The Middle East part 2

[Placebo 29]

/ME Thread says "Here I am".......

[Warden 0]

Hamas Refuse To Disarm

Hamas has rejected calls to disarm by a quartet of the United States, European Union, Russia and the United Nations.

The militant group had a shock victory in the Palestinian general election but has clashed with other countries over its aggressive attitude towards its Israeli neighbours.

Hamas insisted it would not disarm after UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan read out a statement by the quartet, which is currently in London.

Advertisement

Mr Annan had said: "All members of the future Palestinian government must be committed to non-violence, recognition of Israel and acceptance of previous agreements and obligations, including the roadmap."

He added: "If Hamas ... transforms itself from an armed movement into a political party respecting the rules of the game ... I think the international community should be able to work with them."

Armed Hamas supporters after the election But Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said: "The Quartet should have demanded an end to (Israeli) occupation and aggression ... not demanded that the victim should recognise the occupation and stand handcuffed in the face of the aggression."

The quartet's statement followed Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas urging foreign donors to continue sending financial aid to his country.

Mr Abbas said Palestinians would honour all agreements with Israel despite international fears after Hamas' victory.

The president said he had "reiterated our commitment to the peace process" during talks with German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Speaking at a joint press conference, as part of the German leader's visit to the West Bank, Mr Abbas said: "Our talks focused on the need to continue this aid so that our people can stand on their own feet."

The EU and US have indicated that funding for the Palestinian Authority could be cut if Hamas does not end violence and recognise Israel, which it is formally committed to destroying.

[booradley60 0]

I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere else in the thread, so I apologize if it has been mentioned, but a Danish newspaper published some cartoons from political cartoonists depicting Mohammed (comsidered blasphemy by Muslims). The toons have sparked debate over the limits of free speech, and generated angst in the Muslim world toward the Danes.

Daryl Cagle's blog regarding the cartoons. (Where I first saw it.)

Page showing the offending cartoons depicting Mohammed.

[sputnik monroe 102]

Quote[/b] ]In a 24 January statement, the Jordanian parliament said the cartoons "constitute a cowardly and reprehensible crime" and urged the Norwegian and Danish authorities "to express their condemnation and disapproval of this hateful crime and to punish the perpetrators and instigators."

It also called on "parliaments, governments and civil society organisations in the Muslim world to take a firm position on this evil, which strikes at the sentiments of the Arabo-Muslim nation."

Good grief, I've never seen them express this kind of outrage or condemnation over terrorist. I think they need to get their priorites straight.

I try to be fair and open minded towards all religions but man is it just me or are they the most touchy religion on earth. I haven't heard any wacko Christians placing bounties on the heads of Kevin Smith or George Carlin for the whole buddy Jesus schtick in Dogma, yet there are fatwas and bounties calling for the death of a few Danes who drew funny pictures?

Once again I reiterate what I said in another post. Mankind is a disappointment.

[EiZei 0]

And this is from the country that treats elders of zion a respectable source of research..

Sigh.

[Maistro 0]

I think the worst thing is, that muslims from denmark and from countries near here, have actually flewn to muslim countries telling lies of what the danish people have done. It goes from anything like the danish government is sponsoring a new anti-islam movie till Jyllands-posten being a political owned newspaper.

Latest, it was one of the Imams from Denmark who went on BBC World showing "one of the cartoons from Jyllands-Posten (JP)". It was infact a cartoon the Islam parties had drewn themself showing Muhammed in a much worse scenario than the 12 pictures first published in JP.

I don't know weather to laugh or cry for these people. WTO will be blocking any export/import from/to Europe towards any countries who officially told the people to boycut danish goods.... The loosers in the end will be the Muslim people from the various countries. And the winners will be countries outside EU who will be incriesing their export.

[Colossus 2]

Jyllands-Posten got a bomb threat about an hour ago, two of there offices are evacuated (one in Viby and one in Copenhagen)

Was it really necessary to make these drawings? Now the whole country (including Norway thanks to Magazine) is at risk.

It's free press, ok, but I can't see any reason for putting the rest of the country at stake just because they wanted there freedom of speech, in this case it wasn't worth it!

[Acecombat 0]

Am i the only one who fails to understand why drawing 'muhammed' in those cartoons was necessary? Its not as if hes here alive and working AQ .

Those poor cartoonists couldnt find a better way to gain their 5 mins of fame i guess.

Quote[/b] ] Good grief, I've never seen them express this kind of outrage or condemnation over terrorist. I think they need to get their priorites straight.

Actually they have , and in the end they are also only words , which mean sh!t unless they are backed up by some action.

[Maistro 0]

The wholse situation occured, because noone dared to draw Muhammed and some1 wanted to use a 100% clean image of him in a childrens-book.

Jyllands-Posten asked people all over the country to make a picture of him - 12 people dared.

They did the same thing in a film a couple decades ago, where Jesus was placed as being bisexual and had alot of women. It is simply a way to use the free speech - not in a political manner but in a cultural manner against tabues.

The drawings werent meant as a hate against muslims, they were solely meant to show the public that the free speach is still here in Denmark.

Many Muslims here in Denmark are afraid to say anything against other muslims, because the Islam parties here doesnt acknowledge free speach, even though we are in Denmark. Danish muslims havent got the same rights as danish in general. Simply because the Islam community still sees positive on "Killing in honour" and their way of treating women is just sad.

//Edit

No bombs were found during the search

[GoOB 0]

You have to remember that the ones who are outraged still are a minority, the demonstrations, or whatever one should call them consisted only of a few hundred people. And the bomb threats and or other threats are hardly to be regarded as something that will be acted upon.

Still, I think it's ridiculos to publish pictures that aim to stereotype muslims or muslim religious icons. Even if it's in good spirit from the publicist it's not a good thing to do. But at the same time burning Danish flags, making bomb threats and whatnot because of a drawing aren't good things to do either...

Oh... And anyone saying that christians or whatever aren't as easily offended as muslims, look at: http://www.godhatesfags.com/main/green_monument.html a website erected after pastor Ĺke Green was sentenced to one year in prison.

[Acecombat 0]

Quote[/b] ]The wholse situation occured, because noone dared to draw Muhammed and some1 wanted to use a 100% clean image of him in a childrens-book.

So in the end it was nothing more then a bunch of angsty rebellious losers who just wanted to do something that they consider is a 'taboo' ? Heres another taboo i just made up 'suicide' not many dare but hey these pricks should try it would be helpful for the rest of us who dont wanna bother doing something useless and moronic which inturn displeases many for various reasons.

Quote[/b] ]It is simply a way to use the free speech

Its more of a way of showing their true retarded self. Free speech my ass.

[sputnik monroe 102]

Acecombat it may be insulting to Muslims, that and yes it does just show that they are jerks for drawing it. Still here's an example I'll post from another thread in this offtopic forum.

 Tovarish posted this comic in another thread. Is it not as bad or worse than the Mohammed comics? The only difference is it's a different religion being smeared. I don't hear any Fatwahs, bounties, death threats, or boycotts over this comic though. Why is it so different when Islam is the brunt of a joke?

 Judaism and Christianity get made fun of and ridiculed all the time. Hindu's get just as bad treatment towards their religion (see Apu on the Simpsons). The difference seems to be that if some one makes a joke insulting to Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, or Hinduism the practionars of the said religion at most will argue or debate, I haven't heard of any fatwahs or bounties being levied by the Jewish, Christian , Buddhist, Hindu world when ever their religions are smeared.

 I'm sure some one can point out a loony Christian or Jew who's gone all wacko over their religion being insulted, yet that tends to be an exception not the rule. With the Muslim world it seems to me, (and I may be wrong) but it seems that they are awfully quick to kill "blasphemers"  for the dumbest perceived infractions against their faith.

(by the way Tovarish, I'm just using your comic post as an example. I'm in no way picking on you  )

[EiZei 0]

Quote[/b] ]It is simply a way to use the free speech

Its more of a way of showing their true retarded self. Free speech my ass.

That is excatly about what free speech is, no-one can suddenly decide that your speech is "wrong", "offensive" or "stupid" and ban it just for that.

In post-Stalin soviet union dissidents were often locked up and told that they were saying "uninformed and provocative" things or jammed up in mental hospitals because only crazy persons would not want to live in the socialist paradise..

[Maistro 0]

Sure these cartoons was a stupid thing to bring. But this doesnt displace the full picture that we are seeing. We are seeing Other countries trying to push in their control-society into Europe. This just wont happen. We have our free speach, and thats the way its going to be.

Its nice to see other European contries back us up by publishing the pictures in their newspapers.

On the other hand, it will probably just make the whole thing even worse.

Damn ignorant and intolerant fools

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]We are seeing Other countries trying to push in their control-society into Europe. This just wont happen. We have our free speach, and thats the way its going to be.

Hollywood anyone ?

The package is more attractive MAYBE but the "truth" often displayed in those movies, especially warmovies, is far from being authentic.

I remember a big controversy about the "Passion of christ" movie by Mel Gibson aswell. I feel safe to say that we are not that far away from the things we blame others for. Replace "Mohammed" with "USA", "Jesus Christ" or "United we stand" and rethink the approach

[General Barron 0]

Was it really necessary to make these drawings? Now the whole country (including Norway thanks to Magazine) is at risk.

It's free press, ok, but I can't see any reason for putting the rest of the country at stake just because they wanted there freedom of speech, in this case it wasn't worth it!

*pops in*

Wow. We must live on different planets or something, because it seems to me like you are blaming the wrong people. The person(s) who drew these cartoons didn't put anyone at risk. The terrorists making the bomb threats are the ones putting people at risk. How could you think otherwise?

Let me take an example from American history--during the civil rights movement in the deep south. As a reaction to and an attempt to strike fear into the hearts and minds of the Black population against "nigger loving" concepts of racial equality, southerners revived the ever-effective lynching, which had been in decline, to combat the achievements of Civil Rights workers.

Using your logic, one might blame the civil rights workers for endangering the lives of many Americans. Lynching was already in decline, and would have continued to decline if there wasn't any CR movement. I would argue that the blame should, of course, go on the scumbag terrorists that were actually doing the lynching. Just two different ways of looking at the world I guess...

Quote[/b] ]I feel safe to say that we are not that far away from the things we blame others for. Replace "Mohammed" with "USA", "Jesus Christ" or "United we stand" and rethink the approach

I think we are lightyears apart. I see all sorts of political cartoons criticizing the US govt, Christianity, the military, etc, which I find offensive or at least in poor taste (especially in the region where I live). However, it is exceedingly rare to hear anyone talk about government censorship of such things. I can't think of any example where a legistlator has called for something like that--be it on the extreme right (ex: anti-christian messages) or the extreme left (ex: anti-gay messages).

Sure, there are often calls from private groups for boycotts, etc, but there is a WORLD of difference between that and actual GOVERNMENT censorship. Boycotts are a people's right, protected by our capitalist system. Government censorship is prohibited by our 1st amendment. Your country's mileage may vary depending on your own constitutions.

If you think the free world isn't that different from the world under Islamic Sharia law, you are sorely mistaken. If you can go to a store to buy music CDs, then you are not living under Sharia. If your women can wear miniskirts on the street, then you are not living under Sharia. If you can go to dance clubs, then you are not living under Sharia. If any of these examples seem absurd, then obviously you haven't been paying attention to what happens in areas that ARE put under islamic religious law (eg: towns in Iraq under terrorist control).

[aside]

Guess what's 1st on the agenda of Palestine's new terrorist government? No, not improving the economy... not even the destruction of Israel... it's imposing strict Islamic law on its citizens! They claim it will be 'voluntary', but of course that is a load of bull. I feel especially sorry for the non-muslim palestinians...

*disappears*

[Nemesis6 0]

Well, destroying Israel is on their agenda, too. But all in due time I guess. The whole situation is summed up in these nifty cartoons -

--

[denoir 0]

What a load of rubbish. No, I'm not talking about General Barron's post, but about the reaction of the Muslim community. I mean, talk about double standards. Their time would be better spent condemning the pro-terror, anti-western, anti-Semitic etc statements of their leaders.

Modern Islam is really going down the wrong path and are really digging a hole for themselves with their current intolerant and radical agenda.

What they must realize is that intolerance breeds intolerance, and that they can't expect to get away with it forever. And it's not exactly like the west is a nice, kind fluffy bunny. If this shit continues, the other side will grow as intolerant as they are and at that point they'll be fucked as the other side is orders of magnitude stronger.

Until then

Edit: PS, I'm a peace-loving hippie, as liberal and tolerant as humanly possible. If I'm pissed off by this, then you can imagine how the majority, who are not as liberal as I am, feel.

[theavonlady 2]

I'm on my 3rd tin of butter cookies already!

Have a look at cartoons from the Arab world. That's just a sampling.

Nemesis, you missed out on the latest relevant C&F comic.

[Colossus 2]

Was it really necessary to make these drawings? Now the whole country (including Norway thanks to Magazine) is at risk.

It's free press, ok, but I can't see any reason for putting the rest of the country at stake just because they wanted there freedom of speech, in this case it wasn't worth it!

*pops in*

Wow. We must live on different planets or something, because it seems to me like you are blaming the wrong people. The person(s) who drew these cartoons didn't put anyone at risk. The terrorists making the bomb threats are the ones putting people at risk. How could you think otherwise?

Let me take an example from American history--during the civil rights movement in the deep south. As a reaction to and an attempt to strike fear into the hearts and minds of the Black population against "nigger loving" concepts of racial equality, southerners revived the ever-effective lynching, which had been in decline, to combat the achievements of Civil Rights workers.

Using your logic, one might blame the civil rights workers for endangering the lives of many Americans. Lynching was already in decline, and would have continued to decline if there wasn't any CR movement. I would argue that the blame should, of course, go on the scumbag terrorists that were actually doing the lynching. Just two different ways of looking at the world I guess...

I'm just saying they already knew that muslims is sensitive about Muhammed and I don't want to be a part of it!

Of course it's the radical that has the gun but that doesnt mean we need to chear them up to use them.

If I were to say that we need to boycott Israeli trade because I think they do wrong in destroying Palestinian homes I would have been called a anti-Semite and a Nazi (this is based on a actual event)

Now I don't have anything against jews at all but I think there politics is wrong sometimes, and that doesn't make me a anti-Semite and a Nazi.

It's the same feeling muslims have when you draw a negative pic of Muhammed. I'm saying that I respect there sensitivity on that subject and I would leave it as it is.

Everyone has there tabus and there is no reason to attack tabus aggressively.

[EiZei 0]

Everyone has there tabus and there is no reason to attack tabus aggressively.

Yet I don't think there is anything non-personal you could say that would make me go out on the street burning the flags of your country, threatening people of your country who have nothing to do with the matter or demand your goverment to illegally censor you.

This incident CLEARLY demonstrates why anti-hate speech laws are dangerous and utterly worthless.

Quote[/b] ]

Edit: PS, I'm a peace-loving hippie, as liberal and tolerant as humanly possible. If I'm pissed off by this, then you can imagine how the majority, who are not as liberal as I am, feel.

The only thing I wonder is how anybody who truly believes in personal freedom could defend this.

[denoir 0]

Oh... And anyone saying that christians or whatever aren't as easily offended as muslims, look at: http://www.godhatesfags.com/main/green_monument.html a website erected after pastor Ĺke Green was sentenced to one year in prison.

Yes of course, there are idiots in any camp. The question is however of where the average lies and in turn how intolerant the radicals are.

Let me give you a counter example:

If you look at the talk page or the history of the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy at wikipedia, you'll see that it is getting vandalized every few minutes by upset Muslims.

Then take a look at the

Piss Christ article which shows an image of Jesus on a crucifix in a jar of urine. That page hasn't been vandalized at all by upset Christians. Not even once - although it is clearly offensive to Christians.

Now what does that tell us?

[vektorboson 8]

All I have to say: The European peoples should never give in to those threats and histery from radical muslims.

Europe is already giving up a lot of civil rights because of "terrorism" and it should not give up free speech because some people are offended by some caricatures.

But it seems that economic interests are more important than the foundation of our democracies: Civil Rights, especially Free Speech.

[Supah 0]

Outside of oil the middle east has nothing we in europe want nor need. Time to make work of developing alternative energy sources.

[Garcia 0]

Jyllands-Posten got a bomb threat about an hour ago, two of there offices are evacuated (one in Viby and one in Copenhagen)

Was it really necessary to make these drawings? Now the whole country (including Norway thanks to Magazine) is at risk.

It's free press, ok, but I can't see any reason for putting the rest of the country at stake just because they wanted there freedom of speech, in this case it wasn't worth it!

The people that made the drawing never allowed the newspapers to print them.

Quote[/b] ]Outside of oil the middle east has nothing we in europe want nor need. Time to make work of developing alternative energy sources.

You can all buy oil from Norway, for a veeeeery high price, and make us norwegians riiiiiiich