quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: I don't want to understand them, many of us are weary of their crap. They can get the hell out if they cannot conform to western standards of conduct when they are here.
what kind of conduct .. insultion conduct or fornication conduct .. they should get used to insolence .. Mr. Homer standard .. sorry but you don't have a moral you are living to die .. do u that's why we were brought to this life to die
Posts: 1022 | From: cairo | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tony Blair said it best, "they cannot come here and abuse our hospitality and expect to be welcome." Here in the point bibo, Muslim fundamentalism will not fly in the west. Much of what it advocates, such as its view of the place of women, is not even legal here. Thin skinned Muslims who move to the west and want to bring with them 'Islamic law' might as well stay at home. Now, if they want to come here and fit in to American , British, Dutch etc. culture thats fine. Don't tell me or anyone else over here what morals we should be living by.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: Don't tell me or anyone else over here what morals we should be living by.
For someone who spends all his time on ES mouthing off how Muslims and people in the Middle East should live their lives, I don't know how you even had the audacity to even think about typing those words!!!! Your empty baseless arrogance astounds me.
Posts: 4576 | From: Cairo | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is true newcomer that we in the west often point out the disfunctional aspects of middle eastern culture, and there are many. We, however, never rected militarily until that philosophy became a threat to the global economy. There is a reason why most of those nations are mired in poverty. In the end, if you want to live like that I suppose no one will object. The problem comes up when , as in Denmark and everywhere else they try to bring it here.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
My comment was addressed to you (sing.) not you (pl.)! Your diversionary tactics are spurious!
Posts: 4576 | From: Cairo | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
Is it better, worse, or no difference at all that the people and papers who drew/published these cartoons are non-Muslims?
Posts: 8794 | From: 01-20-09 The End of an Error | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
There were no 'tactics' just facts. Lets make it simpler so that you might better understand. When you try to impose a 7th century fundamentalist moral philosophy on people in the west many (plural) as well as myself (singular) will object. As for my views (singular) on the middle east, I also object to cannibalism in the Amazon rain forest and any other barbaric practice left over from the middle ages.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Susan, It does not matter whether the cartoons were created by Muslims or non Muslims. You know how the press is in the west, they show no mercy to anyone and that is a good thing. These people act like they should get a pass that no one else gets. When they move to the west they open themselves up for that kind of thing, pure and simple. If someone wishes to disrespect Islam they have a right to do so. It may not be in good taste but they still have the right to that view point.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The bottom line is whether Muslims have a right to dictate to non-Muslims what non-Muslims can and cannot do.
There is NO assumed contract between the immigrant muslim population and the western community he adopts. He must learn to ADAPT TO western societal norms or he can leave...not the other way around.
Provocation was not the desired end itself by the Danish newspaper, but the aim was to show the intolerance of Islam to criticism, and to further demonstrate the intimidation that is brought to bear.
Posts: 149 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Didn't Jyllandsposten or any Danish representative ask the Saudis for a change, how they respect religions (in plural) and religious freedom of all? This is a perfect moment to ask it, instead of apologising for treating, for a moment, Islam like any other religion (that is, allowing it to be made fun of) - instead of raising it above all others and beyond criticism, as is obviously expected!
Now where is the international demand that Muslims apologize for the destruction of the Buddhas of Bamiyan and all the other priceless works of art?
Where is the international demand that Saudi Arabia apologize for their offensive ban on crosses and Bibles?
Where is the international demand that the Saudi government apologize for its official government visa site that says "No Jewish People" allowed?
Where is the international demand that Muslims apologize for the millions of non-Muslims kidnepped and sold into the cruelist forms of slavery?
Where is the international demand that Muslim newspapers apologize for the cartoons that picture Christians and Jews as monkeys and pigs?
Read this: http://www.alminbar.com/khutbaheng/1819.htm Compare it to the hate speeches of Hitler. Hitler comes out like a saint. And every paragraph of this sermon is backed by a verse from the Quran.
It is dishonest and hypocritical to claim that Islam is the religion of Peace and tolerance. The Islamic World shows absolutely no respect for non-Muslim religions.
Posts: 149 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't agree entirely that Muslims or anyone for that matter *has* to adapt to Western societal norms or he can leave......blacks in America didn't have to adapt to Jim Crowe attitudes after slavery ended, and I think the US is ultimately better off for the hell we all went through in the 50s/60s/70s. Their courage to protest and finally change Western societal norms in the US was a *good* thing.
I think Muslims or anyone has the right to *lawfully* protest whatever they want.
I haven't lived in Europe, but it seems several European nations have a much more antagonistic relationship with Islam and Muslims than we do here. Perhaps Muslim outrage over the incident is not simply a reaction to those specific cartoons, but indicative of the general atmosphere of intolerance for those who are *different?*
Posts: 8794 | From: 01-20-09 The End of an Error | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The problem is Susan that they want to impose Islamic fundamentalist values on the west and most in the west do not like those values, its as simple as that. That is exactly what is causing the problems in Europe. We have all been through the middle ages, we do not want to return. As for blacks in America it is not exactly the same thing. Blacks asked for fundamental human and political rights. These wild Muslims are not doing that, they are attempting to 'impose' a viewpoint on societies who live by just the opposite philosophy. It is like mixing gas and water and will not work. Many of them are simply not reasonable people, they see the world in black and white. They always want to play this hard headed zero sum game where they get everything and you get nothing. The give and take common in western culture simply does not exist in their mental construct.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
For one thing they want a pass on criticism. If you remember, the killings in the Netherlands occured when Dutch media produeced movies and programs that they did not like. In this case (Denmak) they want to censor the media by making threats. Look into the roots of problems in Australia and europe and you will find Islamic intolerance at the core.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think a whole religion shouldn't be held responsible for the act of one or a few nitwits. If it were something *truly* Islamic and one-sided, wouldn't we see the same problems here?
But we don't.
I'm all for free speech, trust me. Lots of stuff gets published here that I find objectionable, but that's how life is, I ignore it unless it crossed some line of common decency that just makes it outrageous to me. But then I'll protest by writing a letter to the editor, or something in that vein. Or boycotting stupid-ass stores like Abercrombie and Fitch. That's my right and should be everyone's right....within the bounds of the law.
Posts: 8794 | From: 01-20-09 The End of an Error | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Abu Bakr, Muslim Cleric: "I am telling you that my religion doesn't tolerate other religion. It doesn't tolerate. The only one law which needs to spread, it can be here or anywhere else, has to be Islam".
Sheikh Omar Bakri, Muslim Cleric: "We don't make a distinction between civilians and non-civilians. Only between Muslims and unbelievers. And the life of an unbeliever has no value." "We will use your democracy to destroy your democracy."
Qur'an 48.29 "Muhammad is God's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another."
Siraj Wahhaj, a CAIR advisory board member, was named in 1995 by U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White as a possible unindicted co-conspirator in connection with the plot to blow up New York City landmarks led by the blind sheikh, Omar Abdul Rahman.
· CAIR is a fundamentalist organization dedicated to the overthrow of the United States Constitution and the installation of an Islamic theocracy in America.
· CAIR wishes nothing more than the implementation of a SHARIA law in American.
· [CAIR seeks to replace the government of the United States] with an Islamist theocracy using our own Constitution as protection....
· CAIR is here to make radical Islam the dominant religion in the United States and to convert our country into an Islamic theocracy along the lines of Iran.
CAIR’s goals are clear, as indicated by its leaders’ sometimes revealing comments:
Ihsan Bagby, another CAIR board member, stated that Muslims “can never be full citizens of this country,” referring to the United States, “because there is no way we can be fully committed to the institutions and ideologies of this country.”
Ibrahim Hooper, the future CAIR spokesman, told the Minneapolis Star Tribune on April 4, 1993: “I wouldn’t want to create the impression that I wouldn’t like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future.”
Omar Ahmad, CAIR’s chairman, announced in July 1998 that “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran . . . should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth.”
Posts: 149 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, yes I agree but I think the problem is deeper than that in the Islamic community, especially in Europe. I think its a mistake to say a 'few nitwits.' We saw in the Palestinian elections the depth of Islamic fundamentalism.
It does not happen here in America for a number of reasons. After 9/11 I think many Muslims here understood that they were skating on thin ice. Plus, America is so diverse (much more than Europe) that we just absorbe everything and everyone. This may be the very worst enviorment for Islamic fundamentalism to thrive in. We have enough rednecks here that there would be some serious a$$ kicking if they ever got out of line. These people are a real and serious problem and we are years away from a solution. As XX noted, they do not believe in free speech.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
A breath of fresh air from Jordan. "Mohammed Cartoon Conflict Gets Even Hotter," from Deutsche Welle:
Meanwhile, a Jordanian gossip tabloid on defiantly published three of the cartoons that have triggered outrage in the Arab and Muslim world.
"Muslims of the world, be reasonable," said the editor-in-chief of the weekly independent newspaper Al-Shihan in an editorial alongside the cartoons, including the one showing the Muslim religion's founder wearing a bomb-shaped turban.
"What brings more prejudice against Islam, these caricatures or pictures of a hostage-taker slashing the throat of his victim in front of the cameras or a suicide bomber who blows himself up during a wedding ceremony in Amman?" wrote Jihad Momani.
We are witnessing the culmination of a major sea change in attitudes towards Islam amongst Europeans.
9/11 got us a bit worried, then we had Madrid and then London. ok, we dismissed that an "al qaeda" attack.
But when Theo Van Gogh was murdered by an islamist, for just making a film, i think that's when it really *really* started to change.
Posts: 149 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
[T]he interplay of society, politics, and religion has a completely difference structure in Islam as a whole. Today's discussion in the West about the possibility of Islamic theological faculties, or about the idea of Islam as a legal entity, presupposes that all religions have basically the same structure, that they all fit into a democratic system with its regulations and the possibilities provided by these regulations. In itself, however, this necessarily contradicts the essence of Islam, which simply does not have the separation of the political and religious sphere which Christianity has had from the beginning. The Koran is a total religious law, which regulates the whole of political and social life and insists that the whole order of life be Islamic. Sharia shapes society from beginning to end. In this sense, it can exploit such partial freedoms as our constitution gives, but it can't be its final goal to say: Yes, now we too are a body with rights, now we are present just like the Catholics and the Protestants. In such a situation, it would not achieve a status consistent with its inner nature; it would be in alienation from itself.
Islam has a total organization of life that is completely different from ours; it embraces simply everything. There is a very marked subordination of woman to man; there is a very tightly knit criminal law, indeed, a law regulating all areas of life, that is opposed to our modern ideas about society. One has to have a clear understanding that it [Islam] is not simply a denomination that can be included in the free realm of a pluralistic society.
Those are the words of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, penned in 1996.
Posts: 149 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by XX: Those are the words of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, penned in 1996.
The Catholic Church has ABSOLUTELY no room to talk about human rights or ability to fit within a Democracy. Posts: 8794 | From: 01-20-09 The End of an Error | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by XX: ''That's nonsense.''
ooh you don't want to get me started on this
Obviously you don't care for Islam but I would like to see a coherent anwser to whether or not Judiasm and Christianity support free speech.
So will you take the time now and pull out those Bible and Talmund verses to prove me wrong?
Posts: 5744 | From: Minneapolis, Mn USA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Free speech is not a religious construct in the west sonomond. The west became secularized in the 18th century. We do not base our civil law directly on religion as Muslims attempt to do.
You are comparing apples and oranges in this debate. Free speech comes out of our Constitution, not the Bible.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: Free speech is not a religious construct in the west sonomond. The west became secularized in the 18th century. We do not base our civil law directly on religion as Muslims attempt to do.
You are comparing apples and oranges in this debate. Free speech comes out of our Constitution, not the Bible.
I was waiting for XX to come up with that, but since you stated it first and share some of the same political overtones as XX its much more satisfying to have you state it for me. Posts: 5744 | From: Minneapolis, Mn USA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bertrand Russell, :Among religions, Bolshevism is to be reckoned with Mohammedanism rather than with Christianity and Buddhism. Christianity and Buddhism are primarily personal religions, with mystical doctrines and a love of contemplation. Mohammedanism and Bolshevism are practical, social, unspiritual, concerned to win the empire of this world.Posts: 149 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am no Dane and certainly don't hate the Arabs. What I hate is the retardation that Islam stands for.
Posts: 149 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
sonomond, i am a reasonable person. I bend over backwards to get along with everyone , so when people like me have had it with many arabs the problem must be bad. i can see the point XX is making.
We are tired of the suicide bombs and terrorism, tired of the whining about Palestine, tired of the 'in your face' religion these people want to practice. I'll be honest, after 25 years of terrorism I hope President Bush bombs the crap out of Iran. I cannot think of a more deserving group of people.
There is a dark side to Islam and pretending it does not exist keeps the problems from being solved.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by XX: I am no Dane and certainly don't hate the Arabs. What I hate is the retardation that Islam stands for.
Sorry to have to explain this to you XX to insult an Arab or to hate an Arab means to insult or hate their religion. There is no separation between the Arab and their faith.
Posts: 5744 | From: Minneapolis, Mn USA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
sonomond, This is exactly what we are talking about. If what you say is true they'll just have to be insulted. If I want to say something critical of their religion or any other I'll damn well do it. If they do not like it...oh well.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: sonomond, This is exactly what we are talking about. If what you say is true they'll just have to be insulted. If I want to say something critical of their religion or any other I'll damn well do it. If they do not like it...oh well.
That's fine. But at what point, if any, does it cross the line and become hate speech, which is not protected by the Constitution? What limits do we draw on this, if any?
Posts: 8794 | From: 01-20-09 The End of an Error | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well humm, can hate speech cover being critical of an aspect of a religion? Sounds like a pretty vague term and I think it was meant to cover racial issues more than anything else. If we put philosophy under hate speech then we could do away with ALL free speech that does not conform to the standards of a given moment. Under a strict definition Muslims practice 'hate speech ' all the time. I refer you to the list of quotes put up by XX in this thread.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Drawing a man is blasphemous because that man is God and cannot be represented otherwise it is a drawing of a man and not blasphemous.
I thought moslems are offended when called mohammadeans. Now they are acting as though they do worship mohammad.
What further illogical stupidity I cannot fathom is that one billion moslems are offended by a carton suggesting mohammad and islam is violent because he has a time-bomb shaped turban.
Their response to this offence is violent. By violent I mean beating up employees of a danish company and desiring to use violence against danish tourists and soldiers.
So the cartoon was accurate and truth is offensive?
If someone drew a cartoon of me as a violent man and I threatened them with violence in response because I am peaceful and offended then either I should be sectioned or gain some basic education.
One billion people need some basic education in logic and how to be civilised is my conclusion from all this.
Posts: 149 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tigerman, It really is not something both sides need to do and here is why. When you move to Denmark the burden is on you to fit in, not on them to conform to you. Tony Blair said it best, "they abuse our hospitality." You are the one moving to their country, into their culture, not the other way around. Many people in the west do see Islam as a radical religion, I agree with the Queen. Perhaps you should work on your own radicals first.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
31. jan 2006 Press Statement by the Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen regarding the drawings of the Prophet Mohammed
“In a press statement issued last night the Danish daily, Jyllandsposten, apologized to the Muslim world. The newspaper stressed that it was not their intention to be offensive. The newspaper apologises for the indisputable offence to many Muslims caused by the drawings.
I want to emphasise that in Denmark we attach fundamental importance to the freedom of expression, which is a vital and indispensable part of a democratic society.
This being said I would like to stress as my personal opinion that I deeply respect the religious feelings of other people. Consequently, I would never myself have chosen to depict religious symbols in this way. Likewise I am deeply distressed by the fact that these drawings by many Muslims have been seen as a defamation of the Prophet Mohammed and Islam as a religion. I hope that the apology of the independent newspaper Jyllandsposten will contribute to comfort those that have been hurt.
I am pleased to note that this apology has been received positively by Muslim communities in Denmark and that they have pledged support for our efforts.
I want to emphasise that the Danish Government condemns any expression, action or indication that attempts to demonise groups of people on the basis of their religion or ethnic background. It is the sort of thing that does not belong in a society that is based on respect for the individual human being.
On this basis I call on all parties to abstain from any statement or action that will create further tension. In Denmark as well as in other countries we must do our utmost to get back to the dialogue and build on the friendship that has always characterized the relations between Denmark and the Muslim world.”
Posts: 290 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by XX: Their response to this offence is violent. By violent I mean beating up employees of a danish company and desiring to use violence against danish tourists and soldiers.
*Some* have been violent in their protests, and this is absolutely inexcusable. Threatening people in Gaza and elsewhere with harm is disgusting. And embarassing.
But those Muslims who protest peacefully in the streets, write letters demanding the removal of certain editors, boycott Danish products, *that* is democracy.
Posts: 8794 | From: 01-20-09 The End of an Error | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nice political statement. he just wants to calm people down and avoid trouble. Unfortunately many of the Mulsims he is talking to do not share his views of 'open' and 'free' speech and dialogue.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
DANES ARE YOUR NEW GOD 
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic