|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis


Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,459
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 11 minutes, 30 seconds
|
Freedom of the Press for Muslims?
#5591949 - 05/04/06 10:02 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
So are they in the stone age?
Islamic Bloc: We Respect Press Freedom But … By Patrick Goodenough CNSNews.com International Editor May 03, 2006
(CNSNews.com) - A bloc representing the world's Islamic nations is marking World Press Freedom Day Wednesday by calling for urgent action to establish international law or a code of conduct aimed at preventing media from defaming religion.
The Saudi-based secretariat of the 57-member Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) said in a statement it was committed to press freedom, but that journalists should be deterred "from premeditatedly vilifying, defaming and violating the rights of others."
Citing the controversy earlier this year over the printing of cartoons depicting Mohammed, the OIC said the publication of the sketches and its ramifications provided "absolute evidence of the consequences of non-abidance with these regulations."
It said the caricatures had insulted "a faith embraced and revered by over one-fifth of the world population, and a religion that advocates peace, tolerance and moral virtues."
Muslims around the world protested against the cartoons, which first appeared in a Danish newspaper six months ago and were later reproduced in numerous, mostly European media outlets. In some countries, protests turned violent, and people were killed in Nigeria, Libya and Afghanistan.
Authorities in some Islamic countries shut down newspapers and arrested journalists following the publication of some of the cartoons.
In Yemen, the editor of the Yemen Observer will mark World Press Freedom Day Wednesday by appearing in court, where prosecutors earlier called for the death sentence for insulting Islam.
Muhammad al-Asadi was arrested last February after his English-language weekly published the cartoons -- in thumbnail size and obscured with a thick, black cross -- to illustrate its news reports on the controversy.
Editors of two Arabic-language papers in Yemen are also on trial, and are due to appear in court later in May. Print editions of all three papers have been frozen for the past three months, although the government this week agreed to allow printing to resume.
Arrests or publication shutdowns resulting from the cartoons were also reported in Malaysia, Indonesia, Syria, India, Algeria, Morocco and Jordan, according to the media freedom lobby group, Reporters Without Borders.
In London this week, the OIC is hosting what it says is the first ever major international conference aimed at countering "Islamophobia," bringing together politicians, diplomats, scholars, media representatives and others from Western and Islamic countries.
Opening the event on Tuesday, OIC secretary-general Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu said Muslims and their religion had been increasingly stereotyped, defamed, marginalized, discriminated against and targeted for "hate crimes" in the West since 9/11 and subsequent terrorist attacks in Madrid and London.
"In addition to the perceived biased Middle East policies of the U.S. and European countries, the rising trend of Islamophobia is giving a boost to the anti-Western sentiments in the Islamic world."
Ihsanoglu said the "terrifying stereotyping we suffer from in the first decade of the 21st century ... is a phenomenon that reminds us of the horrible experiences of the anti-Semitism of the 1930s."
It was unfortunate that in some circles in the West, Islam was considered a "dangerous ideology," he said.
"Misinterpretations of the events perpetrated by extremists in the Muslim world who in turn took 'Islam' as a cover, provided ammunition to the supporters of this fragile and misleading theory."
Of the Mohammed cartoons, Ihsanoglu said the OIC had been trying to explain that "nobody is actually challenging the freedom of expression and press and that the real issue is disrespect" for religious symbols and values.
He said the OIC had expected backing for its stance from European governments, but "to our dismay" those governments had instead supported Denmark.
Also addressing the London conference, British foreign office minister Kim Howells said Muslims, and some non-Muslims, had been "rightly offended" by the publication of the cartoons.
But he also criticized some Islamic media for their handling of the issue, saying "the existence of anti-Western and anti-Jewish media and material in the Muslim world, some of it in state owned press, undermined as hypocritical the moral indignation that was expressed."
Howells said it was right that the issue of Islamophobia was addressed, but Islamic governments and organizations should also address problems that give Islam a negative image.
He cited support for Taliban-type legal and social systems, "recent statements coming out of Tehran," practices that segregate and subjugate women, and conspiracy theories about 9/11 being a CIA plot and polio vaccines being contaminated with viruses.
"And reports of raped women being punished and stoned, restrictions on other religions, including death sentences pronounced on Christian converts, poor human rights records and authoritarian, undemocratic environments all have a negative impact which we cannot ignore."
Howells also challenged views in the Islamic world that he said were wrong, such as the perception that "our foreign policy is deliberately anti-Muslim."
"The reasons for action in Afghanistan and Iraq had nothing to do with the faith of Islam but with the political and security issues that these countries posed."
He said the Islamic world had the right to criticize policies pursued by Britain, the U.S. or the European Union, "but continuing to blame the West for all the ills of the Muslim world is an act of self-denial."
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
RandalFlagg
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/02
Posts: 15,608
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: SirTripAlot]
#5591956 - 05/04/06 10:05 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I don't know whether to laugh or cry when I see Muslims say hardly anything when somebody has their head cut off by militants...but they run out into the streets in a fury when some cartoonist draws a picture.
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero


Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 months, 20 days
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: RandalFlagg]
#5593029 - 05/05/06 06:28 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I saw a great editorial cartoon when the whole cartoon of the prophet thing was going on. It had a muslim guy putting up a poster showing the twin towers getting hit by the jets and some kind of celebrate caption at the bottom of the poster. The muslim guy in the foreground was reading a paper and making a comment towards the cartoons and the lack of respect from the western world. I should have saved it.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
blaze2
The Witness


Registered: 12/20/02
Posts: 1,883
Loc: San Antonio, TX
Last seen: 11 years, 6 months
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: Seuss]
#5593044 - 05/05/06 06:48 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
"I don't know whether to laugh or cry when I see Muslims say hardly anything when somebody has their head cut off by militants...but they run out into the streets in a fury when some cartoonist draws a picture"
Do you go out and take to the streets when there is a hostage at your local Arby's? Of course not. Those people could protest everday all day and it wouldnt stop teh beheadings man.
Now something they CAN affect is freedom of the press, wow, what a coincidence.
I wonder if this situation is at all similar to when you protest teh DEA's misinformation about Pot for example? The Government has freedom of the press to lie to us if they want, and I bet you would agree they shouldn't. These guys just dont want their faith dragged through the mud. What is wrong with that?
Its called common human curtesy and respect or have those words lost all meaning these days?
-------------------- "Religion without science is blind, Science without religion is lame." Albert Einstein "peace is not maintained through force it is acheived through intelligence." Albert Einstein "Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one." Thomas Jefferson "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." --Thomas Jefferson
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis


Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,459
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 11 minutes, 30 seconds
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: Seuss]
#5593049 - 05/05/06 06:55 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
No wonder why they have such a negative view of the Western World when everytrhing they read, and see is so biased
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero


Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 months, 20 days
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: SirTripAlot]
#5593267 - 05/05/06 08:59 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
> These guys just dont want their faith dragged through the mud. What is wrong with that?
The problem is the double standard. These guys will storm the streets in celebration of joy when somebody kills a bunch of Americans, yet they go crazy and demand executions if somebody draws a picture, that in their mind, is mocking their religion.
Remember when Iran was going to show the world how demeaning cartoons were when they had a contest to draw cartoons mocking Jews? Unfortunately for Iran, the rest of the world can tell the difference in significance between a silly cartoon and murder and didn't care. Unfortunately for the rest of the world, the majority of Muslims don't understand the difference and feel that murder is a perfectly acceptable response to being offended by another.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis


Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,459
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 11 minutes, 30 seconds
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: Seuss]
#5593469 - 05/05/06 10:26 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
This goes with some problems I have, when I hear people say:
"Islam is a peaceful religion"
Well, if it is so peaceful, why is freedom of information and freedom of thought so controlled?
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
RandalFlagg
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/02
Posts: 15,608
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: blaze2]
#5594217 - 05/05/06 01:33 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
blaze2 said: Do you go out and take to the streets when there is a hostage at your local Arby's? Of course not. Those people could protest everday all day and it wouldnt stop teh beheadings man.
Now something they CAN affect is freedom of the press, wow, what a coincidence.
They can protest all day long about that cartoon and it isn't going to do anything. Do you think that Dutch cartoonist will retract his cartoon? Do you think that the Western world in general will issue heartfelt letters of apology over some independent guy who drew a picture? Hell no.
The Muslims who ran out into the streets after the cartoon knew that they wouldn't change anything by protesting. They did it because they were mad. And it is incredibly scary that they get mad over a picture but they hardly bat an eyelash when civilians are massacred in the name of their religion.
Quote:
blaze2 said: These guys just dont want their faith dragged through the mud. What is wrong with that?
So it is perfectly acceptable for vicious caricatures of Jews to circulate in the Muslim press? ...But the second somebody draws Muhammed they go nuts? This tactic is a common and hypocritical double standard that is practised by many groups who play the victimization card.
Edited by RandalFlagg (05/05/06 01:34 PM)
|
blaze2
The Witness


Registered: 12/20/02
Posts: 1,883
Loc: San Antonio, TX
Last seen: 11 years, 6 months
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: RandalFlagg]
#5594707 - 05/05/06 03:39 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I did not excuse their own hippocricy, but that doesnt mean that its allright for ANYONE to bash a persons faith.
-------------------- "Religion without science is blind, Science without religion is lame." Albert Einstein "peace is not maintained through force it is acheived through intelligence." Albert Einstein "Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one." Thomas Jefferson "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." --Thomas Jefferson
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: blaze2]
#5594716 - 05/05/06 03:41 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
blaze2 said: I did not excuse their own hippocricy, but that doesnt mean that its allright for ANYONE to bash a persons faith.
Sure it is. You dont believe in freedom of speech? I will bash any and every religion I want to, and you have no right to decied what I say or think.
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: blaze2]
#5594720 - 05/05/06 03:43 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
blaze2 said: I did not excuse their own hippocricy, but that doesnt mean that its allright for ANYONE to bash a persons faith.
By yor capatilized "ANYONE" do you mean that some people have the right to bash a person's faith but others dont? What exctally do you mean by that statment?
|
Ekstaza
stranger than most


Registered: 04/10/03
Posts: 4,324
Loc: Around the corner
Last seen: 9 months, 23 days
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: DieCommie]
#5594753 - 05/05/06 04:01 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DieCommie said:
Quote:
blaze2 said: I did not excuse their own hippocricy, but that doesnt mean that its allright for ANYONE to bash a persons faith.
Sure it is. You dont believe in freedom of speech? I will bash any and every religion I want to, and you have no right to decied what I say or think.
Exactly!!!
I personally believe that Christians, Jews, Muslims and most others of religious faith are for the most part completely full of shit. I have the right to think that and I have the right to say that.
I saw most of those Muhammad pics and a lot of them were in no way offensive what-so-ever. Just the fact that Muhammad was depicted at all is enough to send Muslims off the deep end. That's ridiculous and I'll never bow to their wishes. Islam sucks as does most every other religion and they all need to be ridiculed occasionally to inspire people to realize this.
-------------------- YOUR EXPERIENCE WITH ANY GIVEN DRUG ISN'T THE DEFINITIVE MEASURE OF THE DRUGS EFFECTS.
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis


Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,459
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 11 minutes, 30 seconds
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: Ekstaza]
#5594788 - 05/05/06 04:19 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Anyone know if any of the Arabic governments filter the internet similar to the Chinese?
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: blaze2]
#5595558 - 05/05/06 08:09 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Anybody who believes in a supernatural best friend is an idiot. Is that bashing enough for you? Just in case you didn't understand, by supernatural best friend I mean what any and all of you might consider to be god. My denunciation also extends to anything anyone might consider to be a "soul" or a "spirit".
You wanna take away my right to say that?
--------------------
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis


Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,459
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 11 minutes, 30 seconds
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: zappaisgod]
#5595568 - 05/05/06 08:14 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I dont personally, just dont move to Jordon and decry that in public, bro.
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: SirTripAlot]
#5595577 - 05/05/06 08:18 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
That was for blazey, who, unfortunately, has bought himself a short hiatus. And I am quite fully aware that I couldn't say that in most of the world. And by most, I'm guessing that it's 80%. And if you all think I only say that anonymously on an internet chat room you are very mistaken
--------------------
|
wilshire
free radical


Registered: 05/11/05
Posts: 2,421
Loc: SE PA
Last seen: 14 years, 3 days
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: SirTripAlot]
#5595585 - 05/05/06 08:20 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
So are they in the stone age?
pretty much
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis


Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,459
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 11 minutes, 30 seconds
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: wilshire]
#5596040 - 05/05/06 10:20 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
zappaisgod stated: And if you all think I only say that anonymously on an internet chat room you are very mistaken
No man, never thought that.......
I really love the 1st amendment for that reason.....No human being should have any restraints on his expression.....
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
blaze2
The Witness


Registered: 12/20/02
Posts: 1,883
Loc: San Antonio, TX
Last seen: 11 years, 6 months
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: SirTripAlot]
#5599025 - 05/06/06 09:26 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
You are correct my friends you do indeed have the right to say and think what you will. I merely said you do not have the right to bash a PERSONS faith, when they have done nothing other than say the words, I believe in God. Did I offend you with that statement? Why not just say I dont believe in God, I believe in this, or I believe in that, but no you heart turns first to venomous thoughts, to denounceing the other mans beliefs to justify your own. My thoughts dont need to justified why is it that yours do?
Just to be clear I am talking to no one in particular, and also I believe some of you may be blurring the lines between faith in God, and Following the Church I assure you that there is very real difference. IN the one a man humbles himself only to God, in the other you submit to the will of other men. Peace
blaze2
-------------------- "Religion without science is blind, Science without religion is lame." Albert Einstein "peace is not maintained through force it is acheived through intelligence." Albert Einstein "Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one." Thomas Jefferson "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." --Thomas Jefferson
|
blaze2
The Witness


Registered: 12/20/02
Posts: 1,883
Loc: San Antonio, TX
Last seen: 11 years, 6 months
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: DieCommie]
#5599032 - 05/06/06 09:29 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DieCommie said:
Quote:
blaze2 said: I did not excuse their own hippocricy, but that doesnt mean that its allright for ANYONE to bash a persons faith.
By yor capatilized "ANYONE" do you mean that some people have the right to bash a person's faith but others dont? What exctally do you mean by that statment?
By anyone I meant anyone, as in any person you can concieve of.
-------------------- "Religion without science is blind, Science without religion is lame." Albert Einstein "peace is not maintained through force it is acheived through intelligence." Albert Einstein "Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one." Thomas Jefferson "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." --Thomas Jefferson
|
Baby_Hitler
Errorist



Registered: 03/06/02
Posts: 27,587
Loc: To the limit!
Last seen: 5 hours, 53 minutes
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: blaze2]
#5599278 - 05/06/06 10:42 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Sorry, but you do have the right to bash another person's beliefs just as much as you have a right to breathe air. Anyone who wants to take away that right has given up their right to live.
-------------------- Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ (•_•) <) )~ ANTIFA / \ \(•_•) ( (> SUPER / \ (•_•) <) )> SOLDIERS / \
|
quillini
one meanmotorscooter


Registered: 04/18/06
Posts: 255
Last seen: 1 year, 9 months
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: blaze2]
#5599475 - 05/06/06 11:41 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
blaze2 said: You are correct my friends you do indeed have the right to say and think what you will. I merely said you do not have the right to bash a PERSONS faith, when they have done nothing other than say the words, I believe in God. Did I offend you with that statement? Why not just say I dont believe in God, I believe in this, or I believe in that, but no you heart turns first to venomous thoughts, to denounceing the other mans beliefs to justify your own. My thoughts dont need to justified why is it that yours do?
Just to be clear I am talking to no one in particular, and also I believe some of you may be blurring the lines between faith in God, and Following the Church I assure you that there is very real difference. IN the one a man humbles himself only to God, in the other you submit to the will of other men. Peace
blaze2
OK, I think what you mean is that it is morally wrong to bash somebody because of their faith. By morally wrong, I mean rude and selfish. In other words, bashing somebody for their faith makes you an asshole. I agree.
But it's different to say you don't have a right, as in a constitutional right, to bash somebody for their faith. You have a right to bash somebody (so long as it's not physical) for whatever reason you want. You have a right to say what you want. You have the right to be rude and selfish. You have the right to be an asshole.
You're saying it's morally unjust, not that it is or should be illegal and punishable by law, right?
Am I right? Say I'm right. Cause then I'll agree.
-------------------- No; truth, being alive, was not halfway between anything. It was only to be found by continuous excursions into either realm, and though proportion is the final secret, to espouse it at the outset is to insure sterility. Only connect...
|
CUBErt
Connoisseur ofHallucination


Registered: 08/24/05
Posts: 1,067
Loc: Southern CA
Last seen: 14 years, 3 months
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: blaze2]
#5599927 - 05/07/06 02:01 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
blaze2 said: I wonder if this situation is at all similar to when you protest teh DEA's misinformation about Pot for example? The Government has freedom of the press to lie to us if they want, and I bet you would agree they shouldn't. These guys just dont want their faith dragged through the mud. What is wrong with that?
Well in the case of the DEA lying about pot, thats pretty black and white. Either what they claim about pot is true, or it isn't true.
In the case of the Muslim cartoons, it is somebody's interperetation of the events going on in the world. It would be a lie if they said "the Koran said to blow up America." It is not a lie to point out the fact that many Muslims have recently used their religion to justify terrible attrocities (and of course they aren't the first ones to do this). But whats ironic is how so many Muslim's reaffirmed the criticisms made in these cartoons with their reactions. Basically a comic showed how irrational many Muslims were acting these days, and a significant portion of the Muslim world responded with the same irrationality
-------------------- -CUBErt
 
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: CUBErt]
#5600396 - 05/07/06 08:40 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Is it rude to criticise a person's faith in polite company? Certainly. Is it rude to criticise a person's faith in a debate about faith and it's role in the world? Absolutely not. To leave unchallenged everyone's faith is to avoid any debate whatsoever and fall into a black hole of politicly correct nonsense from which nothing useful will ever emerge. Religion is not immune to challenge and debate just because some people are utterly dogmatic and unquestioning about their fairy tales. I am under constant assault because of my faith in atheism, but I do not shy from the fray. Rather, I embrace it. Bring it on, fools, and expect no quarter from me. I will ridicule your beliefs in a supernatural best friend while I take it apart and expose it for the irrational foolishness it is. Politeness in a debate? Not necessary. Nor even desirable. Only weak minds would wish to put strictures on a "debate." No holds barred and let the games begin. I think there is a difference between calling someone an idiot and calling their beliefs idiotic. I sometimes get in trouble here for that but this isn't my sandbox so they can make whatever rules they want. This isn't the only sandbox, though, and I will be rude in other debate arenas all I want. I will also occasionally call people idiots in other arenas. I have more than once told someone that they really are stupid. Sometimes you run into such deeply ingrained stupidity that that is all that can be said. Like that douchebag protesting at soldier funerals because the USA doesn't execute homos, I forget the dumb bitch's name. I meet similar idiots all the time and when they talk too much I talk back. Fuck em, they're stupid.
--------------------
|
Ekstaza
stranger than most


Registered: 04/10/03
Posts: 4,324
Loc: Around the corner
Last seen: 9 months, 23 days
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: CUBErt]
#5600404 - 05/07/06 08:44 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
CUBErt said: Basically a comic showed how irrational many Muslims were acting these days, and a significant portion of the Muslim world responded with the same irrationality
Exactly!!
And I continue to hold the position that if Muslims want to be taken seriously about being a peaceful religion, then they need to step up and take action against terrorists using Islam for their purposes. If these terrorists are only representatives of a small portion of Muslims, why doesn't the majority step forward, denounce them, and take meaningful action towards stopping these zealots?
-------------------- YOUR EXPERIENCE WITH ANY GIVEN DRUG ISN'T THE DEFINITIVE MEASURE OF THE DRUGS EFFECTS.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: zappaisgod]
#5600569 - 05/07/06 10:07 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
And here we have a fabulous example of a stupid person.
Quote:
VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - In the latest Vatican broadside against "The Da Vinci Code", a leading cardinal says Christians should respond to the book and film with legal action because both offend Christ and the Church he founded.
Cardinal Francis Arinze, a Nigerian who was considered a candidate for pope last year, made his strong comments in a documentary called "The Da Vinci Code-A Masterful Deception."
Arinze's appeal came some 10 days after another Vatican cardinal called for a boycott of the film. Both cardinals asserted that other religions would never stand for offences against their beliefs and that Christians should get tough.
"Christians must not just sit back and say it is enough for us to forgive and to forget," Arinze said in the documentary made by Rome film maker Mario Biasetti for Rome Reports, a Catholic film agency specializing in religious affairs.
"Sometimes it is our duty to do something practical. So it is not I who will tell all Christians what to do but some know legal means which can be taken in order to get the other person to respect the rights of others," Arinze said.
"This is one of the fundamental human rights: that we should be respected, our religious beliefs respected, and our founder Jesus Christ respected," he said, without elaborating on what legal means he had in mind.
(I was going to post the link but it more than doubled the page width, which I hate. See it at Drudge or the BBC)
Does this fucking moron think he can compel my respect? Or does he just want to shut me up? This from a leader of a douchebag group that just recently acknowledged the earth isn't at the center of the universe. Middle age, stone age, they're all fucking idiots. At least the Amish aren't hypocrites. That's all of the respect they're going to get from me. Dumb fucking douchebags.
--------------------
|
Ekstaza
stranger than most


Registered: 04/10/03
Posts: 4,324
Loc: Around the corner
Last seen: 9 months, 23 days
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: zappaisgod]
#5600655 - 05/07/06 10:36 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I find myself in agreement with Zappa, how weird!
Christians have no RIGHT to be free from discussion. Their views are up for criticism just as much as any others.
-------------------- YOUR EXPERIENCE WITH ANY GIVEN DRUG ISN'T THE DEFINITIVE MEASURE OF THE DRUGS EFFECTS.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: Ekstaza]
#5600693 - 05/07/06 10:51 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Ekstaza said: I find myself in agreement with Zappa, how weird!

Oh brave new world that has such people in it!
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: SirTripAlot]
#5601158 - 05/07/06 02:08 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SirTripAlot said: Anyone know if any of the Arabic governments filter the internet similar to the Chinese?
Filter? I don't know. They do do this though:
Quote:
Alaa Abd El-Fatah, one of the Egyptian political activists, and one of the first bloggers in Egypt was arrested today together with around ten more activists during a peaceful demonstration in solidarity with sixty activists who were arrested over the past two weeks in a non-violent sit in, as well who were held in custody for two weeks under investigation for “crimes” that if anything would raise only mockery including, humiliating the president, possession of “publishing equipment”(graffiti spray) and blocking traffic.
http://sabbah.biz/mt/archives/2006/05/07...ther-activists/
Blocking traffic is not permissable. The rest is bullshit.
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: zappaisgod]
#5601191 - 05/07/06 02:17 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
More Muslim free press:
Bahjat was abducted after making three live broadcasts from the edge of her native city of Samarra on the day its golden-domed Shi’ite mosque was blown up, allegedly by Sunni terrorists.
Roadblocks prevented her from entering the city and her anxiety was obvious to everyone who saw her final report. Night was falling and tensions were high.
Two men drove up in a pick-up truck, asking for her. She appealed to a small crowd that had gathered around her crew but nobody was willing to help her. It was reported at the time that she had been shot dead with her cameraman and sound man.
We now know that it was not that swift for Bahjat. First she was stripped to the waist, a humiliation for any woman but particularly so for a pious Muslim who concealed her hair, arms and legs from men other than her father and brother.
Then her arms were bound behind her back. A golden locket in the shape of Iraq that became her glittering trademark in front of the television cameras must have been removed at some point — it is nowhere to be seen in the grainy film, which was made by someone who pointed a mobile phone at her as she lay on a patch of earth in mortal terror.
By the time filming begins, the condemned woman has been blindfolded with a white bandage.
It is stained with blood that trickles from a wound on the left side of her head. She is moaning, although whether from the pain of what has already been done to her or from the fear of what is about to be inflicted is unclear.
Just as Bahjat bore witness to countless atrocities that she covered for her television station, Al-Arabiya, during Iraq’s descent into sectarian conflict, so the recording of her execution embodies the depths of the country’s depravity after three years of war.
A large man dressed in military fatigues, boots and cap approaches from behind and covers her mouth with his left hand. In his right hand, he clutches a large knife with a black handle and an 8in blade. He proceeds to cut her throat from the middle, slicing from side to side.
Her cries — “Ah, ah, ah” — can be heard above the “Allahu akbar” (God is greatest) intoned by the holder of the mobile phone.
Even then, there is no quick release for Bahjat. Her executioner suddenly stands up, his job only half done. A second man in a dark T-shirt and camouflage trousers places his right khaki boot on her abdomen and pushes down hard eight times, forcing a rush of blood from her wounds as she moves her head from right to left.
Only now does the executioner return to finish the task. He hacks off her head and drops it to the ground, then picks it up again and perches it on her bare chest so that it faces the film-maker in a grotesque parody of one of her pieces to camera.
The voice of one of the Arab world’s most highly regarded and outspoken journalists has been silenced. She was 30. "
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2168496,00.html
There's more. It involves an electric drill.
--------------------
|
gluke bastid
Stinky Bum


Registered: 12/20/00
Posts: 3,322
Loc: Charm City
Last seen: 5 years, 3 months
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: Ekstaza]
#5601528 - 05/07/06 04:02 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Ekstaza said: I continue to hold the position that if Muslims want to be taken seriously about being a peaceful religion, then they need to step up and take action against terrorists using Islam for their purposes. If these terrorists are only representatives of a small portion of Muslims, why doesn't the majority step forward, denounce them, and take meaningful action towards stopping these zealots?
I agree with you, however I don't see that it is the responsibility of Muslims to denounce terrorists, just as I don't see it is my responsibility to step forward and protest the Oklahoma City bombing just because it was done by an American. Only from the perspective of someone who doesn't know any muslims, doesn't live in a muslim country and doesn't understand the basic tennants of Islam would it be neccesary for the "muslim world" (I put in quotation marks because there isn't really a unified muslim world at all) to demonstrate that they are opposed to violence.
There are a lot of non-violent Muslim groups out there, in this country and in others: Muslims for Peace, Muslim Peace Fellowship, FPA, CAMP, to name a few. These groups don't get any media attention however, because no one wants to hear about peaceful muslims right now. The media stands to make a lot more off of stories of violent muslims.
All that I'm trying to point out is that it is very clear to me that the American Media is waging a war on muslims right now and trying to make them out into inhuman devils that have no morals. Similarly, the media in the muslim world is making sensations out of some stupid cartoons to try and get muslims to rally around the notion that the western world is a bunch of infidels.
In general I'm very wary of Islamic countries and their political orientations. But I'm also very wary of the media. The media encourages people to get carried away with their projections of the "true character" of whoever the enemy happens to be. Before you get carried away ask yourself if you really know anything about muslims, or if everything you know has just been fed to you over the TV.
--------------------
Society in every form is a blessing, but government at its best is but a necessary evil - Thomas Paine
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: gluke bastid]
#5601571 - 05/07/06 04:17 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Americans stepped up and prosecuted and executed a reprehensible slug. Whether you did or not is irrelevant. The vast majority of Americans recognized him for what he was and took action. This cannot be said for the members of the "religion of shit."
--------------------
|
Phred
Fred's son


Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 18 days
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: gluke bastid]
#5601629 - 05/07/06 04:32 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
gluke_bastid writes:
Quote:
Only from the perspective of someone who doesn't know any muslims, doesn't live in a muslim country and doesn't understand the basic tennants of Islam would it be neccesary for the "muslim world" (I put in quotation marks because there isn't really a unified muslim world at all) to demonstrate that they are opposed to violence.
How odd that I came across a relevant post at one of my favorite blogs just before reading your post. From http://ace.mu.nu/archives/175551.php --
Great Article On Barbary Pirates' "Jihad At Sea" http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=22314
And as a bonus, contains quotes of stuff Jefferson actually said, as opposed to the fake Jefferson quotes John Kerry continues to use after they've long since been debunked as completely specious.
Hey, the man paid $18.59 for Stuff Jefferson Said, 3rd Ed., Rev., on eBay, and damnit, he's going to get his money's worth.
Anyway, this article is a must-read. It details America's first serious confrontation with the jihadists-- and it's shocking how much hasn't changed. Both in terms of the jihadists' claims of a God-granted right to slaughter, enslave, rape, and murder, and the limp-wristed response by many in the West to this Religion of Perpetual Mayhem and Barbarism.
Quote:
Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, then serving as American ambassadors to France and Britain, respectively, met in 1786 in London with the Tripolitan Ambassador to Britain, Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja. These future American presidents were attempting to negotiate a peace treaty which would spare the United States the ravages of jihad piracy—murder, enslavement (with ransoming for redemption), and expropriation of valuable commercial assets—emanating from the Barbary states (modern Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya, known collectively in Arabic as the Maghrib). During their discussions, they questioned Ambassador Adja as to the source of the unprovoked animus directed at the nascent United States republic. Jefferson and Adams, in their subsequent report to the Continental Congress, recorded the Tripolitan Ambassador’s justification:
Quote:
… that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman [Muslim] who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise.
Thus as Joshua London’s Victory in Tripoli elaborates in lucid prose, an aggressive jihad was already being waged against the United States almost 200 years prior to America becoming a dominant international power in the Middle East. Moreover, these jihad depredations targeting America antedated the earliest vestiges of the Zionist movement by a century, and the formal creation of Israel by 162 years—exploding the ahistorical canard that American support for the modern Jewish state is a prerequisite for jihadist attacks on the United States.
...
The Barbary jihad piracy which confronted America soon after our nation was established (i.e., between 1786-1815), was an enduring, formidable enterprise. During the 16th and 17th centuries, as many Europeans were captured, sold, and enslaved by the Barbary corsairs as were West Africans made captive and shipped for plantation labor in the Americas by European slave traders. Robert Davis’ methodical enumeration indicates that between one, and one and one-quarter million white European Christians were enslaved by the Barbary Muslims from 1530 through 1780.
...
Joshua London's compelling narrative of America's political and military efforts during the Barbary wars highlights—appositely—the experiences of William Eaton. Eaton's triumphs and travails during his tenure as consul to Tunis (1799-1803), and later U.S. naval agent to the Barbary states, mirrored those of the young American nation he served.
...
Eaton agonized over the gulf between the enormous potential and depressing reality of the Barbary states. ...Eaton concluded that Islam itself, certainly as practiced in Barbary, was the source of this backwardness:
Quote:
Considered as a nation, they are deplorably wretched, because they have no property in the soil to inspire an ambition to cultivate it. They are abject slaves to the despotism of their government, and they are humiliated by tyranny, the worst of all tyrannies, the despotism of priestcraft. They live in more solemn fear of the frowns of a bigot who has been dead and rotten above a thousand years, than of the living despot whose frown would cost them their lives…The ignorance, superstitious tradition and civil and religious tyranny, which depress the human mind here, exclude improvement of every kind…
...
Joshua London concludes his engrossing, carefully researched, and intellectually honest account of the Barbary wars with this insightful analysis:
Quote:
During the war with Tripoli, the United States began to test William Eaton’s hypothesis that fighting back and protecting the national honor and national interest with force was the best way to end Barbary piracy. Just at the moment of triumph, however, President Thomas Jefferson wavered and settled on the side of expediency. Jefferson’s lack of resolve left American interests unguarded, and once again American maritime trade felt the Barbary terror. By 1816, however, the United States finally provded that William Eaton was right. This success ignited the imagination of the Old World powers to rise up against the Barbary pirates.
Hugh Fitzgerald at Jihadwatch.org has a companion piece, with similar quotes but with some additional material. John Quincy Adams, it seems, was not given to "Religion of Peace" apologism:
Quote:
….he [Muhammad] declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind…The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God…the faithful follower of the prophet may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force.
Think John Kerry will be quoting those genuine quotes from Jefferson, Madison, and John Quincy Adams?
Of course not. But then, neither will George Bush, either.
Fitzgerald writes:
Quote:
As one reads and ponders these remarks by Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, and John Quincy Adams, one is struck by the self-assurance that they represent civilization, and that Islam and its representatives did not, and it would have been ludicrous to pretend otherwise. Islam did not change between 1786 or 1805 or 1830 and today. The doctrine of Jihad did not change. The Qur’an was not a different Qur’an; the Hadith were not differently ranked from the way muhaddithin had ranked them, according to various levels of authenticity, nearly a thousand years before. If anything, the forces of Islam were far weaker then, and far less able, therefore, to conduct Jihad. The only instrument available was military, and in military matters the Muslims were hopelessly surpassed by the technology of a much more advanced civilization – more advanced in every possible way. So what happened? How is it that today no Western leader can bring himself to write about Islam as Jefferson, Adams, John Quincy Adams, or even in modern times, as Churchill did in The River War?
"Civilization" and "progress" happened, and that's not always a good thing.
If a civilization is to survive in the face of perpetual attacks and outrages, it must have some degree of confidence in itself. We generally mark it as "progress" when we doubt ourselves, when we question our own assumptions and dogmas and subjective views; but there is a time for questioning, and a time to put questions aside. Not put them aside forever; but put the "question yourself" imperative decidedly lower on our civilizational list of priorities.
The Muslim jihadists don't question themselves at all. They believe, without question, that they have the right to murder, rape, maim, and enslave anyone who is an infidel. That is barbarism.
But to do nothing but question one's own actions and motives in the face of such an implacable and merciless enemy isn't "progress," it's stupidity, moral cowardice, and suicide.
The definition of a liberal, in foreign policy, is someone who won't take his own side in a fight. I'm afraid we don't have that luxury any more.
Thanks to JackM. of Letters from Desolation Row ( http://www.lettersfromdesolationrow.blogspot.com/ ) for the first article. (BTW, JackM. is answering all and sundry questions you may have.)
Thanks to Craig for the second one.
Not To Undermine A Serious Point With a Non-Serious Quote, But...
Quote:
"Barbarism is the natural state of mankind... Civilization is unnatural. It is the whim of circumstance. And barbarism must always ultimately triumph."
Okay, that's a Conan quote, from my favorite Conan story, Beyond the Black River. It also appears, however, in Stuff Jefferson Said After Reading An Issue of Weird Tales, Vol. 1.
I guess it's pretty silly to quote Conan in this context. But there are advantages to barbarism -- energy, cultural confidence (even when that confidence far exceeds what a culture has, objectively, to be confident about), and a ruthlessness from which the forces of civilization naturally flinch.
Civilization is important.
But if a civilization is to survive, it must not grow so decadent, so vain in exulting its own sophistication, that it can view its own survival in "objective" terms that do not favor itself over the enemy.
At some point, a civilization needs to embrace some of the virtues of barbarism when it is faced with barbaric attacks. Otherwise, it will perish, no matter how much stronger or more advanced it may appear on paper, for a simple lack of willpower enough to actually bother saving itself.
**************************************************************************
Phred
--------------------
|
Phred
Fred's son


Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 18 days
|
Re: Freedom of the Press for Muslims? [Re: Phred]
#5601704 - 05/07/06 04:50 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
And following up on the topic raised at the end of the commentary in my previous post, to wit:
Quote:
Civilization is important.
But if a civilization is to survive, it must not grow so decadent, so vain in exulting its own sophistication, that it can view its own survival in "objective" terms that do not favor itself over the enemy.
At some point, a civilization needs to embrace some of the virtues of barbarism when it is faced with barbaric attacks. Otherwise, it will perish, no matter how much stronger or more advanced it may appear on paper, for a simple lack of willpower enough to actually bother saving itself.
I will post a followup from the same author (Ace) at the same website (ace.mu.nu) . Since that might take this thread a bit too far from its original topic, I'll start a new thread here -- http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/5601696/an/0/page/0
Phred
--------------------
|
|