Lebanese protesters torch Danish Embassy

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Why is it that most of the world's terrorists are __________ ?

Are they - or is it just the ones we're interested in?

Again I direct your attention here - List of terrorist groups although you can find most of the same info from the State Department website.

Terrorism is a wide, global phenomenon that isn't merely restricted to religious fundamentalists. Conveniently however, most of the Bush governments rhetoric and language on the 'war on terror' is directed specifically towards terrorism from muslims.

I mentioned the Northern Ireland troubles because they were indicative of another (just as deadly) form of terrorism which killed a comparable number of people to 9/11.

It seems the debate about terrorirsm is black and white where other cultures and religions (outside of our knowledge and experience) are concerned, but we allow ourselves more scope for debate when discussing our own home grown terrorists.

Edited February 6, 2006 by Fishdude

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Why is it that most of the world's terrorists are __________ ?

Are they - or is it just the ones we're interested in?

They seem to be doing the most damage. We can split hairs but in your heart you know the truth.

Do you think any terrorists were in the crowd that torched the Danish Embassy? I'm not sure myself. But if there were'nt then what does that say about those mobs of ________ ? Not much different than terrorists. And all over a few drawings.

[Jaylen Brit 0]

Now see...this is why (having spoken about it in those other threads) I do not stand with any organized religion. Not because I am untrustworthy, or unsupportive of good people, but because I have seen time and again the results of a group of people turning into sheep, following each other over the edge of a cliff.

When it comes down to it, these are thousands of people marching, destroying and spreading hatred deliberately...because of a picture. And while the picture may be offensive to them (I can see that - after all, there are not meant to be any depictions of the Prophet Muhammed...let alone ones like that!), it is simply a picture.

Begs the question: what would have happened if for example someone dressed and went around proclaiming he WAS the prophet Mohammed... What would have happened then, if this is the reaction to a picture? What is the world coming to, when people take ink on paper SO seriously that they go around, smashing things up? Hell - I'll tell you what - why don't we ALL do that! The next time you take offense at something, boys and girls, go and smash at least five things up (could be a mailbox, a neighbor's car etc) and make a big sign condemning the perp and all other who look vaguely like him, to hell.

I think these people need to stop what they are doing, sit down and be thoroughly ashamed of what they were caught up in. This was no way to react - after all, if a group of people are going to complain that they are seen in a certain way:

1) They shouldn't perpetuate it (at least for the sake of their children) and

2) They ought to see that conversely, not all "Westerners" are Muslim-hating-extremists, and calm down.

I ahve no patience for people who wander about, aimlessly destroying things because they are angry. I think it's pathetic - and I'd say the same thing if it was one of my family, too.

This was exactly my point - if people wandered the streets yelling 'yay slavery, bring back segregationsim' would people stand for it? No, I don't think they would.

So why is THIS - the burning, the calling for mass murder (on the placards) tolerated?

In the UK we don't allow the BNP (facist party) to wander through Brixton ( which in case you don't know has a large black population) spreading their filth and racism and calling for 'death to all people of color' and waving signs that say 'lets have more Stephen Lawrences' (murdered black teenager)

nor should we allow this either (the placards the burning of embassies).

I dont see that as freedom of speech its incitement to racial hatred and it achieves NOTHING except give fuel to the fire of facists and the 'let's bomb arab countries all to hell' brigade.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Now see...this is why (having spoken about it in those other threads) I do not stand with any organized religion. Not because I am untrustworthy, or unsupportive of good people, but because I have seen time and again the results of a group of people turning into sheep, following each other over the edge of a cliff.

When it comes down to it, these are thousands of people marching, destroying and spreading hatred deliberately...because of a picture. And while the picture may be offensive to them (I can see that - after all, there are not meant to be any depictions of the Prophet Muhammed...let alone ones like that!), it is simply a picture.

Begs the question: what would have happened if for example someone dressed and went around proclaiming he WAS the prophet Mohammed... What would have happened then, if this is the reaction to a picture? What is the world coming to, when people take ink on paper SO seriously that they go around, smashing things up? Hell - I'll tell you what - why don't we ALL do that! The next time you take offense at something, boys and girls, go and smash at least five things up (could be a mailbox, a neighbor's car etc) and make a big sign condemning the perp and all other who look vaguely like him, to hell.

I think these people need to stop what they are doing, sit down and be thoroughly ashamed of what they were caught up in. This was no way to react - after all, if a group of people are going to complain that they are seen in a certain way:

1) They shouldn't perpetuate it (at least for the sake of their children) and

2) They ought to see that conversely, not all "Westerners" are Muslim-hating-extremists, and calm down.

I ahve no patience for people who wander about, aimlessly destroying things because they are angry. I think it's pathetic - and I'd say the same thing if it was one of my family, too.

Yes JayJay. All this over some pictures. How many cartoons of the pope or other western incons have been drawn over the years and the west just tolerates it. How many Embassies in the US were set on fire after 9/11. A few cartoons about Islam and all hell breaks loose.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Yes JayJay. All this over some pictures. How many cartoons of the pope or other western incons have been drawn over the years and the west just tolerates it. How many Embassies in the US were set on fire after 9/11. A few cartoons about Islam and all hell breaks loose.

That seems to be because some may feel their icons are holier than others. In reality, it just portrays the idiocy of that ridiculous mob. I said it before and I'll say it again: Do unto others as you would have others do unto you. That said, they have no valid complaint.

It ain't about support or condemnation of the cartoons either. Austria currently holds the presidency of the EU and has urged the EU to condemn the publishing of said cartoons. Their embassy in Teheran was attacked nonetheless.

Those criminal mobs just want to destroy and kill.

[Bosco 1]

But then, their media shows the same lack of respect and sensitivity on a regular basis. And I haven't seen anyone protesting that much less torch embassies because of it. That's all I am saying.

Practice what you preach. Else, you're just ridiculous...

I don't in any way agree with the reaction, however, I think your comparison is lacking. The insensitive cartoons in the Middle East generally target the actions of Sharon, Israel, other political figures, or a generalized group of people, not Jesus, Moses or other prophet. There are plenty of cartoons depicting Muslims/Arabs in general or Muslim leaders and you will not get this kind of reaction.

I highly doubt you could find a single cartoon done by Muslims depicting any of the prophets in a way on par with how Muhammad was depicted in those cartoons.

Again, not condoning the response in any way, but saying their media shows the "same" lack of respect on a daily basis is not a fair one. Find me one cartoon drawn by a Muslim depicting Jesus in a negative way and I will happily retract my words.

Rebecca

Edited February 6, 2006 by rhouni

[Fuzzness 2]

I have seen many of the cartoons printed by middle eastern media and they are far worse than the offending danish cartoon. In fact they don't even compare. yet no saudi or jordanian embassies have been torched. explain that one to me.

[pedroh 21]

PWNAGE!!

man.. I dunno why people are tolerating these savage mobs.. i'd kick some ####### or throw some tear gas to appease them.. thats the only way they learn...

[Bosco 1]

I have seen many of the cartoons printed by middle eastern media and they are far worse than the offending danish cartoon. In fact they don't even compare. yet no saudi or jordanian embassies have been torched. explain that one to me.

Find just one depicting Jesus or Moses.

Rebecca

[pedroh 21]

I have seen many of the cartoons printed by middle eastern media and they are far worse than the offending danish cartoon. In fact they don't even compare. yet no saudi or jordanian embassies have been torched. explain that one to me.

Find just one depicting Jesus or Moses.

Rebecca

watch southpark or any jew comedy standup from comedy central..

dee dee dee

[Fuzzness 2]

I have seen many of the cartoons printed by middle eastern media and they are far worse than the offending danish cartoon. In fact they don't even compare. yet no saudi or jordanian embassies have been torched. explain that one to me.

Find just one depicting Jesus or Moses.

Rebecca

Does it need to be Jesus or Moses to be offensive to me as a human being?

[Bosco 1]

I have seen many of the cartoons printed by middle eastern media and they are far worse than the offending danish cartoon. In fact they don't even compare. yet no saudi or jordanian embassies have been torched. explain that one to me.

Find just one depicting Jesus or Moses.

Rebecca

Does it need to be Jesus or Moses to be offensive to me as a human being?

No, but I am discussing the reaction rather than what is offensive and the comparison that what is done in the Arab/Muslim media is the SAME as what was done in this case.

There are plenty of offensive cartoons about Muslim political leaders, Muslims, etc. that you do not see this reaction to. The difference is that this depicted a Prophet in an offensive way, and that is NOT something you would find done by Muslims regarding the Christian/Jewish prophets.

Again, I find the reaction appalling, but I think this is a very unfair comparison.

Rebecca

[Fuzzness 2]

I have seen many of the cartoons printed by middle eastern media and they are far worse than the offending danish cartoon. In fact they don't even compare. yet no saudi or jordanian embassies have been torched. explain that one to me.

Find just one depicting Jesus or Moses.

Rebecca

Does it need to be Jesus or Moses to be offensive to me as a human being?

No, but I am discussing the reaction rather than what is offensive and the comparison that what is done in the Arab/Muslim media is the SAME as what was done in this case.

There are plenty of offensive cartoons about Muslim political leaders, Muslims, etc. that you do not see this reaction to. The difference is that this depicted a Prophet in an offensive way, and that is NOT something you would find done by Muslims regarding the Christian/Jewish prophets.

Again, I find the reaction appalling, but I think this is a very unfair comparison.

Rebecca

Hold on just a second... I don't recall hearing that the cartoonist was christian. So since I am not a christian, does this mean I am allowed to make offensive cartoons about Mohammed or Jesus or Moses?

At least we agree on one thing, the reaction was appalling. And I do also think the cartoon was in bad taste. I didn't find it funny at all.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

There are plenty of offensive cartoons about Muslim political leaders, Muslims, etc. that you do not see this reaction to. The difference is that this depicted a Prophet in an offensive way, and that is NOT something you would find done by Muslims regarding the Christian/Jewish prophets.

Again, I find the reaction appalling, but I think this is a very unfair comparison.

Rebecca

So, the Star of David with the Nazi Swastika superimposed within it (there's a link to that tasteless piece of Arab work above) and the Arab cartoons openly engaging in denying the holocaust are not as offensive? Please.

[Bosco 1]

I have seen many of the cartoons printed by middle eastern media and they are far worse than the offending danish cartoon. In fact they don't even compare. yet no saudi or jordanian embassies have been torched. explain that one to me.

Find just one depicting Jesus or Moses.

Rebecca

Does it need to be Jesus or Moses to be offensive to me as a human being?

No, but I am discussing the reaction rather than what is offensive and the comparison that what is done in the Arab/Muslim media is the SAME as what was done in this case.

There are plenty of offensive cartoons about Muslim political leaders, Muslims, etc. that you do not see this reaction to. The difference is that this depicted a Prophet in an offensive way, and that is NOT something you would find done by Muslims regarding the Christian/Jewish prophets.

Again, I find the reaction appalling, but I think this is a very unfair comparison.

Rebecca

Hold on just a second... I don't recall hearing that the cartoonist was christian. So since I am not a christian, does this mean I am allowed to make offensive cartoons about Mohammed or Jesus or Moses?

At least we agree on one thing, the reaction was appalling. And I do also think the cartoon was in bad taste. I didn't find it funny at all.

Two issues here:

1) The reactions: There are and have been plenty of negative depictions of Muslims and Muslim leaders that you have not seen this reaction to. In this case a prophet was depicted. I am saying comparing the reaction of an offensive depiction of Sharon to the offensive depiction of Muhammad is unfair. A fair comparison would be the reaction of a depiction of Arafat to Sharon, or Jewish people to Muslim people.

2) The comparison that the Arab/Muslim media is equally offensive as the Western media. It was said that the Arab media does the "same" on a regular basis. I am saying they will never depict a prophet in that way.

Rebecca