I believe you. I'm trying mentally to put this in a context where I would actually care and I can see your angle.
Look, I never said "yes, let's take some hostages and threaten the paper!"
I said that someone royally fucked up. I think it's clear that it was poor enough judgment and taste, and has far-enough reaching consequences (that could've been predicted) to say it's a fuck up.
I was personally offended by the cartoons, but that's just me. I'm not killing anyone over it.
If a big US paper, say the Times or the Post, published a bunch of really racist cartoons, and African American groups went wild and the paper was getting death threats and a couple white folks got beat up over it, I don't think anyone would sanction the violence but pretty much everyone would say, "well this is what can happen when you publish really offensive and provocative material in a national paper about a group of people who would resort to violence as their "revenge" against literature, art or someone's opinion.[/b] ."
That's all.
Seriously, what is the difference between this cartoon and a Crucifix submerged in Piss??
They both degrade a religious belief
They both degrade the figure head of said religions
Yet us intolerant Americans displayed Pisschrist in a Museum and paid the artist grant money to help him create his art!!
And yet those intolerant Christians didn't use any violence as their "revenge"
Some Christians bomb abortion clinics and kill doctors. Others wage crusades...
Trying to paint the Muslim faith or Muslims in general as inherently violent is not really going to get you anywhere. There is a direct causal connection between oppression and violence.
What Christian Organization, sanctioned by a recognized church or religion has ever claimed responsibility for Abortion Clinic Bombings??? I'm not saying it hasn't happened, I'd just like to be educated as to who, if anyone, has actually done this so I can add them to my list of assholic religious zealots.??
Some Christians bomb abortion clinics and kill doctors. Others wage crusades...
Trying to paint the Muslim faith or Muslims in general as inherently violent is not really going to get you anywhere. There is a direct causal connection between oppression and violence.
Some Christians bomb abortion clinics and kill doctors. Others wage crusades...
Trying to paint the Muslim faith or Muslims in general as inherently violent is not really going to get you anywhere. There is a direct causal connection between oppression and violence.
who in your view is oppressing muslims?
You're totally disingenous and I'm not going to have this discussion with you.
Rockadelic, I am fairly sure that the abortion "vigilance" is sanctioned by fringe churches and groups. Just like Muslim violence is sanctioned by fringe mosques and groups. Same shit.
Some Christians bomb abortion clinics and kill doctors. Others wage crusades...
Trying to paint the Muslim faith or Muslims in general as inherently violent is not really going to get you anywhere. There is a direct causal connection between oppression and violence.
who in your view is oppressing muslims?
You're totally disingenous and I'm not going to have this discussion with you.
Rockadelic, I am fairly sure that the abortion "vigilance" is sanctioned by fringe churches and groups. Just like Muslim violence is sanctioned by fringe mosques and groups. Same shit.
I've heard MANY Christian leaders, of MANy different denominations denounce these Abortion Bombings....where are the Muslim leaders who are denouncing the terrorism that Muslims are perpetrating around the globe??
I can only think of three reasons that EVERY Muslim leader hasn't spoken out against this Muslim related violence(even if it is a fringe group like the Abortion nuts)
1) They just don't care 2) They actually support it 3) They are afarid that these fundamentalists will attack them if they do.
Some Christians bomb abortion clinics and kill doctors. Others wage crusades...
Trying to paint the Muslim faith or Muslims in general as inherently violent is not really going to get you anywhere. There is a direct causal connection between oppression and violence.
who in your view is oppressing muslims?
You're totally disingenous and I'm not going to have this discussion with you.
Rockadelic, I am fairly sure that the abortion "vigilance" is sanctioned by fringe churches and groups. Just like Muslim violence is sanctioned by fringe mosques and groups. Same shit.
I've heard MANY Christian leaders, of MANy different denominations denounce these Abortion Bombings....where are the Muslim leaders who are denouncing the terrorism that Muslims are perpetrating around the globe??
I can only think of three reasons that EVERY Muslim leader hasn't spoken out against this Muslim related violence(even if it is a fringe group like the Abortion nuts)
1) They just don't care 2) They actually support it 3) They are afarid that these fundamentalists will attack them if they do.
Can anyone give a more reasonable explanation??
many have - but i guess the news you watch just doesn't show it.
your reasoning is scary - because leaders don't speak out against it they must be ok with it?
i don't remember hearing every white person apologizing for and condemning Timothy McVeigh's actions or every American apologizing for and condemning the military wiping out whole villages in El Salvador - should I assume they're all down?
Some Christians bomb abortion clinics and kill doctors. Others wage crusades...
Trying to paint the Muslim faith or Muslims in general as inherently violent is not really going to get you anywhere. There is a direct causal connection between oppression and violence.
who in your view is oppressing muslims?
You're totally disingenous and I'm not going to have this discussion with you.
Rockadelic, I am fairly sure that the abortion "vigilance" is sanctioned by fringe churches and groups. Just like Muslim violence is sanctioned by fringe mosques and groups. Same shit.
I've heard MANY Christian leaders, of MANy different denominations denounce these Abortion Bombings....where are the Muslim leaders who are denouncing the terrorism that Muslims are perpetrating around the globe??
I can only think of three reasons that EVERY Muslim leader hasn't spoken out against this Muslim related violence(even if it is a fringe group like the Abortion nuts)
1) They just don't care 2) They actually support it 3) They are afarid that these fundamentalists will attack them if they do.
Can anyone give a more reasonable explanation??
many have - but i guess the news you watch just doesn't show it.
your reasoning is scary - because leaders don't speak out against it they must be ok with it?
i don't remember hearing every white person apologizing for and condemning Timothy McVeigh's actions or every American apologizing for and condemning the military wiping out whole villages in El Salvador - should I assume they're all down?
Can you give me a link to, or the name of one of these leaders who have spoken out?? I watch a hell of a lot of news and other than some local Muslim AMERICAN CITIZENS I haven't seen a single one. Maybe our media is purposely not showing them??
Timothy McVeigh was representing some insane Militia mentality and/or group, and certainly not "all white people"....and even that insane Militia group came out and said they did not support McVeigh.
Maybe, just maybe if some of the Muslim Leaders and Holy Men spoke out against terrorism, some of it's followers would think twice before committing it.
Some Christians bomb abortion clinics and kill doctors. Others wage crusades...
Trying to paint the Muslim faith or Muslims in general as inherently violent is not really going to get you anywhere. There is a direct causal connection between oppression and violence.
who in your view is oppressing muslims?
You're totally disingenous and I'm not going to have this discussion with you.
Rockadelic, I am fairly sure that the abortion "vigilance" is sanctioned by fringe churches and groups. Just like Muslim violence is sanctioned by fringe mosques and groups. Same shit.
I've heard MANY Christian leaders, of MANy different denominations denounce these Abortion Bombings....where are the Muslim leaders who are denouncing the terrorism that Muslims are perpetrating around the globe??
I can only think of three reasons that EVERY Muslim leader hasn't spoken out against this Muslim related violence(even if it is a fringe group like the Abortion nuts)
1) They just don't care 2) They actually support it 3) They are afarid that these fundamentalists will attack them if they do.
Can anyone give a more reasonable explanation??
many have - but i guess the news you watch just doesn't show it.
your reasoning is scary - because leaders don't speak out against it they must be ok with it?
i don't remember hearing every white person apologizing for and condemning Timothy McVeigh's actions or every American apologizing for and condemning the military wiping out whole villages in El Salvador - should I assume they're all down?
Can you give me a link to, or the name of one of these leaders who have spoken out?? I watch a hell of a lot of news and other than some local Muslim AMERICAN CITIZENS I haven't seen a single one. Maybe our media is purposely not showing them??
Timothy McVeigh was representing some insane Militia mentality and/or group, and certainly not "all white people"....and even that insane Militia group came out and said they did not support McVeigh.
Maybe, just maybe if some of the Muslim Leaders and Holy Men spoke out against terrorism, some of it's followers would think twice before committing it.
i think your expectation of a few people having to answer for other people's actions just because they are the same religion is messed up.
you're missing the point of my example of McVeigh.
i think the problem for folks, like rockadelic, not to pick on him, i suffer from this time to time myself, is the calm rational voices that come out against terrorism are drowned out by the nuts, the media is more likley to showcase a crazy muslim dude rather than i guy like this... come on hes boring and tame
people are much more likely to read something with a crazy looking dude like...
Maybe, just maybe if some of the Muslim Leaders and Holy Men spoke out against terrorism, some of it's followers would think twice before committing it.
Rich it's pretty clear that you just don't get a lot of info from the Muslim world, I mean... some of the biggest imams, mosques, and leaders of Muslim groups have condemned terrorism... the biggest Islamic scholars in the world have come out and said, "this is not sanctioned by Islam"...
i think your expectation of a few people having to answer for other people's actions just because they are the same religion is messed up.
you're missing the point of my example of McVeigh.
i think the problem for folks, like rockadelic, not to pick on him, i suffer from this time to time myself, is the calm rational voices that come out against terrorism are drowned out by the nuts, the media is more likley to showcase a crazy muslim dude rather than i guy like this... come on hes boring and tame
people are much more likely to read something with a crazy looking dude like...
Just out of curiosity, is that guy "crazy" because he's wearing a turban? Other than that, and the color of their beards, I see no real differences (btw, fuck al-Zawahiri).
And Rock - I think it is very dangerous to make blanket statements.
Maybe, just maybe if some of the Muslim Leaders and Holy Men spoke out against terrorism, some of it's followers would think twice before committing it.
Rich it's pretty clear that you just don't get a lot of info from the Muslim world, I mean... some of the biggest imams, mosques, and leaders of Muslim groups have condemned terrorism... the biggest Islamic scholars in the world have come out and said, "this is not sanctioned by Islam"...
I don't pretend to know everything and quite frankly all I hear and see here in the U.S. is "Where are the Muslim leaders who speak out against Islamofacism".......I've been educated by y'all, but would still like some names of MUSLIM LEADERS(not "scholars") so I can research what they've said and to whom.
Just out of curiosity, is that guy "crazy" because he's wearing a turban? Other than that, and the color of their beards, I see no real differences (btw, fuck al-Zawahir).
try scary to americans rather than crazy, not about the turban and shit, more about who looks like a threat to americans, even though personally suits scare me more than turbans
And just to throw it out there, "jihad" does not mean "holy war".
I give up...what does it mean??
Jihad (Arabic: جهاد jihād) is an Islamic term, from the Arabic root jhd ("to exert utmost effort, to strive, struggle"), which connotes a wide range of meanings: anything from an inward spiritual struggle to attain perfect faith to a political or militant struggle to defend or further Islam. Jihad is repeatedly used in the context of Holy War by Islamic militants and some religious leaders throughout the Middle East [1]. Some Muslims consider jihad to be the most misunderstood aspect of their religion by non-Muslims [2]. The Islamic religious legitimacy of the goals or methods of various Islamist movements who adopt the terminology of jihad is often brought into question, usually by moderate and liberal Muslims.
In much of the English speaking world, jihad is associated with the phrase "holy war"; however, the concept of jihad encompasses more than just warfare, and a more accurate translation probably would be "holy struggle", "righteous struggle" or "holy endeavour". The denotation is of a challenging or difficult, (frequently) opposed effort, made either in accomplishment or resistance.
A person who engages in any form of jihad is called a "mujahid", meaning "striver" or "struggler". This term is most often used to mean a person who engages in fighting, but, for example a Muslim struggling to memorize the Qur'an is called a mujahid. The neologism jihadist is sometimes used to describe militant Islamic groups .
Just out of curiosity, is that guy "crazy" because he's wearing a turban? Other than that, and the color of their beards, I see no real differences (btw, fuck al-Zawahir).
try scary to americans rather than crazy, not about the turban and shit, more about who looks like a threat to americans, even though personally suits scare me more than turbans
What he says and does is far scarier than how he looks.
"...your leaders, who are keen to accumulate wealth, insist on throwing you in battles and killing your souls in Iraq and Afghanistan -- and, God willing, on your own land."
I honestly don't have the energy to get into this whole topic, but I will say this: there are nuts in every religion, so to say "MUSLIMS ARE LIKE THIS" makes as much sense as saying "CHRISTIANS ARE LIKE THIS". You have different denominations, beliefs, sects etc. You cannot wholeheartedly say any group of millions is entirely the same, and to do so is a dangerous, narrow minded cop-out.
Maybe, just maybe if some of the Muslim Leaders and Holy Men spoke out against terrorism, some of it's followers would think twice before committing it.
Rich it's pretty clear that you just don't get a lot of info from the Muslim world, I mean... some of the biggest imams, mosques, and leaders of Muslim groups have condemned terrorism... the biggest Islamic scholars in the world have come out and said, "this is not sanctioned by Islam"...
I don't pretend to know everything and quite frankly all I hear and see here in the U.S. is "Where are the Muslim leaders who speak out against Islamofacism".......I've been educated by y'all, but would still like some names of MUSLIM LEADERS(not "scholars") so I can research what they've said and to whom.
in Islam - scholars are often leaders and leaders, scholars.
i think you're asking to be proven wrong, not my department.
but if you really want to learn and hear what Muslim leaders/scholars/citizens are saying (about how they feel and not all Muslims), it's not difficult to find by searching on the web or going to the library and checking for overseas newspapers, journals, etc...perhaps engage some folks you might meet in your community.
And just out of curiosity, how many of you have been to a Mosque or been around Muslims?
Been around Muslims/people who believe in Islam.
Never been to a Mosque. I'm an atheist, so I rarely enter a house of God, but I'll probably check out some of the more historic ones later on in life, if luck's willing. For instance, I'd love to visit the Mezquita Mosque-Cathedral in Cordoba.
What he says and does is far scarier than how he looks.
for sure
"...your leaders, who are keen to accumulate wealth, insist on throwing you in battles and killing your souls in Iraq and Afghanistan -- and, God willing, on your own land."
I honestly don't have the energy to get into this whole topic, but I will say this: there are nuts in every religion, so to say "MUSLIMS ARE LIKE THIS" makes as much sense as saying "CHRISTIANS ARE LIKE THIS". You have different denominations, beliefs, sects etc. You cannot wholeheartedly say any group of millions is entirely the same, and to do so is a dangerous, narrow minded cop-out.
And just out of curiosity, how many of you have been to a Mosque or been around Muslims?
Been around Muslims/people who believe in Islam.
Never been to a Mosque. I'm an atheist, so I rarely enter a house of God, but I'll probably check out some of the more historic ones later on in life, if luck's willing. For instance, I'd love to visit the Mezquita Mosque-Cathedral in Cordoba.
Wrrd. I think it's important for people to have at least some first hand experience with a culture or religion before they profess to tell the world what it is like.
What I recall from my reading and experience (it's been well over a decade), Islam is a religion that welcomes all. The first time I went to a Mosque I felt uncomfortable because I wasn't heavy into the religion, I just wanted to learn more, but by the end of the night I felt welcomed like family. My own personal experiences in life with Muslims tells me that the core of the religion has very little to do with the actions of fundamentalists that make headlines, but just like in any religion, teachings are open to interperetation, and all through time man has been manipulating their meanings for his own agenda.
Ultimately I came to find that organized religion is not for me. That's why I just believe in God and let all these suckas battle to the death.
What he says and does is far scarier than how he looks.
for sure
"...your leaders, who are keen to accumulate wealth, insist on throwing you in battles and killing your souls in Iraq and Afghanistan -- and, God willing, on your own land."
I honestly don't have the energy to get into this whole topic, but I will say this: there are nuts in every religion, so to say "MUSLIMS ARE LIKE THIS" makes as much sense as saying "CHRISTIANS ARE LIKE THIS". You have different denominations, beliefs, sects etc. You cannot wholeheartedly say any group of millions is entirely the same, and to do so is a dangerous, narrow minded cop-out.
Let me get some coffee and i'll be back.
i didnt say that, hope your not looking at me
No, no, Rockadelic. And don't get me wrong, you all make some interesting points. I just think sometimes we need to step out of what we know and get a fresh perspective on things. That's why despite how these types on coversations usually end up spiraling into name calling and ignorance, we'll all continue to have them. I've changed some of my personal opinions and views because of some of the exchanges on here. It can be a constructive thing if folls are willing to listen to one another.
1. I am no where near a religious person. I dislike being preach to. But in any case, I believe in a higher power.
2. I have family in many different faiths, including Islam.
3. This thread is going way off topic and getting seriously mixed up between faith/race.
4. I'm surprised this thread has gone this far. Since no one said anything towards the many joke comics w/ either Jesus/christianity or the priest (w/boys) stuff that was posted in the last 4 or so months.
5. Is this all in either bad taste or pure ignorance? Hell yeah.
The really sad part about this is... In the end, its probably going to really hurt the people that have nothing to do with it. From the poor muslim that just lost their job at the danish company in S.A. to maybe the Danish person walking around the wrong street in some foreign country who might get grabbed.
Nobody is coming out a winner anytime soon... Probably because we all lose in the end if we keep this up.
Many of the replies in this thread, except those made by Paycheck, Ness and a few others, bear the signs of gut reaction and lack of first-hand knowledge about what is really going on here. Again, the comfy pillow called the freedom of speech speech is pulled out from the convenient closet. I understand this because there are a lot of subtleties going on here that y'all might not know about.
The general consensus seems to be
1. The cartoons = bad taste.
2. Bad taste not enough to kidnap people and raise hell.
Good. I can get with this for starters, except there has been no kidnappings yet, 'just' a few assaults and a lot of angry demonstrations. And the boycott of course. The problem is that the image in people's heads seems to be:
Innocent, objective newspaper in bubblefuck Denmark prints a few harmless drawings of Muhammad one day
---->>>>
Outrage and violence all over the world the next day
This has not been the course of actions. First, let me break it down to just the bare facts.
---
STEP 1:[/b]
SEPTEMBER 30TH (4 MONTHS AGO!!): Jyllands-Posten prints the 12 drawings of the holy prophet of Islam, Muhammad. The reactions from danish muslims can roughly be split into 3 categories: A: I don't care (very few) B: I find the drawings offensive and/or stupid, but hey - we've got freedom of speech here so I won't do anything about it (many). C: I find the drawings offensive, and I'm going to do something about it (NON-VIOLENT) (many).
STEP 2:[/b]
October 19th: 11 ambassadors from muslim countries ask for a meeting with our prime minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen, asking him to denounce the drawings. The prime minister refuses. ??? November-December: A delegation - representing reaction C - from the Danish Islamic Community consisting of imams and other leading figures from Copenhagen, Odense and Aarhus travel all over the Middle East to talk with politicians, leaders of organizations and religious leaders to rally a protest against Denmark. ??? December 7th: Demonstrations in Pakistan against the prophet drawings and Denmark. ??? December 19th: 22 former danish ambassadors criticize Anders Fogh for not wanting to meet with the muslim ambassadors. ??? December 29th: The foreign secretaries from the League Of Arab States criticize the danish government for their handling of the matter of the prophet drawings. ??? January 1st: Anders Fogh calls for a sober debate in his New Years Speech and the speech is translated to arabic.
STEP 3:[/b]
January 10th: The norwegian christian newspaper Magazinet prints the 12 drawings with permission from Jyllands-Posten. ??? January 26th: The Saudi-arabians begin a boycott of danish products in the supermarkets. The Saudi-Arabian government calls their ambassador in Denmark back home to discuss the drawings. ??? January 26th: Norway apologizes for the prophet drawings. ??? January 27th: The danish dairy product giant Arla reports that their sales in Saudi-Arabia are close to zero. Losses are 1.7 million dollars a day. Medicinal company Novo start to feel the effects of the boycott as well. ??? January 28th: The danish ambassador in Saudi-Arabia, Hans Klingenberg, is interviewed on the american TV-channel AP-TV, criticizing Jyllands-Posten for showing poor judgement and lack of knowledge of Islam. ??? January 28th: The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), representing 57 states, declare that Denmark should have denounced the drawings. ??? January 29th: Libya closes their embassy in Denmark. The danish ambassador in Kuwait is called for a meeting with the government of Kuwait. The Syrian government states that is is "shocked" by the drawings.The danish ambassador in Jordan is called to answer to the foreign secretary of Jordan. ??? January 29th: The discontent with the drawings and demonstrations are increasing on the streets of most of the Middle East, where danish flags and banners with pictures of the danish prime minister are burned in protest of the insult to the holy prophet of Islam. ??? January 30th: Prime minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen personally denounces the drawings, but does not make an official apology on behalf of the danish government. ??? January 30th: Jyllands-Posten apologizes for having offended muslims with the drawings, but not for printing them.
---
As you can see it took 3 months from the drawings were printed until we reached step 3, which is where it really started to get silly. Why did we even reach step 2? To understand this, you have to read between the lines. First of all, the shit should have been deaded even before the delegation started their round trip in november.
I believe this could have happened if the danish politicians and the newspaper in question would have just communicated in a calm and rational manner with the DK Islamic community from the get-go, instead of being so damn dismissive. Apologies or not, a lot of frustrations could have been defused by just speaking with these people instead of exhibiting that usual smug and condescending attitude that is so prevalent in danish society.
You've got to understand that foreigners, people of foreign descent or just people who look a little different are subject to a sort of passive-aggressive form of racism/discrimination on a daily basis. I'm sorry to say that it's an integrated part of society here. The last 30-40 years Denmark has seen a vast influx of immigrants, refugees, their children and their children's children. My mother and myself are a part of this segment. In this time we've eaten all kinds of shit from the 'real' danes: social, economic and cultural discrimination.
Being called a monkey, a black bastard and all sorts of local words I can't translate to english. Having your religion ridiculed as being 'medieval'. Being ridiculed for even being religious and practicing your religion in everyday life. Having your job application rejected without further consideration if your name was Hassan. Making a simple mistake at work and being told to "go back to the savannah" by your colleague. Being automatically viewed as a potential rapist. Being constantly viewed as when dealing with any kind of authority. Being viewed as part of one big grey mass of 'immigrants' (which in people's minds equals muslims these days), no matter if you are sudanese, pakistani, indonesian or albanian. Being viewed as a cancer in society with nothing to contribute.
I haven't had it that bad because my father is from Denmark and my mother is the kind of person who quickly adapts to new situations - hardworking, never bitter, taking the bad with the good. Plus she comes from a catholic background and not an islamic, which 'helps' a little as well. But I have seen and felt enough for myself to know what feelings are bubbling in the hearts of people, what's bubbling in my own heart. With the emergence of The Danish People's Party 15 years ago (the equivalent of the British National Party or Front National), it's become even more legitimate to speak about 'foreigners' in the most unpleasant and uncivilised manner in danish society, adding fuel to the fire, condoning stupidity and polarization. I'm sick and tired of the "us vs. them" mentality that is so prevalent here today.
People are not talking with each other, they are talking at each other. We can all agree on the readymade freedom of speech yadyada. But there is also such a thing as using your brain before saying or writing something. Isn't that one of the tr
aits of being civilized? Jyllands-Posten were fanning the fire delibarately. The political climate here does not need this kind of shit.
Negative seeds have been planted in people on all sides for too many years. We need constructive dialogue and positive action, not more mudslinging. The media and politicians have responsibilities. Words and images mean A LOT. We need to stop perpetrating stereotypes. We need to stop hiding behind dandy words about freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is not an excuse for stupidity.
Now it's become a semi-farce involving the international community, based on part facts, part feelings, part hearsay, part personal interests. A lot of what these people in the arab countries have been told about the issue is not true or overblown, but the man on the street does not know this. That's what happens when things get out of hand. All he knows is that Denmark is now a symbol of westerners taking a big fat dump on his religion/culture.
A lot of people in these countries are governed by one-party systems where the media = the government. They see Jyllands-Posten as the voice of Denmark, the voice of our government. Many of these countries are also repressing their populations, and this issue is being used as a vent for frustrations stemming from this as well. It has given generally frustrated people here and abroad an excuse for overreaction, and my question is "why?". What exactly did Jyllands-Posten accomplish by this? This was not a healthy contribution to a rotten debate. This was not a piece of clever satire, meant to make all sides laugh hearty-har-har, then kiss and make up. They knew damn well what they were just gonna start some shit.
People are now saying things based on hate, anger, spite, ignorance or just plain misinformation. I saw a man from Islamic Jihad on the Gaza Strip saying he wanted an official apology from the Danish Queen. - she has absolutey no political power here! And there has been talk amongst Danes to go burn copies of the Qur'an on the Copenhagen Town Square as an answer to the burning of danish flags in the Middle East.
*SIGH*
When will people ever learn? This is a downward spiral, and I'm sick of it. We could have stopped this a long time ago. And I'm not just talking about 3 months ago, I'm talking about 30 years ago.
---
Sorry for the looong-ass rant. I know y'all don't really get much news from our corner of the world, and I just wanted to get this thread away from the inadequate birds-eye view, back on-topic and let people know the facts and the bigger context of what's going on here.
And I'm kinda sad there hasn't been more europeans adding their 2 cents to this thread. The discussion seems a little amputated with mostly americans/canadians present.
the comfy pillow called the freedom of speech speech is pulled out from the convenient closet.
i stopped reading at this point
I know the post is long, but if you would have kept reading you would see what I meant. OK, so I'm a little sarcastic, I just wanted to express that things are not that simple. Oh well, read on if you want to. If not, so be it.
When you were there, did you think at all that Palestinians should have more/better access to it? Not provoking, serious question.
No. old doods and women get steady access to the entire Temple Mount. It's the young males that are restricted from time to time.
honestly, though, I think the Israelis are more than fair about it considering that Muslim mosque-goers have routinely stoned Jews praying below at the Western Wall.
Don't forget that the Temple Mount is the holiest site in Judaism. Yet the Israelis, out of clear-thinking pragmatism in the wake of the Six-Day War, have allowed the Islamic Waqf to administer it since the beginning.
I'd like to see more oversight, actually. The unrestricted digging/excavating/building that the waqf has allowed under the Temple Mount has, according to several engineering surveys, seriously compromised the Mount's structural integrity. Not to mention basically destroyed untold archeological artifacts in the process.
Comments
What Christian Organization, sanctioned by a recognized church or religion has ever claimed responsibility for Abortion Clinic Bombings??? I'm not saying it hasn't happened, I'd just like to be educated as to who, if anyone, has actually done this so I can add them to my list of assholic religious zealots.??
who in your view is oppressing muslims?
You're totally disingenous and I'm not going to have this discussion with you.
Rockadelic, I am fairly sure that the abortion "vigilance" is sanctioned by fringe churches and groups. Just like Muslim violence is sanctioned by fringe mosques and groups. Same shit.
I've heard MANY Christian leaders, of MANy different denominations denounce these Abortion Bombings....where are the Muslim leaders who are denouncing the terrorism that Muslims are perpetrating around the globe??
I can only think of three reasons that EVERY Muslim leader hasn't spoken out against this Muslim related violence(even if it is a fringe group like the Abortion nuts)
1) They just don't care
2) They actually support it
3) They are afarid that these fundamentalists will attack them if they do.
Can anyone give a more reasonable explanation??
many have - but i guess the news you watch just doesn't show it.
your reasoning is scary - because leaders don't speak out against it they must be ok with it?
i don't remember hearing every white person apologizing for and condemning Timothy McVeigh's actions or every American apologizing for and condemning the military wiping out whole villages in El Salvador - should I assume they're all down?
Can you give me a link to, or the name of one of these leaders who have spoken out?? I watch a hell of a lot of news and other than some local Muslim AMERICAN CITIZENS I haven't seen a single one. Maybe our media is purposely not showing them??
Timothy McVeigh was representing some insane Militia mentality and/or group, and certainly not "all white people"....and even that insane Militia group came out and said they did not support McVeigh.
Maybe, just maybe if some of the Muslim Leaders and Holy Men spoke out against terrorism, some of it's followers would think twice before committing it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4677633.stm
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/16461.htm
http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2001-09/13/article14.shtml
i think your expectation of a few people having to answer for other people's actions just because they are the same religion is messed up.
you're missing the point of my example of McVeigh.
i think the problem for folks, like rockadelic, not to pick on him, i suffer from this time to time myself, is the calm rational voices that come out against terrorism are drowned out by the nuts, the media is more likley to showcase a crazy muslim dude rather than i guy like this...
come on hes boring and tame
people are much more likely to read something with a crazy looking dude like...
Rich it's pretty clear that you just don't get a lot of info from the Muslim world, I mean... some of the biggest imams, mosques, and leaders of Muslim groups have condemned terrorism... the biggest Islamic scholars in the world have come out and said, "this is not sanctioned by Islam"...
Just out of curiosity, is that guy "crazy" because he's wearing a turban? Other than that, and the color of their beards, I see no real differences (btw, fuck al-Zawahiri).
And Rock - I think it is very dangerous to make blanket statements.
I don't pretend to know everything and quite frankly all I hear and see here in the U.S. is "Where are the Muslim leaders who speak out against Islamofacism".......I've been educated by y'all, but would still like some names of MUSLIM LEADERS(not "scholars") so I can research what they've said and to whom.
try scary to americans rather than crazy, not about the turban and shit, more about who looks like a threat to americans, even though personally suits scare me more than turbans
You think???
And just to throw it out there, "jihad" does not mean "holy war".
I give up...what does it mean??
Jihad (Arabic: جهاد jihād) is an Islamic term, from the Arabic root jhd ("to exert utmost effort, to strive, struggle"), which connotes a wide range of meanings: anything from an inward spiritual struggle to attain perfect faith to a political or militant struggle to defend or further Islam. Jihad is repeatedly used in the context of Holy War by Islamic militants and some religious leaders throughout the Middle East [1]. Some Muslims consider jihad to be the most misunderstood aspect of their religion by non-Muslims [2]. The Islamic religious legitimacy of the goals or methods of various Islamist movements who adopt the terminology of jihad is often brought into question, usually by moderate and liberal Muslims.
In much of the English speaking world, jihad is associated with the phrase "holy war"; however, the concept of jihad encompasses more than just warfare, and a more accurate translation probably would be "holy struggle", "righteous struggle" or "holy endeavour". The denotation is of a challenging or difficult, (frequently) opposed effort, made either in accomplishment or resistance.
A person who engages in any form of jihad is called a "mujahid", meaning "striver" or "struggler". This term is most often used to mean a person who engages in fighting, but, for example a Muslim struggling to memorize the Qur'an is called a mujahid. The neologism jihadist is sometimes used to describe militant Islamic groups .
What he says and does is far scarier than how he looks.
"...your leaders, who are keen to accumulate wealth, insist on throwing you in battles and killing your souls in Iraq and Afghanistan -- and, God willing, on your own land."
I honestly don't have the energy to get into this whole topic, but I will say this: there are nuts in every religion, so to say "MUSLIMS ARE LIKE THIS" makes as much sense as saying "CHRISTIANS ARE LIKE THIS".
You have different denominations, beliefs, sects etc. You cannot wholeheartedly say any group of millions is entirely the same, and to do so is a dangerous, narrow minded cop-out.
Let me get some coffee and i'll be back.
in Islam - scholars are often leaders and leaders, scholars.
i think you're asking to be proven wrong, not my department.
but if you really want to learn and hear what Muslim leaders/scholars/citizens are saying (about how they feel and not all Muslims), it's not difficult to find by searching on the web or going to the library and checking for overseas newspapers, journals, etc...perhaps engage some folks you might meet in your community.
Been around Muslims/people who believe in Islam.
Never been to a Mosque. I'm an atheist, so I rarely enter a house of God, but I'll probably check out some of the more historic ones later on in life, if luck's willing. For instance, I'd love to visit the Mezquita Mosque-Cathedral in Cordoba.
for sure
i didnt say that, hope your not looking at me
Wrrd. I think it's important for people to have at least some first hand experience with a culture or religion before they profess to tell the world what it is like.
What I recall from my reading and experience (it's been well over a decade), Islam is a religion that welcomes all. The first time I went to a Mosque I felt uncomfortable because I wasn't heavy into the religion, I just wanted to learn more, but by the end of the night I felt welcomed like family. My own personal experiences in life with Muslims tells me that the core of the religion has very little to do with the actions of fundamentalists that make headlines, but just like in any religion, teachings are open to interperetation, and all through time man has been manipulating their meanings for his own agenda.
Ultimately I came to find that organized religion is not for me.
That's why I just believe in God and let all these suckas battle to the death.
Much like this thread.
Have fun and keep your mind open.
No, no, Rockadelic.
And don't get me wrong, you all make some interesting points. I just think sometimes we need to step out of what we know and get a fresh perspective on things.
That's why despite how these types on coversations usually end up spiraling into name calling and ignorance, we'll all continue to have them.
I've changed some of my personal opinions and views because of some of the exchanges on here. It can be a constructive thing if folls are willing to listen to one another.
1. I am no where near a religious person. I dislike being preach to. But in any case, I believe in a higher power.
2. I have family in many different faiths, including Islam.
3. This thread is going way off topic and getting seriously mixed up between faith/race.
4. I'm surprised this thread has gone this far. Since no one said anything towards the many joke comics w/ either Jesus/christianity or the priest (w/boys) stuff that was posted in the last 4 or so months.
5. Is this all in either bad taste or pure ignorance? Hell yeah.
The really sad part about this is... In the end, its probably going to really hurt the people that have nothing to do with it. From the poor muslim that just lost their job at the danish company in S.A. to maybe the Danish person walking around the wrong street in some foreign country who might get grabbed.
Nobody is coming out a winner anytime soon... Probably because we all lose in the end if we keep this up.
I've been there. Highly reccommended.
I've been in lots of mosques. Al-Aqsa in Jerusalem is pretty impressive inside: big and wooden with a real earthy feel.
When you were there, did you think at all that Palestinians should have more/better access to it? Not provoking, serious question.
Many of the replies in this thread, except those made by Paycheck, Ness and a few others, bear the signs of gut reaction and lack of first-hand knowledge about what is really going on here. Again, the comfy pillow called the freedom of speech speech is pulled out from the convenient closet. I understand this because there are a lot of subtleties going on here that y'all might not know about.
The general consensus seems to be
Good. I can get with this for starters, except there has been no kidnappings yet, 'just' a few assaults and a lot of angry demonstrations. And the boycott of course. The problem is that the image in people's heads seems to be:
Innocent, objective newspaper in bubblefuck Denmark
prints a few harmless drawings of Muhammad one day
---->>>>
Outrage and violence all over the world the next day
This has not been the course of actions. First, let me break it down to just the bare facts.
---
STEP 1:[/b]
SEPTEMBER 30TH (4 MONTHS AGO!!):
Jyllands-Posten prints the 12 drawings of the holy prophet of Islam, Muhammad. The reactions from danish muslims can roughly be split into 3 categories:
A: I don't care (very few)
B: I find the drawings offensive and/or stupid, but hey - we've got freedom of speech here so I won't do anything about it (many).
C: I find the drawings offensive, and I'm going to do something about it (NON-VIOLENT) (many).
STEP 2:[/b]
October 19th:
11 ambassadors from muslim countries ask for a meeting with our prime minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen, asking him to denounce the drawings. The prime minister refuses.
???
November-December:
A delegation - representing reaction C - from the Danish Islamic Community consisting of imams and other leading figures from Copenhagen, Odense and Aarhus travel all over the Middle East to talk with politicians, leaders of organizations and religious leaders to rally a protest against Denmark.
???
December 7th:
Demonstrations in Pakistan against the prophet drawings and Denmark.
???
December 19th:
22 former danish ambassadors criticize Anders Fogh for not wanting to meet with the muslim ambassadors.
???
December 29th:
The foreign secretaries from the League Of Arab States criticize the danish government for their handling of the matter of the prophet drawings.
???
January 1st:
Anders Fogh calls for a sober debate in his New Years Speech and the speech is translated to arabic.
STEP 3:[/b]
January 10th:
The norwegian christian newspaper Magazinet prints the 12 drawings with permission from Jyllands-Posten.
???
January 26th:
The Saudi-arabians begin a boycott of danish products in the supermarkets. The Saudi-Arabian government calls their ambassador in Denmark back home to discuss the drawings.
???
January 26th:
Norway apologizes for the prophet drawings.
???
January 27th:
The danish dairy product giant Arla reports that their sales in Saudi-Arabia are close to zero. Losses are 1.7 million dollars a day. Medicinal company Novo start to feel the effects of the boycott as well.
???
January 28th:
The danish ambassador in Saudi-Arabia, Hans Klingenberg, is interviewed on the american TV-channel AP-TV, criticizing Jyllands-Posten for showing poor judgement and lack of knowledge of Islam.
???
January 28th:
The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), representing 57 states, declare that Denmark should have denounced the drawings.
???
January 29th:
Libya closes their embassy in Denmark. The danish ambassador in Kuwait is called for a meeting with the government of Kuwait. The Syrian government states that is is "shocked" by the drawings.The danish ambassador in Jordan is called to answer to the foreign secretary of Jordan.
???
January 29th:
The discontent with the drawings and demonstrations are increasing on the streets of most of the Middle East, where danish flags and banners with pictures of the danish prime minister are burned in protest of the insult to the holy prophet of Islam.
???
January 30th:
Prime minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen personally denounces the drawings, but does not make an official apology on behalf of the danish government.
???
January 30th:
Jyllands-Posten apologizes for having offended muslims with the drawings, but not for printing them.
---
As you can see it took 3 months from the drawings were printed until we reached step 3, which is where it really started to get silly. Why did we even reach step 2? To understand this, you have to read between the lines. First of all, the shit should have been deaded even before the delegation started their round trip in november.
I believe this could have happened if the danish politicians and the newspaper in question would have just communicated in a calm and rational manner with the DK Islamic community from the get-go, instead of being so damn dismissive. Apologies or not, a lot of frustrations could have been defused by just speaking with these people instead of exhibiting that usual smug and condescending attitude that is so prevalent in danish society.
You've got to understand that foreigners, people of foreign descent or just people who look a little different are subject to a sort of passive-aggressive form of racism/discrimination on a daily basis. I'm sorry to say that it's an integrated part of society here. The last 30-40 years Denmark has seen a vast influx of immigrants, refugees, their children and their children's children. My mother and myself are a part of this segment. In this time we've eaten all kinds of shit from the 'real' danes: social, economic and cultural discrimination.
Being called a monkey, a black bastard and all sorts of local words I can't translate to english. Having your religion ridiculed as being 'medieval'. Being ridiculed for even being religious and practicing your religion in everyday life. Having your job application rejected without further consideration if your name was Hassan. Making a simple mistake at work and being told to "go back to the savannah" by your colleague. Being automatically viewed as a potential rapist. Being constantly viewed as
I haven't had it that bad because my father is from Denmark and my mother is the kind of person who quickly adapts to new situations - hardworking, never bitter, taking the bad with the good. Plus she comes from a catholic background and not an islamic, which 'helps' a little as well. But I have seen and felt enough for myself to know what feelings are bubbling in the hearts of people, what's bubbling in my own heart. With the emergence of The Danish People's Party 15 years ago (the equivalent of the British National Party or Front National), it's become even more legitimate to speak about 'foreigners' in the most unpleasant and uncivilised manner in danish society, adding fuel to the fire, condoning stupidity and polarization. I'm sick and tired of the "us vs. them" mentality that is so prevalent here today.
People are not talking with each other, they are talking at each other. We can all agree on the readymade freedom of speech yadyada. But there is also such a thing as using your brain before saying or writing something. Isn't that one of the tr aits of being civilized? Jyllands-Posten were fanning the fire delibarately. The political climate here does not need this kind of shit.
Negative seeds have been planted in people on all sides for too many years. We need constructive dialogue and positive action, not more mudslinging. The media and politicians have responsibilities. Words and images mean A LOT. We need to stop perpetrating stereotypes. We need to stop hiding behind dandy words about freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is not an excuse for stupidity.
Now it's become a semi-farce involving the international community, based on part facts, part feelings, part hearsay, part personal interests. A lot of what these people in the arab countries have been told about the issue is not true or overblown, but the man on the street does not know this. That's what happens when things get out of hand. All he knows is that Denmark is now a symbol of westerners taking a big fat dump on his religion/culture.
A lot of people in these countries are governed by one-party systems where the media = the government. They see Jyllands-Posten as the voice of Denmark, the voice of our government. Many of these countries are also repressing their populations, and this issue is being used as a vent for frustrations stemming from this as well. It has given generally frustrated people here and abroad an excuse for overreaction, and my question is "why?". What exactly did Jyllands-Posten accomplish by this? This was not a healthy contribution to a rotten debate. This was not a piece of clever satire, meant to make all sides laugh hearty-har-har, then kiss and make up. They knew damn well what they were just gonna start some shit.
People are now saying things based on hate, anger, spite, ignorance or just plain misinformation. I saw a man from Islamic Jihad on the Gaza Strip saying he wanted an official apology from the Danish Queen.
*SIGH*
When will people ever learn? This is a downward spiral, and I'm sick of it. We could have stopped this a long time ago. And I'm not just talking about 3 months ago, I'm talking about 30 years ago.
---
Sorry for the looong-ass rant. I know y'all don't really get much news from our corner of the world, and I just wanted to get this thread away from the inadequate birds-eye view, back on-topic and let people know the facts and the bigger context of what's going on here.
And I'm kinda sad there hasn't been more europeans adding their 2 cents to this thread. The discussion seems a little amputated with mostly americans/canadians present.
i stopped reading at this point
You shouldn't have.
I know the post is long, but if you would have kept reading you would see what I meant. OK, so I'm a little sarcastic, I just wanted to express that things are not that simple. Oh well, read on if you want to. If not, so be it.
No. old doods and women get steady access to the entire Temple Mount. It's the young males that are restricted from time to time.
honestly, though, I think the Israelis are more than fair about it considering that Muslim mosque-goers have routinely stoned Jews praying below at the Western Wall.
Don't forget that the Temple Mount is the holiest site in Judaism. Yet the Israelis, out of clear-thinking pragmatism in the wake of the Six-Day War, have allowed the Islamic Waqf to administer it since the beginning.
I'd like to see more oversight, actually. The unrestricted digging/excavating/building that the waqf has allowed under the Temple Mount has, according to several engineering surveys, seriously compromised the Mount's structural integrity. Not to mention basically destroyed untold archeological artifacts in the process.