Those cartoons again
-
Roger J wrote:
if so, doesnt that rule only apply to muslims? or are muslims trying to force everyone to obey by that rule? are there more rules in the quoran that we should obey?
Well just a point: I don't know if you are us citizen, but if you are you perhaps won't burn flag of the us (or your country). When other people in other countries do this, you don't like it too and you may want them to respect your flag. The flag of the us is often burned in arabic countries and not many us citizens are happy about this. This is the same point with the cartoons. The muslims want to be respected and, as they believe that god or the prophet should not be painted, they want everyone to respect their religion, not drawing any cartoons of mohamed. Not all muslims take their weapons and burn down the consulates (and the flags), but some of them do. There are so called christians, who do nearly the same, treating people with black skin as animals, kill christians from other confessions and so on. I dislike the reaction of the muslims, but you shouldn't do, like they are the only ones who react "a little bit strange".
Roger J wrote:
also, why should Denmark apologize ? muslims are burning dansih flags , which is a symbol of destruction of danish society, isnt it? wouldnt denmark and muslims be about even now that both have insulted eachother?
Well in this point you're right. But the cleverer gives in (a sad truth, it establish the world domination of the dumb)! On the other hand there are many examples where the western countries reacted totally wrong. Not only George Bush, but a lot of heads of governments. There are two sides of every story and (even some hollywood pictures want to make us believe) you can't say that one are the good ones and the others are the bad. Most times this is wrong. Greetings, Ingo ------------------------------ A bug in a Microsoft Product? No! It's not a bug it's an undocumented feature!
ihoecken wrote:
There are two sides of every story
Actually there are three sides: your side, my side and the truth.
turning the other cheek just gets you slapped twice
-
farmer giles wrote:
against deliberately insulting other peoples culture or religion
I disagree. It is OUR culture to insult anything we want. We have a satirical history going back hundreds of years, and nothing is above that. It is part of our honesty and sense of humour and to avoid insulting a foreign culture by limiting our own is a mistake. Nunc est bibendum
fat_boy wrote:
It is OUR culture to insult anything we want.
Well that is not culture that is dullness. You can make jokes, but there is no apology to hurt other persons. And when this is what an insult does. There must be a space, where you can make jokes, but if it goes further this is no culture and there is no right to do this. By the way: When you make jokes about something stupid, you're intelligent. When you make jokes about something intelligent you're stupid. Greetings, Ingo ------------------------------ A bug in a Microsoft Product? No! It's not a bug it's an undocumented feature!
-
ihoecken wrote:
There are two sides of every story
Actually there are three sides: your side, my side and the truth.
turning the other cheek just gets you slapped twice
legalAlien wrote:
Actually there are three sides: your side, my side and the truth.
The truth? What is the truth? It's totally uninteresting when you discuss about feelings. And there is more than one truth, there are many. Greetings, Ingo ------------------------------ A bug in a Microsoft Product? No! It's not a bug it's an undocumented feature!
-
fat_boy wrote:
It is OUR culture to insult anything we want.
Well that is not culture that is dullness. You can make jokes, but there is no apology to hurt other persons. And when this is what an insult does. There must be a space, where you can make jokes, but if it goes further this is no culture and there is no right to do this. By the way: When you make jokes about something stupid, you're intelligent. When you make jokes about something intelligent you're stupid. Greetings, Ingo ------------------------------ A bug in a Microsoft Product? No! It's not a bug it's an undocumented feature!
ihoecken wrote:
that is not culture that is dullness
Hogarth, Punch, Private Eye, a long tradition of political and religous satire. This is not dullness, this is OUR culture. Have you ever seen 'Have I Got News For You'? How dare another, foreign culture tell us how to live! Nunc est bibendum
-
Your reply manifests "interest in communication"? Please. It fits that you should preach, though.
You suggest that the row over the cartoons has to do with "the nuclear 'crisis' hovering over Iran". I ask for clarification and you tell me to "connect the dots". Very helpful. Thanks. That clears that up. You suggest that speculation about the presumed hypocrisy of hundreds of millions of human beings is "infantile". I don't know if you say that because because you think it is obviously true or obviously false. Your response on that point is that you haven't raised the issues and that they are all over the board. Thanks. That clears up your position on that issue nicely too. Then you say "no need to fantasize on the perfectly spherical meaning of 'freedom' (for those not-so-bright-yet-keen-to-aver out there)". I can't even begin to narrow this down. I haven't the faintest idea what you are trying to say. On this point you make no response at all. Once again, really helpful. Lastly, I link to an article that explains the slow process whereby the cartoon issue built to its present crisis, as opposed to having been pulled on at an opportune moment, and your response is: "You've answered yourself." So on four points, you make not the slightest effort to communicate. I point this out and you complain at my own lack of effort. Just for good measure, you throw in an unexplained allusion to my alleged propensity to preach. Well, some things are obvious and shouldn't need much explanation. Others are not and do need explanation. We obviously disagree about what falls into each category. For my own part, it is clear that you are an arrogant wanker with nothing useful to contribute. Go fuck yourself. John Carson "To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason is like administering medicine to the dead." Thomas Paine -- modified at 9:18 Monday 6th February, 2006
-
ihoecken wrote:
that is not culture that is dullness
Hogarth, Punch, Private Eye, a long tradition of political and religous satire. This is not dullness, this is OUR culture. Have you ever seen 'Have I Got News For You'? How dare another, foreign culture tell us how to live! Nunc est bibendum
fat_boy wrote:
This is not dullness, this is OUR culture.
Perhaps it's your culture but it's not mine. I don't make jokes about anyone I don't like to be made about me. I respect other people and their way of life and I want them to respect me. Nothing against jokes but I don't want to insult anybody who didn't insulted me and most times I try to restrain, even when I'm insulted. It's better to say that and to talk to people. When you insult someone he may draw a gun and kill you. So don't come to me and complain when you're dead. It's your own fault. And I won't help you then. Be a ghost somewhere else... Greetings, Ingo ------------------------------ A bug in a Microsoft Product? No! It's not a bug it's an undocumented feature!
-
fat_boy wrote:
This is not dullness, this is OUR culture.
Perhaps it's your culture but it's not mine. I don't make jokes about anyone I don't like to be made about me. I respect other people and their way of life and I want them to respect me. Nothing against jokes but I don't want to insult anybody who didn't insulted me and most times I try to restrain, even when I'm insulted. It's better to say that and to talk to people. When you insult someone he may draw a gun and kill you. So don't come to me and complain when you're dead. It's your own fault. And I won't help you then. Be a ghost somewhere else... Greetings, Ingo ------------------------------ A bug in a Microsoft Product? No! It's not a bug it's an undocumented feature!
Well these protests were in the UK so everything I have said is true and relevant. And, these are satirical jokes designed to expose lies and deceit. If the average Muslem cant see that we are pointing at a minority of THEIR culture then they are truly stupid.
ihoecken wrote:
who didn't insulted me
What do you call a bomb on public transport? That is an almighty insult.
ihoecken wrote:
I won't help you
Never asked for it thanks. Nunc est bibendum
-
Well these protests were in the UK so everything I have said is true and relevant. And, these are satirical jokes designed to expose lies and deceit. If the average Muslem cant see that we are pointing at a minority of THEIR culture then they are truly stupid.
ihoecken wrote:
who didn't insulted me
What do you call a bomb on public transport? That is an almighty insult.
ihoecken wrote:
I won't help you
Never asked for it thanks. Nunc est bibendum
fat_boy wrote:
What do you call a bomb on public transport? That is an almighty insult.
I didn't justify any terror from muslims or anybody else. We discussed insulting someone, not killing. I never even mentioned that the cartoons were wrong in my eyes. I don't like any violence and terror is much worse than an insult, but this is no carte blanche to hurt someones feelings.
fat_boy wrote:
If the average Muslem cant see that we are pointing at a minority of THEIR culture then they are truly stupid.
By the way, I know some muslims who never would burn our flags or consular representation. And they don't mind the cartoons. What is the average then? The worst case? Greetings, Ingo ------------------------------ A bug in a Microsoft Product? No! It's not a bug it's an undocumented feature!
-
fat_boy wrote:
What do you call a bomb on public transport? That is an almighty insult.
I didn't justify any terror from muslims or anybody else. We discussed insulting someone, not killing. I never even mentioned that the cartoons were wrong in my eyes. I don't like any violence and terror is much worse than an insult, but this is no carte blanche to hurt someones feelings.
fat_boy wrote:
If the average Muslem cant see that we are pointing at a minority of THEIR culture then they are truly stupid.
By the way, I know some muslims who never would burn our flags or consular representation. And they don't mind the cartoons. What is the average then? The worst case? Greetings, Ingo ------------------------------ A bug in a Microsoft Product? No! It's not a bug it's an undocumented feature!
-
You suggest that the row over the cartoons has to do with "the nuclear 'crisis' hovering over Iran". I ask for clarification and you tell me to "connect the dots". Very helpful. Thanks. That clears that up. You suggest that speculation about the presumed hypocrisy of hundreds of millions of human beings is "infantile". I don't know if you say that because because you think it is obviously true or obviously false. Your response on that point is that you haven't raised the issues and that they are all over the board. Thanks. That clears up your position on that issue nicely too. Then you say "no need to fantasize on the perfectly spherical meaning of 'freedom' (for those not-so-bright-yet-keen-to-aver out there)". I can't even begin to narrow this down. I haven't the faintest idea what you are trying to say. On this point you make no response at all. Once again, really helpful. Lastly, I link to an article that explains the slow process whereby the cartoon issue built to its present crisis, as opposed to having been pulled on at an opportune moment, and your response is: "You've answered yourself." So on four points, you make not the slightest effort to communicate. I point this out and you complain at my own lack of effort. Just for good measure, you throw in an unexplained allusion to my alleged propensity to preach. Well, some things are obvious and shouldn't need much explanation. Others are not and do need explanation. We obviously disagree about what falls into each category. For my own part, it is clear that you are an arrogant wanker with nothing useful to contribute. Go fuck yourself. John Carson "To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason is like administering medicine to the dead." Thomas Paine -- modified at 9:18 Monday 6th February, 2006
Always surprises me when a felow tries to play dumb while pretending to be clever.
John Carson wrote:
You suggest that speculation about the presumed hypocrisy of hundreds of millions of human beings is "infantile". I don't know if you say that because because you think it is obviously true or obviously false. Your response on that point is that you haven't raised the issues and that they are all over the board. Thanks. That clears up your position on that issue nicely too.
Do you honestly beleive it is possible to make any kind of value judgement over hundreds of millions of human beings without making a fool of yourself? Please.
John Carson wrote:
Then you say "no need to fantasize on the perfectly spherical meaning of 'freedom' (for those not-so-bright-yet-keen-to-aver out there)". I can't even begin to narrow this down. I haven't the faintest idea what you are trying to say. On this point you make no response at all. Once again, really helpful.
My statement is indeed obscure, at least as obscure as the previous one. Well, go ahead and "debate" what freedom really really, I mean, really really means.
John Carson wrote:
Lastly, I link to an article that explains the slow process whereby the cartoon issue built to its present crisis, as opposed to having been pulled on at an opportune moment, and your response is: "You've answered yourself."
No, I didn't. I can only wonder if you actually lie to yourself with such ease. Read again what YOU said:
John Carson wrote:
There has been plenty of activity over those 4 months, even though the matter has not come to world-wide attention until now.
To which I said: "You've answered yourself.". Now, does it take a genius?
John Carson wrote:
So on four points, you make not the slightest effort to communicate.
Yet, where is your effort? Not only you don't make one, you actually brag about it. Again, the preacher.
John Carson wrote:
I point this out and you complain at my own lack of effort. Just for good measure, you throw in an unexplained allusion to my alleged propensity to preach. Well, some things are obvious and shouldn't need much explanation.
As shown.
-
I just wonder where is it stated that you may not publish pictures of Mohammed? is it in the quoran? if so, doesnt that rule only apply to muslims? or are muslims trying to force everyone to obey by that rule? are there more rules in the quoran that we should obey? also, why should Denmark apologize ? muslims are burning dansih flags , which is a symbol of destruction of danish society, isnt it? wouldnt denmark and muslims be about even now that both have insulted eachother?
Actually, I think they should burn all the Danish flags they can get. You see, we're such a small country that I can hardly believe those flags are produced anywhere else than here, and if they keep up the burning, it just might make up for their boycot on other Danish products :-) "God doesn't play dice" - Albert Einstein "God not only plays dice, He sometimes throws the dices where they cannot be seen" - Niels Bohr
-
Always surprises me when a felow tries to play dumb while pretending to be clever.
John Carson wrote:
You suggest that speculation about the presumed hypocrisy of hundreds of millions of human beings is "infantile". I don't know if you say that because because you think it is obviously true or obviously false. Your response on that point is that you haven't raised the issues and that they are all over the board. Thanks. That clears up your position on that issue nicely too.
Do you honestly beleive it is possible to make any kind of value judgement over hundreds of millions of human beings without making a fool of yourself? Please.
John Carson wrote:
Then you say "no need to fantasize on the perfectly spherical meaning of 'freedom' (for those not-so-bright-yet-keen-to-aver out there)". I can't even begin to narrow this down. I haven't the faintest idea what you are trying to say. On this point you make no response at all. Once again, really helpful.
My statement is indeed obscure, at least as obscure as the previous one. Well, go ahead and "debate" what freedom really really, I mean, really really means.
John Carson wrote:
Lastly, I link to an article that explains the slow process whereby the cartoon issue built to its present crisis, as opposed to having been pulled on at an opportune moment, and your response is: "You've answered yourself."
No, I didn't. I can only wonder if you actually lie to yourself with such ease. Read again what YOU said:
John Carson wrote:
There has been plenty of activity over those 4 months, even though the matter has not come to world-wide attention until now.
To which I said: "You've answered yourself.". Now, does it take a genius?
John Carson wrote:
So on four points, you make not the slightest effort to communicate.
Yet, where is your effort? Not only you don't make one, you actually brag about it. Again, the preacher.
John Carson wrote:
I point this out and you complain at my own lack of effort. Just for good measure, you throw in an unexplained allusion to my alleged propensity to preach. Well, some things are obvious and shouldn't need much explanation.
As shown.
What makes you an arrogant wanker is that you promote views that are highly controversial and yet think there is no need to argue for them. You make obscure statements of your own position combined with a few sneers about naivety, and leave it at that. Attempts to get more information are unproductive, mainly eliciting more insults regarding my intelligence. You think that whatever is in your mind must be both clear and clearly true to everyone else. You view requests for clarification as insincere: a case of "playing dumb". You apparently believe you are the Borg Queen. You are yet to explain your position re Iran and the nuclear issue. I am guessing that you are claiming that this controversy has been orchestrated by the West so as to make Muslims look bad, thereby paving the way politically for action against Iran. However, you might equally be claiming that the Muslims are pulling on a controversy in order to build solidarity in anticipation of a confrontation with the West over the nuclear issue. But the Borg Queen has no need to explain her thinking.
DaTxomin wrote:
Do you honestly beleive it is possible to make any kind of value judgement over hundreds of millions of human beings without making a fool of yourself? Please.
Again a sneer rather than an attempt to explain or justify your position. Here is how it looks to me. If a person believes in denying religious freedom to non-Muslims, yet expects non-Muslims to completely respect the Islamic religion, then that person is being hypocrtical. If millions of Muslims adopt that position, then millions are being hypocritical. (They might not be hypocritical on other issues, of course, but we are not talking about those other issues.) It is my contention --- and the contention of countless others --- that this is exactly the case. I have no idea how we thereby make fools of ourselves, but clearly I am a malfunctioning Borg drone.
DaTxomin wrote:
John Carson wrote: Lastly, I link to an article that explains the slow process whereby the cartoon issue built to its present crisis, as opposed to having been pulled on at an opportune moment, and your response is: "You've answered yourself." No, I didn't. I can only wonder if you actually lie to yourself with such ease. Read again what YOU said: John Carson wrote: There has been plenty of activity over those 4 months, even though the matter has not come to world-wide attention until now.
-
Come on, guys, I'm sure that other folks have pointed this out before. The cartoons where posted at the end of September. How come it has taken some 4 months for them to become an outrage? May it have to do with the nuclear "crisis" hovering over Iran? No need to speculate about the presumed hypocresy of hundreds of millions of human beings (I mean, please, how infantile can one get) and no need to fantasize on the perfectly spherical meaning of "freedom" (for those not-so-bright-yet-keen-to-aver out there). Just a bit less of naivete.
Good point - Not many people seem willing to admit the possibility that the "cartoon violence" could be about more then just cartoons. Steve