Muhammad Cartoon Controversy (3 Viewers)

[Simpson Freak]

hitler had the right idea but the wrong religion

You are a disgusting person, to think that you support any human being treated like that is monstrous.

Everyone knows now that you are just a hateful ass.

 

[davin]

Is there any reason why we have to publish them? Everyone is acting like we're supposed to publish them.

here's why the attitude that they have to be published. firstly, they are newsorthy at this point. thanks to the protests and riots.
second, its because of the reason they WOULDN'T be published. they're not getting published because they're not good, or something like that, or by the editor's decision on the content but because of the fears of violence, mainly. its the heckler's veto, the idea that someone else can't speak freely because people will react violently.


and its not censorship if the paper decides to not print something. its their paper, they can decide what they want in it and what they don't want in it.

 

[ihavenothing]

Someone needs to make a fresh batch of cartoons regarding the controversy in the Australian papers.

 

[Simpson Freak]

Never mind the fact that if they weren't blowing themselves in the name of Islam there would be no cartoon to start with. Muslims have no respect for other religions so why should everyone else respect theirs. They do things to christians that are way beyond drawings in a newspaper.

They are going to have to learn to cop some shit about their religion sooner or later. It happens with everyone else why do they think they are somehow immune.

The fact is only a small minority are the ones blowing themselves up, there are nutters and fanatics in all walks of life, the fact that i and a billion others can be called terrorists because of the actions of a small percentage of hateful freaks is appalling.

I agree it is not right to burn down embassies in response to being offended, but as i said, there are nutters out there, and this just gives them a blank cheque for mayhem. is it not obvious.
however the newspaper has a responsibility, if something is going to cause a bunch of freaks to start burning things, they should maybe wait until the political climate has calmed.

it is also not right of a newspaper to label a billion people because of the actions of a few.

Al-Qaeda claim to be doing what they are doing in the name of God, but then so is the Ku Klux Klan.

we seem to always here of the violent protests but barely do we see on the news, the views of the moderate mainstream muslims, unless they are hairy and dont speak a word of english they dont get any air time.

anyway from the pleasure of watching the simpsons audio commentary, virtually every country they visit, they are hated the next day. New Orleans had huge problems with their song about their city, and the Japanese and Brazillian hated them after they visited their respective countrie. I think only australia didnt care when they were made fun of.

Now the people who were angry at the simpsons were not violent like some of the protests, but when you have entire nations (llike syria) who are basically not friendly with the west (understatement) such a cartoon can only insight hatred, and cause more people to join the freaky radical nutters.

the danish cartoons can be seen as the straw that broke the mule's back, it was irresponsible of them to release mocking cartoons that not only make fun of the minority, but the entire population, they are not very clever cartoons and simply labelling over a billion people as terrorists.

there are many religious leaders that are trying to calm the situation, however when people in this country have the attitude, "you can force us to not print the cartoons" is almost like a challenge to the crazy and the close-minded.

i think much more peace would come about, if the media said they were against such racist labelling of people, instead of making it looking like "here we printed it and you cant stop us, what are you going to do blow us up?"

Ultimately, if the cartoons were published here simply to show people what all the fuss is about, then there would be no big problem, but currently it seems like if it was going to be published it is meant to be undermining the beliefs of some. There would a be a few radicals that would then cause more moderate and mainstream muslims to join them and start causing problems.

Thats the here isnt it, the cartoons were published a few months ago and go a negative yet peaceful response, however now they were republished and spread to other countries, under the attitude of "you cant stop us", which is not RESPONSIBLE,

 

[Simpson Freak]

here's why the attitude that they have to be published. firstly, they are newsorthy at this point. thanks to the protests and riots.
second, its because of the reason they WOULDN'T be published. they're not getting published because they're not good, or something like that, or by the editor's decision on the content but because of the fears of violence, mainly. its the heckler's veto, the idea that someone else can't speak freely because people will react violently.


and its not censorship if the paper decides to not print something. its their paper, they can decide what they want in it and what they don't want in it.

You have not addressed WHY they HAVE to be published, if it will cause a few freaks to go crazy, isnt it more prudent to not publish them, and come off like you are offering the nutters an olive branch.

usually the radicals are not all just crazy, its mainly their leader that tells them killing innocents is okay and god would want them to do it, those radical leaders dont let their followers have their own opinion on their religion, and if they ever say "do we have to kill these children" that person would be killed as a traitor because of what the FANATICAL LEADER said.

if its dat important for people to see them, which i think is bolony since the cartoons are not a literary and visual masterpiece, they are just crappy cartoons that say A BILLION muslims follow a terrorist, or they say that muslims follow a guy that supports terrorists when they blow themselves up. errrr where was i oya, they dont have to publish them but can put them on a website....or i know....
a promotion!!!! :

BUY THIS SATURDAY'S SYDNEY MORNING HERALD AND YOU WILL RECEIVE A FREE CD OF DANISH CARTOONS FOR YOU VIEWING PLEASURE, OR IF YOU ARE A TERRORIST BURN IT TO YOUR HEARTLESS CONTENT.

 

[davin]

since you keep talking about the cartoons being designed to label all muslims, please explain that, as really only 3 of them seem to be about terrorism in the first place. you seem to be generalising a lot. also given that they feature only mohommad that thats not saying its all muslims are terrorists. you're creating a claim that the cartoons never made to try to make them seem more offensive.

 

[davin]

soo....its ok to publish them in something with the paper but nto in the paper itself?

and see, they were printed because the Danish paper felt that they made a point. they've been reprinted for sake of free speech, because they are newsworth, and to reinforce that point the Danish paper was making, which was the same point the article with them had.

you're trying to say "well, it doesn't seem important to me, so it shouldn't be publiushed" but you're not the editor of the paper. the editor can make decisions here. he felt it was important, and you're trying to impose your opinion on him

 

[Not-That-Bright]

You have not addressed WHY they HAVE to be published, if it will cause a few freaks to go crazy, isnt it more prudent to not publish them, and come off like you are offering the nutters an olive branch.

If you could be bothered to do some research on the matter, you would find out they were published in response to the difficulty a danish author whom was writing a story about muhammed had in finding cartoonists for his work (out of fear) and other such events. It was about how we have censored ourselves out of fear.

usually the radicals are not all just crazy, its mainly their leader that tells them killing innocents is okay and god would want them to do it, those radical leaders dont let their followers have their own opinion on their religion, and if they ever say "do we have to kill these children" that person would be killed as a traitor because of what the FANATICAL LEADER said.

If these people are following that fanatical leader than they are almost as if they were doing it on their own.

if its dat important for people to see them, which i think is bolony since the cartoons are not a literary and visual masterpiece, they are just crappy cartoons

I do agree, most of them aren't very witty or whatever.

that say A BILLION muslims follow a terrorist, or they say that muslims follow a guy that supports terrorists when they blow themselves up. errrr where was i oya, they dont have to publish them but can put them on a website....or i know....
a promotion!!!! :

You can look at them and see that they are perhaps highlighting the way in which the teachings of muhammed have been 'hijacked' by fundamentalist terrorists.

 

[davin]

You can look at them and see that they are perhaps highlighting the way in which the teachings of muhammed have been 'hijacked' by fundamentalist terrorists.

still don't see why, if its the terrorism assosciation issue, that the greatest outcry isn't against THEM

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Yea I don't either. I mean the only reason we have this association between islam and terrorism... is because it's there. We can see it on the tv in huge marches proclaiming islam and terrorism... we can see it in the way that radical muslim clerics are promoting terrorism.... we can see it in the way that oh-so-many terrorists are muslims..

The association is fair.

 

[Simpson Freak]

since you keep talking about the cartoons being designed to label all muslims, please explain that, as really only 3 of them seem to be about terrorism in the first place. you seem to be generalising a lot. also given that they feature only mohommad that thats not saying its all muslims are terrorists. you're creating a claim that the cartoons never made to try to make them seem more offensive.

well i havent seen all of them, but i am going about the ones that i did see or hear about.

Muslims try to follow by mohammad's example, ergo when you have him as a terrorist then ya, basically the dannish newspaper is saying "all muslims are taught to be terrorists"

then there is the one where he is standing outside heaven, basically the paper says "mohammad believes terrorists belong in heaven, therefore muslims feel right to blow ppl up".

while i would say "mohammad nor god would want you to hurt any living thing" just so i can make people with radical views see sense (not that i have ever met any). this newspaper comes along and calls says to a billion people that their prophet is a terrorist and supports terrorists,

there are other cartoons, but they are, as NOT THAT BRIGHT said, "amatuer" or was it immature,, meh amatuer......they are just a cheap knock and provocation to a group of people that we already know have a small minority of nuts, now these nuts corrupt others and now you have a bigger minority of nuts, and the media especially in middel east makes this out to be a declaration of war and you have even more nuts, and when the media broad cast almost always just the nutters, non-muslims think all muslims are cashews...errr i mean nuts.

the newspapers reprinted them irresponsibly.

its is a truth of humanity that:
TRAGEDY + time = COMEDY (where time>0 and is the only variable)

the dannish didnt add enough time, and in a political climate that is as unstable as this you get a resultant of

TRAGEDY > COMEDY

oh i miss my beloved 4 unit equations....errr anyway.

 

[davin]

simpson_freak, if you want to talk about content of the cartoons, then, please go see all 12 so that we can discuss this on the same level here, as at present the rest of us are more informed on their content than you.

and see, the link between islam and terrorism was not created by these cartoons, they were created by muslims that were using terrorism with islam as a justification. its a criticism, if anything, of THOSE using ISLAM as a justification

 

[Simpson Freak]

You can look at them and see that they are perhaps highlighting the way in which the teachings of muhammed have been 'hijacked' by fundamentalist terrorists.

thats a very nice point, but the problem is if the media in the middle east are about to twist this into a war declaration, then why is it responsible of the newspaper to release such material.

there would be other cartoons that can show that far better, like i am thinking of a juxtaposition of a quote from mohammad...like "there is no compulsion in religion" , compared to a...errr...terrorist quote like errr..."death to those not in islam"



"If these people are following that fanatical leader than they are almost as if they were doing it on their own. "

Well thats not necessarily true, should all WW2 germans be called nazi's? should all the people that pulled the trigger to kill a jewish family under orders of hitler be seen as evil?
The terrorist leaders deny their followers their own opinion, so it is unfair to treat them as if they are thinking "i will kill this child" when they go to kill a child.

like in Revenge of The Sith, anakin skywalker killing younglings, is him saying to himself "i must save padme's life".

i dont no if it was proper to add a star wars analogy, but i love it and i have the freedom to love it

 

[banco55]

Doesn't it come down to a sort of blackmail/extortion? "Oh, don't do that or the muslim nutters will go crazy". Should salman rushdie not have published his book to avoid the islamic nutters? Should theo van gogh not have made the movie which cost him his life?

Have a look at all the nasty cartoons arabs print about the jews. Perhaps the jews should follow in the arabs footsteps and start threatening to go bonkers if the cartooons are printed again. After all intimidation works. Sending a message that if you blow things up, or even look as if you might, we'll capitulate to you is not a good idea.

 

[davin]

yeah, but see...in the same context, let me sum up this discussion starwarsy

"Islamic fundamentalists are evil!"
"in my opinion danish cartoonists are evil"
"well, then you are lost!"

don't quote star wars agsint me. i know fandom well beyond anyone can imagine :-D

 

[davin]

Doesn't it come down to a sort of blackmail/extortion? "Oh, don't do that or the muslim nutters will go crazy". Should salman rushdie not have published his book to avoid the islamic nutters? Should theo van gogh not have made the movie which cost him his life?

thats the idea of the heckler's veto. the idea that the threats someone else will make would silence free speech

 

[Simpson Freak]

simpson_freak, if you want to talk about content of the cartoons, then, please go see all 12 so that we can discuss this on the same level here, as at present the rest of us are more informed on their content than you.

and see, the link between islam and terrorism was not created by these cartoons, they were created by muslims that were using terrorism with islam as a justification. its a criticism, if anything, of THOSE using ISLAM as a justification

"Haven't you ever heard of Occam's Razor? "The simplest explanation is probably the correct one."" [Lisa Simpson]

well an english teacher would have said your view is valid, however we have to look at the intentions of the cartoonist.

the message of "mohammad was like ...BLANK.....so all muslims believe its right to be like .....BLANK...."

is far more clear than "look at wat image you terrorists are giving mohammad"

thats pretty much what the message is:

"EVERY EXTREMIST AND TERRORIST ACTION IS SUPPORTED BY MOHAMMAD"

thats the undeniable message of all 12 of the cartoons.

 

[Simpson Freak]

thats the idea of the heckler's veto. the idea that the threats someone else will make would silence free speech

which is why its a better idea to have the majority of muslims supporting your message against terrorism, instead of you putting the normals in with the nutters to express you anger at the nutters.

its that simple

 

[davin]

simpson_freak, firstly, you are in no way qualified to say that as you have not EVEN SEEN all 12, yet you talk in absolutes.
second, that is in no way a use of occam's razor. for starters, you're then ENTIRELY ignoring the article that was ran in the paper along with the cartoons. i'm beginning to wonder if you're even aware of said article. you're acting like they just randomly put in some drawings of mohommad for kicks.

again, please explain why each one, individually, has that message.

 

[Simpson Freak]

yeah, but see...in the same context, let me sum up this discussion starwarsy

"Islamic fundamentalists are evil!"
"in my opinion danish cartoonists are evil"
"well, then you are lost!"

don't quote star wars agsint me. i know fandom well beyond anyone can imagine :-D

ya well you have to remember, if it is the islamic radical that says they are in the right and the danish are the only evil ones, they are the truly lost ones, you wont see me arguing with you on that one davin.