or air them.

Second, it's Iran's president who has decided to come out in recent months and question the existence of the Holocaust, and it's an Iranian newspaper that has called for the Holocaust cartoon contest.

Third, I don't think Bush has even mentioned Iran directly when speaking about the cartoon ordeal.

Fourth, unfortunately, Iran actually poses a potential threat at this juncture. A whole lot of nations recognize this, as does the UN. And apparently, at least for the time being, the Bush administration is being very cautious as far as gathering intelligence and acting multilaterally, depending upon the cooperation of other nations, specifically in Europe.

The differences in attitue of the White House toward Iran in February 2006 and Iraq in February 2003 are pretty astonishing, actually. They'll never admit it, but they might have learned at least a little something from their previous gross mistakes.

I never said they did. What I'm saying is that is how the information is being used by the pravda.

Not only do I get A&E, I get Logo too. I love Graham Norton.

Examples? As I mentioned, I don't think the Bush administration has yet mentioned Iran specifically when speaking about this cartoon debacle. I haven't seen any articles that make much mention of Iran in this context, either, other than coverage of the Holocaust cartoon contest, and none of those articles seemed to me to portray Iran as dangerously fanatical.

If anything, Iran running a newspaper contest and cutting off economic ties with Denmark seems like a more level-headed response (relatively) than the embassy burnings and killings that have been occurring elsewhere.

They don't have to.

http://www.upi.com/SecurityTerrorism...8-104811-5127r

Russian MP gives date of U.S. Iran attack
MOSCOW, Feb. 8 (UPI) -- Russian Duma member Vladimir Zhirinovsky said that a U.S. attack on Iraq is "inevitable" and will occur on March 28.

Zhirinovsky is vice-chairman of Russia's Duma and founder and leader of the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia.

During an interview with Ekho Moskvy radio station, Zhirinovsky said, "The war is inevitable because the Americans want this war. Any country claiming a leading position in the world will need to wage wars. Otherwise it will simply not be able to retain its leading position.

"The date for the strike is already known -- it is Israel's election day (March 28.) It is also known how much that war will cost."

Zhirinovsky also told his listeners that the Danish publication of cartoons offensive to Muslims was a deliberate psychological operation by the Bush administration intended to "provoke a row between Europe and the Islamic world. It will all end with European countries thanking the United States and paying, and giving soldiers."

What, all of them? How discriminating... please tell us she doesn't have a responsible job :rolleyes:

And please keep Graham Norton over there :(

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Yes, we were watching a show on the religion of Islam. They had terrorists as well as clergy speak. While the minister was speaking about what Islam really is, and how terrorists and extremists have twisted it, I mentioned how terrorists have bastardized the religion. She said she thought most muslims did. I said, actually, that isn't true, most muslims are peaceful. Then she said "I don't care, I hate them all and I don't care if it isn't politically correct." :shocked: I did not speak to her the rest of the day and had to leave the room even though the show was really interesting. :( Plus it made me really sad since that is the exact attitude the terrorists have toward us, that blind hatred without reason. Plus how can you just hate people? I just don't understand.

That's unfortunate your roomate has strong feelings like that. There are good and bad people no matter what race.

She's a good and nice person! That's the thing! :confused:

Ah yes, of course. I had forgotten that the Bush administration's inner circle includes the Duma. No doubt Mr. Zhirinovsky is a very reliable source on this matter, as the White House has been working so intimately with Russian politicans lately in the construction of its foreign policy. The rest of the world clearly has taken notice of Mr. Zhirinovsky's comments, as well. The article's all over the major news sites...

More wars. How lovely.:mad:

I never said the administration had linked the cartoons to Iran. That was you.
"Iraq" is a typo in the article and I can provide another article (same story) without the typo.

Oops, looks like I spoke too soon. Is Condi Rice far enough in Bush's inner circle for you J? :laugh:

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/WBT004751.htm

US's Rice: Iran, Syria stoke Muslim cartoon anger
08 Feb 2006 17:45:19 GMT

Source: Reuters

WASHINGTON, Feb 8 (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice accused Iran and Syria on Wednesday of deliberately stoking Muslim anger in a dispute over cartoons satirizing Islam's Prophet Mohammad that has sparked deadly protests.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4694876.stm

Iran and Syria 'incited violence'

Norway's embassy in Iran was also targeted
The US secretary of state has accused Iran and Syria of fuelling anti-Western sentiment, in a row over cartoons satirising the Prophet Muhammad.
Condoleezza Rice said both countries used the opportunity to incite violence and exploit Muslim anger.

The accusation came as the UK embassy in Iran came under attack. Western embassies in Syria and Lebanon were set alight over the weekend.

Protests continue elsewhere, with four killed in an Afghan demonstration.

The deaths - at a protest by about 400 people in the town of Qalat - bring to 12 the number of people killed in Afghan protests over the cartoons in recent days.

Afghanistan's top council of Muslim clerics has called for an end to several days of demonstrations.

'Sentiments inflamed'

Speaking at a joint news conference with Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, Ms Rice said some countries were behaving responsibly with regard to the row but that others "have also used this opportunity to incite violence."

"I don't have any doubt that ... Iran and Syria have gone out of their way to inflame sentiments and to use this to their own purposes. And the world ought to call them on it," she said.

During the day about 200 Iranian demonstrators attacked the UK embassy in Tehran, but were prevented by police from forcing entry to the building.

The Danish and Norwegian embassies in Iran have also been attacked, while those in Beirut and Damascus were set on fire at the weekend.

Meanwhile US President George W Bush urged governments to prevent attacks on diplomatic missions.

"I call upon the governments around the world to stop the violence, to be respectful, to protect property, protect the lives of innocent diplomats who are serving their countries overseas," he said.

In other developments:

French magazine Charlie Hebdo becomes the latest to print the cartoons. President Jacques Chirac condemns decisions to republish the cartoons as an "overt provocation"

Hackers attack hundreds of Danish websites, posting pro-Islamic messages condemning publication of the images

Several hundred people march on the Italian embassy in the Bangladeshi capital Dhaka, but are blocked by police

About 300 Palestinian protesters attack an international observers' mission in the West Bank town of Hebron, throwing rocks and bottles and trying to torch one of its buildings

Thousands demonstrate in Pakistan's Dara Adam Khel tribal region, bordering Afghanistan.

That's sad :( Good job for her she doesn't live in London :nod:

I was being sarcastic, David. This Zhirinovsky guy is talking out of his ass. There's no possible way that some loudmouth Russian MP knows anything about the Bush administration's foreign policy plans. In addition, claiming that this cartoon ordeal was somehow orchestrated by the US is absolutely ludicrous and completely unfounded.

This idiot also has something of a history for shooting his mouth off and making things up. Check out this wonderful article about his response to Condoleeza Rice's reprimanding of Russia regarding its handling of the recent gas crisis in Ukraine: http://english.pravda.ru/main/18/88/...ndoleezza.html

"Condoleezza Rice released a coarse anti-Russian statement. This is because she is a single woman who has no children. She loses her reason because of her late single status. Nature takes it all."

Even putting aside the fact that he's a Russian MP, does this sound like a guy who would be privy to the White House's foreign policy decisions? (Frankly, gldstwmn, I'm shocked that you actually claim to believe this.)

Of course Iran and other Muslim countries are going to be called to task for allowing or encouraging violence in response to these cartoons. But that has nothing to do with an impending war. Do you believe that we're going to launch a war against Syria, as well, because Condi mentioned it in her statement?

Oh I didnt mean that as any comment on what you were saying. SOrry about that. I was being more general in saying we dont need any more wars. Again sorry

:laugh: You obviously don't know me very well. Of course, if you've got better ideas, then I'm willing to read them.