Don't know if anyone has posted this yet [if so, then you all with have to forgive and/or indulge my ignorance in this regard], but here are the cartoons:

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Gallery/28.htm

Ali otherwise has a take on our efforts to bring "democracy" to the Middle East that would presumably please the more "leftist" crowd [though maybe not for the same reason[s]]. And lucky for me, Ali disclaims any copyright to his material [or as Ali puts it: Permission is given to reprint this article.], so with that in mind[http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/sina60202.htm]:

"The Muslim media kept fueling the fire. Aljazeera was up in arms and in an angry article entitled “Has defaming Prophets become Freedom of speech?”, wrote: “Religion is people [sic] - People's ideologies and beliefs should be given great respect. And what journalists call ‘Freedom of expression’ should not by any means hurt the feelings of people; from any religions or sects" And:

In order to allow ‘Freedom of Speech’, governments and organizations must first understand what freedom of speech is,” elucidated Aljazeera patronizingly, the concept of democracy for the rest of us who according to them don’t know its meaning.

Religion is not people. This is sophism at best. Maybe it’s time that these “grand gurus of democracy” descend from their high horses and take a closer look in the mirror to see how Muslims treat the non-Muslims wherever they are the majority.

In Saudi Arabia , even the possession of a copy of the Bible is a crime and if Christian workers are caught meeting in their own homes praying with fellow Christians they could go to jail and be deported. Saudi Arabia, bases its constitution on the Quran and the sayings of Muhammad. Public practice of any other religion is banned.

In Saudi Arabia a court sentenced a teacher to 40 months in prison and 750 lashes for discussing the Bible in the classroom and for telling his students that the Jews were right. He was taken to court by his colleagues and students and was flogged in public charged with promoting a “dubious ideology and mocking religion”.

Aljazeera concluded: “The Islamic religion does not allow offensive remarks by both Muslims and Non-Muslims.”

What rights Muslims should have on non-Muslims to allow or disallow them anything? Isn’t that preposterous? Also the claim that Muslims do not make offensive remarks of other faiths falls flat on its face when we read how Muhammad mocked the religion of the Meccans and at the first opportunity, broke his treaty with them; seized their temple, Ka'ba and destroyed their idols. What right did he have to do so? Isn't this violence? He even disparaged the Jews calling them apes and swine, and the Christians whom he called idol-worshippers for believing in Trinity."

Has Aljazeera asked the Baha’is to see how Muslims insult their faith and persecute them? Why Aljazeera does not protest when Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran says he will stop Christianity in Iran? Islam does not respect any other belief. This claim is hypocritical and a patent lie."

Before we can establish democracy in any country we must lay its foundation. First we have to fight the censorship of thought. You can’t have democracy without freedom of speech. Freedom of speech means freedom to criticize any belief. Beliefs do not have to be protected. It’s the right to criticize them that has to be protected. Beliefs must be scrutinized and if found wanting discarded. True beliefs don't need protection and fallacious beliefs don't have to be protected.

How can you respect the faith of someone who believes it is his God given duty to kill you because your faith is not "right"? Should you respect the belief of one who thinks God has rendered your wife and property halal to him? The very notion of respecting beliefs is absurd. Belief means acceptance of a postulate as true without evidence. Why should such a fallacy be respected?

Muslims threaten the Media when a journalist or a broadcaster casts doubt on the “peacefulness” of Islam. They demand apologies and resignation. Often they get what want and the “offending” journalists are forced to apologize or lose their jobs. Sadly the public, like sheep, watches this violation of rights and does not intervene or protest. What they don't know is that this is an attack on THEIR freedom.

Say NO to the appeasers and the useful idiots

We are destroying our own democracy by our own hands. Our own misguided politicians are hard at work chipping away our democracy. It is regrettable, to put it mildly, that the Council of Europe (CoE) should criticize the Danish Government for its refusal to impose a ban on freedom of speech in Demark in order to appease the Muslims. They said:

“Denmark has a tradition for tolerance and respect for others. Notwithstanding this tradition, a strong seam of intolerance has developed in Danish society, particularly towards immigrants and also Muslims.”

Shouldn't the CoE demand tolerance from Muslims and condemn them for bullying Denmark to violate the freedom of speech?

The CoE has become so dhimmi (servile to Muslims) that they even condemned Denmark for prosecuting Muslims who incite hate. That is unbelievable!

This council even organized a seminar to condemn the criticism of Islam and equated it to anti-Semitism. In another place they called criticism of Islam “islamophobia” and said it is a “dangerous inclination”.

How can they be more wrong? Semites are people; Islam is a belief system. This is comparing apples to oranges. Shouldn't people in such high positions be intelligent enough to know the difference between a race and a creed?

People have to be protected, not beliefs.

You can’t change your race and ethnicity but you can change your belief. Destructive beliefs that preach hate and discrimination must not be protected. They must be criticized and banned. Prohibiting the criticism of such beliefs, or any belief, is insane! Are the Christians or the Jews demanding the ban on criticism of Christianity and Judaism? Has anyone suggested that the books of Bertrand Russell or Thomas Paine who were critical of Judeo- Christianity be banned? The believers of no other religion demand apologies or threaten to boycott you or kill you if you slight their religion. Why should the word [sic] apologize to Muslims when it is they who have to explain the violence and the hate that is in their holy book and the crimes committed by their prophet and apologize?

Before taking democracy to Islamic countries, let us save our own democracy at home. Our own democracy is under attack. We are afraid to talk in our own “democratic countries”. Most Media are scared to publish articles critical of Islam. Those who do publish them deserve praise. If you speak the truth, the way you see it, you can loose our job like Michael Graham or the editor Jacques Lefranc of France . Or you’ll be forced to apologize like Paul Harvey and Lowell Greene, face lawsuits like Oriana Fallaci, or be stabbed to death like Theo Van Gogh. Where is our democracy? Where is our freedom of speech?

Why spend so much money and sacrifice the lives of our young men and women to bring democracy to a people who have no appreciation for it and are not grateful of our sacrifices? "Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs.”

Get rid of those despots who threaten our world and let the Muslims sort their own problems. They must learn democracy on their own. Often democracies are born out of bloodshed. If that is the rout they want to take, let them. We have a model of democracy that works and they are welcome to use if they want, and yes it was born out of bloodshed too. But if they want to have it their way, who are we to stop them? We must protect our own freedom, which is in grave danger.

Today, we must stand by Denmark that is hurting because of the boycotts imposed on it by the Muslims. Stop feeding the Pedestrians who bite your hand a billion dollars a year. Use that money to save Denmark and the other victims of Islamic bullishness. Say no to Islamofascism and defend our own freedom of speech and our democracy."

And, lastly, and to borrow one more time from Ali:

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Announcement/602020226.htm

I am curious if the press there has pointed out that the response from the radical Muslim elements (threatened bombings, etc) essentially indicates that the very cartoons they're upset about were in fact quite accurate? Perhaps if this were pointed out more often, then their response might change a little. Until then, they're only both welcoming, and in fact validating, such depictions.

News headlines today say that the Danish embassy in Syria was burned down.

Whether or not anybody thinks that the cartoons were right or wrong, legal or illegal, tell me how a cartoon can justify destructive and violent behavior like this. I can't think of anywhere else in the world where this kind of behavior would be tolerated. The is exactly the type of situation where the UN needs to step in and tell the violent factions to cool it. Imagine the results if any other group were to burn down buildings and threaten to kill people over a simple drawing.

Up until now, when it was all mostly rhetoric, I was disappointed with the Muslim reaction but not surprised. But as far as this has escalated, it's time for Europe along with the North American countries to take some action and let these nations know that this will not be accepted and that unless they want things to get worse they need to settle their people down.

I will give credit to Iran and Iraq. I have read reports that religious leaders in both countries have protested, but asked their followers to stay calm and not turn violent. There may be other nations that have said this, but none that I have read about.

It would be quite appropriate, then, for said Danish newspaper (or ALL newspapers) to run cartoons featuring Mohammed burning down embassies, with continued cartoons for each and every other terroristic response. Eventually, then, it might sink in that their response is completely inappropriate, and also totally counterproductive. Giving in to their demands, of course, has exactly the opposite effect.

Yes, and the Swedish and Chilean embassies went up with it because they were in the same building.

After this attack the mob moved on to torch the Norwegian embassy and once that was done they moved on to the French embassy. I'm still waiting to hear if it survived the attack.

According to the Danish media the attacks were said to be in protest to news that Danes were planning to gather in Copenhagen's town square to burn the koran. I'll return to this in a while...

The Danish foreign ministry has requested all Danes leave Syria immedietely. Its a testament to our current PC world view that these people were not already moved out of Syria and the other middle eastern nations.
The images from Syria have landed in Denmark like a bombshell and just about every politician I've seen interviewed has been in a state of absolute shock. I can't but help wonder at how naive these people must be if they hadn't anticipated this.


Well rest assured Andrew, for Kofi is on the case.

Our foreign minister just managed to express great satisfaction that Kofi Anan had called upon his Muslim brothers to accept the Danish apology (he didn't specify which apology he meant) before the news from Syria spilled across our screens.


Yes, well... I'm not expecting much from the EU. So far their luke warm sentiments of solidarity have barely been issued before their condemnation of the cartoonists rendered it useless.

With regards to the US and the UK, well... its disapointing that our allies have not been able to show us some official support, but on the other hand, there is a bigger picture to consider.
I can appreciate that these two nations, with their troops in Iraq, must consider the safety of their soldiers first and foremost and at this point in the proceedings I am quite satisfied with US stance in this matter. There is still popular support for the US led coalition in Iraq but whether or not that support would survive if the Iraqi population were to see Washington align itself 'against' their beloved prophet is pretty dubious.

They used to say, loose lips sink ships and I think that principle applies here.

Of course, there is also the question of whether or not this issue would have had the reaction it did if GW Bush had not followed the particular course of foreign policy he has, but thats a whole other debate. Suffice to say this is a left wing argument being used by some in Denmark.


I've heard that al Sistani has condemned the cartoons but also blamed the extremists for the violent reactions.

I don't know whether or not that means anything. The BBC said Sistani had written this on his web page so I went to have a look but it must have been written in Arabic for I saw nothing in English.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Today has seen quite a few developments in Denmark. Several demonstrations were planned and some were carried out. There had been a rumour circulating that the Danish Front (a nationalist fringe group, regarded by some as a nazi party) were going to burn the koran in protest. This rumour has been circulating for at least four days according to the Danish Syrian MP Naser Khader, and was, if not started, then at least given impetus by Abu Laban who, tears in his eyes, went on al Jazeera and made this claim.

As it turned out, the Danish Front demonstration was 20-30 men in black coats, standing in a park with a couple of Danish flags and a megaphone, shouting "Long Live Denmark!". No books and no flags were burned. When interviewed by the medai, the leader of the DF demonstrators replied; "Why would we burn books or flags? We're not animals..."

The DF demonstration may have been small and harmless (in itself) but some 4-500 left wing demonstrators and Muslim youths converged on Hillerød (where the DF were demonstarting) to make several counter protests. The police kept the various groups seperated and this apparently frustrated the Autonome's* and the Muslims so much that they started rioting. As far as I know there is still sporadic violence happening on Copenhagen right now. The Police have arrested around 160 people.

Another demonstration also took place in Copenhagen. About 500 people people got together in lines to form the word 'respect'. This totally peaceful demonstratin recieved only a passing mention in the press since the events in Syria and the Autonome rioting overshadowing everything else.

And, another notable development that went almost unnoticed today was the 'birth' of Naser Khader's Moderate Muslim Society. Just under 200 Muslims got together to form a society dedicated to countering the radical imams. Khader was interviewed after the meeting, which took place in the Danish Parliment building and expressed satisfaction.
We shall have to wait and see whether or not this new group can make a difference or not...


* The Autonome's are left wing political agitators who'se 'platform' is to combat right wing extremism. They are probably the most violent political group in Denmark. The nearest US comparison would be the Black Bloc.

I have been following this whole issue closely for the last two weeks .... and I must admit I am completely stupified, angry and desillusioned.

What the is happening. I just cannot understand it .. the only thing I do understand is ... No I just do not understand why different European countries have reacted so luke warm to this apparent threat to one of our basic principles of our western society. If there was one time to support eachother it is now.

Western societies always talk about freedom and freedom of speech ... it is time that they stand up and defend this right.

In the Netherlands there wasn't as much attention towards this serious issue as I hoped, because of all the political debates and struggles about sending 1200 soldiers to Uruzgan (the most dangerous province of Afghanistan), but I bet and hope it will be the focuss point of the media in the next few days / weeks / months (who knows how long this will continue? )

I just hope my little country will stand firm behind the Danes and Norwegians and will send a clear message this will not and can not be tolerated. We already lost a famous filmmaker because he openly spoke out against the obvious negative sides of Islam.

I most certainly did, though I did so by denying the very premise of the question. I asserted that to the majority of Muslims these cartoons are not more offensive than the death of their brethren.

I'm sure you'd simply as "How could you possibly think that?" In light of the fact that these protests have been so much greater than protests against violence by Muslim militants.

First I'd say that protest against offences against Islam by Muslims may have been a bit smaller but that is because they tend to be localized. When bombers attacked London, it was British Muslims marching for peace. We've seen similar peace marches in Iraq and Israel/Palestine.

These peace marches are not so uncommon really, we only hear little about them because they don't have the sensational appeal of this story.

Why would Muslims react in wide numbers (though not unison, I'll get to that later) to this when they reacted mostly locally to other offenses?

Blame the psychology of an insult. A Muslim acting against the precepts of Islam to the shame of a the religion is embarrassing in an impersonal, almost accidental sort of way.

The publication of these cartoons, which were clearly meant to offend is more of a slap in the face.

The difference hear is the the cartoons were a purposeful and direct, if less potent, insult. Muslims know far better who to blame and where they reside than the shadowy heads of Al-Qaeda.

The cries of victimhood over this issue on both sides are more than a little melodramatic.

The US went through this same thing on the very rumor that someone flushed a Koran down a toilet if you'll remember.

There is a lack of perspective, most of the protests have been peaceful and not at all a direct threat to European democratic values.

Embassies in Syria Are Burned in Furor Over Prophet Cartoon
Extremists on both sides are eager to take advantage. If right-wing nationalist in Denmark see benefits in the furor, is it any shock that militant muslims in Syria saw there chance to gain some public acclaim by striking back at the "rich Europeans which look down upon them"?

There is distance between the peaceful outrage of most demonstrators and the acts of the extremists which some have found it convenient to gloss over. Official with Europe itself have made clear that this is not a one-sided issue.

Irate Muslims Stage New Protests

i agree entirely. Freedom of speech does not translate to license to be obnoxious. It's legal and it always should be, but it should not be applauded as somehow standing up for Western principles.

These papers aren't standing for anyone's principles they're preaching to the choir and making themselves and their nations look like fools, almost as much as Syrian protestors shame themselves by burning the (empty) embassy.




Many Muslims who are interviewed counter that their media does not often engage in such cartoons. We could, of course, debate such incidents if you could identify a few as it is a fair point.

Its weird, but in a strange way I'm almost enjoying it. It feels like a great pressure has finally been released and now we are confronted with the reality of European society anno 2006 and we can see how the various people react.

As I mentioned earlier, I am most disapointed with the BBC and the multicultural nightmare it now seems to represent. Listening to BBC radio's news and current events programmes has been very illuminating indeed. For example, I've discovered that Denmark is (apparently) the last bastion of the Third Reich. That Danes are racist xenophobes who hate Islam so much that we (all) published these pictures as a deliberate attack against Muslims, because Danes just hate Muslims so much that we are doing everything we can to drive them out of our country.

I've heard all of these views expressed in the last few weeks, mostly by moderate British Muslim experts of one sort or another but also by supposedly neutral journalists.



Yes, but as I always say, don't judge people by what they say, judge them by how they act.

We are constantly being told that Islam is a religion of peace... so where is the evidence?
The Islamic idea of peace seems to be to do nothing and say nothing. The British appear to have taken that message to heart.

We Danes are being accused of 19th century style racism by people who won't do anything to prevent the violence being done in the name of Islam and who won't even do anything to protect us either. When suicide bombers attacked London, what was the British reaction? Shock, some anger... politicians speaking softly to ease the 'tensions' and protect the 'vibrant multiculture', a few broken windows in mosques and scuffles in the street... the sort of thing that happens frequently in contemporary England.

Now, seven months later, I see people marching in London carrrying banners that threaten to repeat the London bombings, only this time its against Denmark. This is what years of unchecked immigration has resulted in. British police stand, idle and impotent whilst people break the law and incite violence right out in the open.

No one in Denmark, not one single person has called for any one to be hurt, mistreated or insulted, in any way. The worst thing that has happened has been the conservative and nationalist politicians tightening the immigration laws to slow down the influx of people entering the country. For this we were called racist.

As if there was some kind of obligation on European countries to simply allow unchecked millions to pour into Europe bringing their medieval religion with them, imposing their horrible customs* on us and threatening us for not complying with their religious laws.

Very well then.

Let these terrorists do what they want to and let the world bear witness as to how peaceful the Islamic world is.



Doesn't it make you wonder just why we are trying to export democracy to the Islamic world when we can't even expect the Muslims here to abide by our laws?

Hamid Kharzi (sp?) was in Denmark a week ago. He was here to receive a bag of cash from the Danish people in order to help him 'establish democracy' in his nation. When asked about the matter** he spoke calmly and urged mutual respect.

Then he flew to London for a conference hosted by Tony Blair (PBUH) and here, no longer burdened by his bag of Danish money, he felt no compunction in condemning us for allowing such disrespect of Islam to take place. Odd, that he never felt so strongly when he was in Copenhagen.

Incidently you might like to know that some Danish journalists went to Holland to ask them about Theo Van Gogh. The idea was to get a retrospective view on how that murder is perceived in Holland today by the ordinary people on the street. Unfortunatley it soon became clear that practically no one was willing to speak to the camera (one woman did, and she lamented for Holland) and the journalists were forced to conclude that the Dutch are afraid to speak their minds in public.



Yeah, but haven't you heard the news? He deserved it because he insulted Islam!

In fact, Theo Van Gogh and Ayaan Hirsi Ali were quoted by Abu Laban in his report to the Muslims scholars of Saudi Arabia and Egypt on how bad a place Denmark is for Muslims:
Link.



Well your entitled to your opinion turnea, and I've certainly heard a lot of Muslims say that over the last few days... but I've not seen any tangible evidence that it is true.



Speak for yourself!

We hear about them all the time in Denmark... you see, contrary to the fashionable perception, Denmark is not the racist stronghold its now being portrayed as.
The Danes are in fact extremelly well informed as to what goes on in the rest of the world, in no small part because, considering the size of our population, we are in fact one of the most generous nations on Earth.

There is a considerable sympathy in Denmark for the plight of other nations and an acute awareness as to the problems and realities faced in places, such as the middle east. As such, we are not ignorant of the various peace movements around and about the planet. In fact we gladly subsidize a good deal of them.

But no amount of awareness, or peace marches in the wake of bombings doesn't change the stark reality of what Islam does to nations. There is no other ideology, except maybe Christianity, in the world today, or ever, that has caused so much confrontation and suffering.



Yes, were just sooooo melodramatic.

Why those cartoonist are obviously over reacting by hiding under police protection. After all, Whats a death threat or two these days? And the Danish embassy staff... whats the big idea with fleeing Syria? How melodramatic!

turnea. I don't care whether or not its rude, or a 'slap in the face'. You can make up all the apologies you want to but nothing you say is going to change the facts of what we're seeing, right here, right now, in Denmark. Hundreds of Muslims and left wing autonome running riot in Copenhagen, our embassy in Syria torched and all due to a fake rumour that some one was going to burn the Koran.

And where are the 'good Muslims'?

Well, 170 of them had a meeting today and decided to start a society... and hold their next meeting in April... and that was that. Of course, other Muslims strongly condemed the Moderate Muslim Society and during this founding meeting variuos women in headscarfs felt the need to start screaming about their rights... but, yes. I know there are good Muslims as well. I know they want peace. I know they exist.

They are that great big silent group who stand in the corner and say nothing whilst the extremists strap on the suicide bombers.

How does that saying go?



So... by your argument here, your equating cartoons which portray the opinion of an individual with a raving mob committing arson against the soverign territory of another state...

Okay. Odd point of view, but your entitled to it I guess.

As for freedom of speech granting license to be obnoxious. Actually, freedom of speech does grant that license. Thats the whole point of freedom of speech. To say things other people might not like. To hold unpopular opinions.

Because why?

Because, as (I think) Voltaire pointed out, without freedom of speech, without the license to complain, criticise and satirize, then you can't have democracy. Without the right to dissent, then democracy is repaced by tyranny.

So, you can call me a fool for believing that, but only because you have the right of free speech.



Eh?

What are you asking me for? Proof these images exist? Are you going to deny they do?

Well, here you go... knock yourself out:

http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=Eg...ons&sa=N&tab=wi



One more thing. Some of the Americans here might like to read this article. It might amuse them... I don't know. I amused me.
Link.



* here is an example of one such horrible custom:Link.

** No one asked him what was being done to stop the avalanche of heroin that his nation is now busily producing. That would probably have been 'rude'.

Excuse me? That last comment of yours is truly outrageous and uninformed.
People have been beaten up, embassies attacked and burned, fatwas calling for the death of journalists and artists have been issued, people protest in the streets of London calling for terrorist attacks on Denmark and the whole of Europe, and we are being melodramatic? Give me a EDITED TO REMOVE ATTEMPT AT BYPASSING PROFANITY FILTER. in break.

On the other hand no western European have issued any such threats against any muslims or any muslims countries. We continue to pay out welfare and take care of the the great number of muslims here who can't seem to take care of themselves, and no one is even suggesting, apart from probably a total of 50 people on the extreme right, that we start a massdeportation of all muslims. There is no widespread racism of any significance in Denmark against muslims, quite the contrary in fact, but racially motivated attacks on Danes are usually not counted as "racist motivated" attacks in Denmark.

This link gives the number of hate crimes in Denmark for 2002 which is 66 in total, and although I can't find a source for this, I remember it last year was around 80 or so, and remember, this number is excluding racist attacks on ethnic Danes. That's per year in country of 5.5 million people. So yes, the cries of victimhood on the muslim side is extremely melodramatic and completely without basis in fact.

http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/discrimina...ears-080805.pdf

(if you read the stuff about Denmark in the link there is a lot of politically loaded tripe about the widespread racism in Denmark with no basis in fact, other than the nonsense about the current government, which I didn't voted for by the way, is racially motivated in seeking to limit immigration - feel free to ignore that)



Is this supposed to make it more acceptable?


Ironic that the article mentions Indonesia, where angry mobs thrashed the lobby of the building housing the Danish embassy, and was trying to get access to the embassy itself. Luckily it was situated on the 25th floor of the building, making it possible for police to prevent them access. In London the protesters were calling for terrorist attacks and executions of pretty much anybody non-muslim. "Non-violent" indeed.


Oh its no shock at all. The scary fact is just that the militant muslims in Syria are able to gather thousands of people with no counter demonstrations, while racist right-wing organizations in Denmark are able to gather 30 people, with probably 10 times that amount in counterdemonstrations. Thats what is scary.


Straw is a spineless bastard and he doesn't represent European sentiment. At this point it doesn't make any sense to argue whether the cartoons where "offensive" or not. What does it matter? Anybody bending backwards now to lend credibility to islamic law is in my view an enemy of western values, and they are certainly not entitled to my respect anymore.


Who is saying anything about applauding speech you don't agree with? All I and others that use our free speech ask is that you and others don't undermine that right by excusing religious violence, by citing "offensive" cartoons as a reason (and you do so implicity every time you focus on the offensiveness of the cartoons and not on the legality of it). Whenever a person actively undermine free speech by saying it shouldn't be offensive, they are in my opinion reinforcing religious fundamentalists in their view, that they are right to carry out violence in response to the cartoons. In other words, I think they are spineless cowards that would sell their own mothers to appease radical islam, and interpret that as you will. I am all for understanding and peaceful dialouge, and I applaud all who wish to engage in that, like at least a few muslims here in Denmark seem to, but I can't bend over backwards anymore without breaking my back.


What choir would that be? I am certainly not a typical reader of the paper that published the cartoons. My political beliefs lie far to the left of the ones usually expressed in their editorial pages, but its is certainly anything but a racist or xenophobic paper, and the only ones making a fool of themselves is violent islamists. By the way, I fail to understand how a paper could make a fool out of its nation of residence by publishing these cartoons? Maybe you could elaborate further.


You are kidding, right... RIGHT?

That and the fact that Naser Khader has to have two body guards to protect him.... from other Muslims.


(Translated by me, and I also added the imbedded link) Link.

This is how the headlines should have read today:

"In a move to prove that muslims are indeed not terrorists or barbarians today, the muslims burned down an embassy and demanded heads be severed!"

What amazes me is that the muslims burn American flags on national TV, state sponsored BTW, see Iran etc. And do we go to the streets demanding that every muslim be hanged by his neck?

Nah, we brush them off as loonies with a chip on their shoulders.

The muslims really lost an opportunity here to take the upper hand in this situation. They could have said "see, we try to be peaceful and we get portrayed this way". They could have made the Danes look intolerant. Instead, they acted EXACTLY the way they were portrayed!!

I agree with freedom of the press, I have no problems with the cartoons at ALL. I've seen Iranian cartoons making fun of our president, no big deal to me.

It's time for these people to come out of the dark ages. Religion in general is a major problem IMHO. It's the absense of rational thought and provides excuses to be inhumane and violent.

I think the single "lesson" that I can draw from this is that Muslims ought to declare a Jihad on themselves, for they really are their own worst enemy. They've now managed to alienate some of their biggest defenders in the more "progressive" countries, although al-Reuters, AP, and Kofi Annen continue to call the uprising a "row" instead of riots.

Having seen Jesus, Mary, and everything else that I hold sacred desecrated as expressions of "art", I can understand the Muslims being upset at someone drawing a cartoon of Mohammed or Allah. But that empathy quickly evaporates when they call for murder and start burning down buildings. Once again showing a genuine lack of civility. I really don't think the Crusades have ever ended for these folks, just a little "time out" from time to time.

Homicide bombing is not how a civilized people act, I'm sorry.

I am, however, encouraged that there seems to be a "bi-partisan" reaction of support from the U.S. for freedom of expression, with the exception of the usual share of those who are just in the game to incite people regardless of the cause. Islam seems to be the only force in the universe that can pull Democrats and Republicas together, even if only for an instant.

The only thing I'm waiting for now is Cindy Sheehan and Michael Moore to figure out how to blame GWB for it. After all, it is diverting attention from Iraq...

As far as my personal reaction, I'm nibbling on Havarti. (only because I have to drive to far to get Leyden so it will have to wait)

As my name suggest, we´re getting a bit worried here in Denmark, today I heard a sausage (pork) selling man, who got knocked up by some muslim guys, the debate here is rising to hysterical heights. Is this the beginning of war, civil or global?

Europe is starting to feel just a tiny bit of what Israel has undergone for decades. Does this give me some satisfaction? In a little way I must admit yes, because of the blind support that the European governments have given over the years to these same groups. Do I hate what is happening to Europeans? You better belive it.

This is going to get a lot worse before long. The entire matter has been blown so far out of proportion that it is ludicrous. Just about as insane as the reaction to the rumor that American guards at Gitmo attempted to flush a Koran down a toilet. Or that Israel was undermining the Mosques on the Temple Mount (that is happening but it has been done by the Waqf).

Now an embassy has been burnt.

Yet I have not heard of a single Muslim leader, religious or not that has spoken out against the Muslim violence. I think that is the most telling of all. To have fundamentalists nuts protesting is to be expected. All religions have them, but the lack of responsible leadership is not. Where or where are those so-called 'peaceful' people? And why are they so silent?

Oh they are out there.

What they say usually goes something like this:
We denounce the violence, but the cartoons were offensive, hurtful, blasphemous whatever...blablabla... evil of the west....blablabla.... racism..blablabla...zionist conspiracy...blablabla...holocaust lies... etc.

To add to that, there seem to be two groups of people in Europe right now:

Group 1: "We condemn the violence, but the cartoons were hurtful, so this was to be expected, and Denmark and the newspaper should switfly apologize. Freedom of speech shouldn't be used to cause offense."

Group 2: "We condemn the violence, and while the cartoons may have caused offense, that is in no conceivable way an excuse. Freedom of speech is not up for discussion."

Guess with group I respect and guess with group I wouldn't consider worthy to shine my boots.

Exactly,we have heard little or no attempt from their (muslim) religious leaders, as to calming these matters down, instead it seems like they see this issue as a religious awakening, and welcoming it.
3 embassies has now been burnt down, 2 in Syria, and one in Beirut.
Someone down there is doing their utmost to blow up the fire, instead of trying to stamp it out.
Is it so, that it is implicit in the muslim religion, that they want to rule the world?

A worried Dane

Welcome to the forum. WD. I would suggest however that you read the posting rules first. One line responses are not allowed unless you are asking for a clarifiaction of a point made by some one else.

To answer your question. I do not believe this is the start of a war. If there is a war underway then it surely started on 11 September 2001 and every thing we've seen since then has just been an escalation of what began on that day.

One could argue that it started even further back, at least here in Europe. The unchecked immigration of the late 80's and 90's has burdened us with a mass of humanity who identifies itself by its religious belief's and ignores our democratic principles. If these groups existed solely within the parameters of their new homelands then they could be assimilated into them, but the truth is (always) more complex.

The myth of multiculture is that it bestows myriad possibilities on a state. It gives you an alluring fantasy of a rich cultural tapestry that you can belong to. But its all just a popular myth, in my opinion one that is so welcomed in Europe because so many people here suffer from a guilt complex with regards to the history of Europe. You can see it most clearly in those countries which had the big colonial empires. The bigger their empires were, the more they cling to the illusion of multiculture as their nations gradually mutate beyond their control.

The reality of multiculture is that a nation which is divided into multiple cultures, is divided.

Also, what we're seeing in Europe today is the direct product of too many years of socialist domination of the political landscape. I don't mean by this that the conservatives are any better, but rather that Europe has wallowed in socialist day dreams for too long and our current political parties no longer reflect the social realities of our society's. Socialism was created a century ago in a world that was very different from that we have today, and yet socialism still continues to influence our political thought processes.

What we need is new political thought. Ideologies that reflect our contemporary societies and do not carry the baggage of the 19th century.

We have become jaded and lazy with years of wealth and prosperity and in our soft arrogance we have let slip the fundamental lessons of state craft. We have lost interest in defending ourselves, turned our backs on the military principles without which a state will gradually cease to exist (by which I mean without the means to defend yourself, you are vulnerable to attack) given away our rights to self determination to the corruption and nepotism that is todays EU in search of ever more profit.

Worst of all we have allowed our politicians to get away with far too much. Especially here in Denmark, but also all across Europe we have turned a blind eye to the lack of prudence and true political debate that ought to have surrounded the immigration of so many people. We didn't say anything when thousands of people were allowed to just move in and take over entire city districts and all in the interests of keeping up population figures to fuel the grand vision of the Communité Europa.

...or SPQE as Sevac calls it.

Now, when the problem has become to large to ignore, we are faced with few possibilities and we've reached the stage where even those people who allowed so many to enter must face the consequences of their actions:

(translated from Swedish) Link.

What we have here is an example of an immigrant woman who fled from tyranny and oppression in her old country to Sweden where she could live in security and safety, who succeeded in integrating, became a politician and fought for the rights of others to follow in her footsteps.

Then, one day she woke up and found she had to flee her new home and once again seek the security of living amongst Swedes and all thanks to the policies she worked so hard to implement... At what point, I wonder, will Nalin Pekgul realise that the Swedes are not an infinte resource who can continue to provide her and her family sanctuary from the rising tide of tyranny?

I wonder if she even understands the share of responsibility she has for letting so many tyrants into Sweden?

Nalin Pekgul's experience is not unique in Europe. Not at all. In fact, considering some places, like Holland, France and Great Britain, the Scandinavian examples are all pretty tame.

Link.

Professor Afshin Ellian's words are echoed here in Denmark by Professor Medhi Mozaffari. The only difference is, so far, Mozaffari has yet to need body guards (as far as I know)

So, we're not at war. Not really, not by the classic definition of that word... but I do believe war is being waged upon us by people who refer to their war as a holy one and who refer to themselves as holy warriors ...whether we agree to fight or not.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Indeed not. If you recall, much fuss was made about GW Bush's single use of the word 'crusade', not least in the Middle East but also in left wing circles in the west. I myself even made the point at the time that it was a unfortunate slip of the tongue.

But consider how often you hear the word Jihad these days. Or note the use of that word in describing various terrorist groups, like Islamic Jihad. Consider also how often you hear about the Muhajideen... that word means 'Holy Warrior'. It is the Arabic equivalent of 'Crusader'.

I think you are correct. For a lot of people in the Islamic world, quite possibly a majority, the crusades never ended.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Yes. Its ironic. Don't expect the cash flow to the Palestinians to stop any time soon though.


They burned down a Danish consulate in Beirut today as well.


The Danish foreign minister said that his Syrian counter part had profusely apologised when he spoke to him...

To bad he didn't go on TV and do it but given the word from the US today that the Syrian government sanctioned the attacks, I wonder just what it was the Syrian FM was apologising for.

Needless to say Per Stig Møller (the Danish FM) accepted the apology anyway.



edited for spelling.

Link.

What kind of free speech would a nonMuslim get in any of the predominantly Muslim countries. Can I bring a Bible there? Could I hold a demonstration attempting to undermine the government? We have opened our societies to anybody who comes in peace, but we are the ones who are criticized!

Now the news is reporting arson attacks in Lebanon. Where are the governments of Lebanon and Syria and these other nations? In the US, we have the freedom to assemble and protest, but if it has the possibility of getting violent, the police will always be there to keep the peace. The failure of their governments to step in and prevent these sorts of hostile actions amount to a overt sanction of them.

So let me ask a question to those of you who are following this:

Where does it go from here? Will this just die down with time or is this going to boil over into more violence and discord between cultures?

I have several questions to pose to the Danes

I read this from a web site moif had linked to and I found it to be a very interesting POV.


source

I saw a lot of questions or points to hypocrisy regarding the holocaust denial laws in Europe but I felt those examples were really unfair because of the fact that the holocaust was such a horrible event in Europe and so one would expect special treatment in the law, as we see here in America with discrimination laws. But the above examples I think are fair game...
In some aspects this is the last freedom left in Europe, religious criticism and that is a result of the fact that Europe has grown so secular (I know not one family member in UK who attends Church but I have several here in US) so religion is considered fair game. But question homosexuality, abortion rights, or opposition to the state's demands to educate your child etc. and then your rights to free expression are not afforded.

In America we get gobs of criticism, as you all know, because we allow groups like the KKK, and the anti-gay, anti-abortion, homeschooling groups to exist and sometimes even gain too much power within our system, but one of the cornerstones of our society is freedom of expression.

In fact last week my entire neighborhood was delivered a neo nazi white supremest newspaper, it was horrible and far more offensive that any of the Muhammad images.

Do you feel that many European societies have restricted their freedom to such a degree in order to serve this perceived "progressive ideal" that this phenomena with the cartoons is your final battle? And do you feel this will result in a liberalisation towards permitting political opinions that have currently been stifled?

They sure are, but why should I as a Dane address them? Denmark does reside in Europe, but Denmark is not synonymous with Europe and we have none of the laws cited in the above article. That being said, I will address some of the point in the article.


Why is that wrong? Is it not a fair requirement, that the government expects people working in the civil service to respect and uphold the law of the land, whether they think the laws are right or not? I can not get job in the Danish police force if I refuse to enforce Danish drugs laws, which I think are wrong. The above example is exactly the same.


Ayaan Hirsi Ali wants religious schools that preach violence and hate abolished, not by banning them, but by barring them from receiving government funds. Surely that is a morally sound opinion, that has nothing to do with freedom of speech. If they want to preach violence and hate they can do so for their own money. The same with the Calvinist party - if they want to discriminate against women they can do so without public funds. Nothing wrong with saying that, is there?


I am sure they are only "toying" with that idea in regards to schools that teach violence and hate. While that may be seen as limiting free speech, it does nothing of the kind - as reprehensible as I find the idea, the parents would still be free to send their children to these institutions after they have attended a "permitted" school, but why should these fundamentalist schools get a government stamp of approval and the part of taxpayer funds that follows it?



Sure they are, and the above cited examples does nothing but prove, that Europe is is not one country, and that we do hold different viewpoints and have different laws. I don't feel I should have to defend the stupidity of laws in other countries in Europe to be able to defend my right to freedom of speech as it exists in Denmark.


And its the same thing here in Denmark and in many other European countries. We have anti-abortionists, nazis, anti-gays, homeschoolers and a lot of other fringe groups too... none of their speech is muffled here, unless they directly incite to violence and murder.


We have had examples of exactly the same here in Denmark and other European countries, yet you question our devotion to freedom of speech because of a few examples taken out of context?


I agree that a few countries have, like for example Britain. People and media seem scared to death to address serious issues in relation to islam or any other ideology that runs contrary to western values, out of fear of being labeled "insensitive" or worse "racist". Denmark and other countries were to a lesser degree like this too, but this event has changed a lot. nazis, anti-abortionists and anti-gays have never been muffled - there aren't just that many of them around in Europe, and when they speak very few people bother to listen, but they do speak out, and in general nobody here wants to take that right away from them.

Denmarks foreign minister, Per Stig Møller has just given a press briefing. He spoke about the burning of the embassy buildings. He said, "It is the responsibility of the individual nations to safe guard the embassy' on their soil".

When asked about whether Denmark had done enough to prevent the troubles we now see in the Middle East he answered that no one, not even the leaders of the Middle East anticipated the rise of such troubles. He placed the blame firmly on various religious groups who had moved to cause the trouble outside of the various governments.

Egypts response, made to Kofi Annan is that if Denmark wishes to resume its former position of trust with Egypt then it must impose a 'hard line' against the Danish media. In effect, we must shut up and remain silent if we wish to be friends with Egypt.

My answer to Egypt would not be permissible under this forum's rules I'm afraid, but it would be along the lines of the saying; "If you lie with dogs, then don't be surprised if you get flea's". The way I see it, we've been lying with dogs for too long and now its starting to itch. The western world has put up with Islamic intolerance and tyranny for too long.


Surely it depends on which nation you are in? Some 'Islamic nations' are quite moderate, others, less so. In Egypt I have read that the Coptic Chrstian church is practically under seige Whilst in the Philipines, Malysia and Thailand Muslims regularly attack Christians (and vice versa).


On an international level I think this will settle down within the next few days and weeks. The popular reaction against Denmark will probably die down again quite soon.

However, there will be long term effects. Denmark has been tainted in such a fashion that it will long remain an object of hatred in the Middle East. Unlike my nations Foreign Minister I have no illusions as to the mentality of the Middle East. Iraq's transport minister has just made it clear that Iraq will no longer accept any help from either Denmark or Norway and I wonder if they'll also demand our soldiers vacate their nation. All across the Middle East we've seen contracts cancelled, deals broken and common projects abruptly ended. The lesson is that religious extremism rules in the Middle East because it holds the real power. The people's hearts and minds.

I anticipate Denmark will witness some form of terrorist attack in the near future. Al qaeda have made several threats against Denmark in the past and in recent days Hezbollah has promised blood will flow in Denmark within two weeks. We know that there are elements within Denmark who are willing to resort to terrorist violence. There are already several people being held by the Danish police in connection to a foiled terrorist attack against an American embassy building in Bosnia Hertzogovina.

Another long term effect I can easily imagine is the continued vilification of Denmark by the British media as it caters to its own cherished illusions of multiculture and its ever growing and ever more powerful Muslim population. This state of affairs will continue for as long as men like Sir Iqbal Sacranie, and Yusuf al-Qaradawi are given license to dictate to the British public their own perception of Islam and as long as the Koran is considered a legitimate ideology protected by common perception from criticism. As things stand today, you can incite violence and terrorism simply by reading up from the koran in a public meeting. Link.

For my own part, I feel we Danes silently crossed our own national Rubicon when we joined the Coalition forces in Iraq. From that point on, we were always going to see this clash of culture come to the fore. It was inevitable. Islamic fundamentalism is alive and thriving all throughout Europe and, although there are Muslims opposed to it, these (depsite what Julian or turnea might claim) are a small, almost invisible, minority.

There is a silent majority who may not actively support terrorism, to that at least I will agree, but in such times as these, the silence of such a majority seen against ever increasing Islamic violence, can only be regarded as a silence of approval.

This clash has been a long time under way. No one wants it as can be seen by the demonstrations for peace we've seen in Denmark during the week end (as opposed to the extremist demonstrations we've also seen) but if we try to just ignore it then it will simply wash right over us. There is a story from Danish history about King Knud (Canute the Great) who, according to the story, was so far removed from reality that he thought he had the power to stop the tide. What we risk today is much the same. Our politicians are busy trying to push back a tide of confrotation that threatens to wash right over them.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


I can't answer that question very well. Denmark has very liberal laws regarding free speech and as a consequence we also allow such groups as Hizb-ut-Tahir and the nazi's to continue to exist. I personally don't see this as a final battle... though it may be the last point at which peaceful compromise was possible before the real violence begins.

A Norwegian nationalist movement has today issued threats against Muslims in Norway unless these issue public apologies for the various burnings of the Norwegian flag. This was widely reported in this morning but I note the story seems to have vanished again from the various sites.

Either its not true, or people have decided not to fan the flames. Its the violent backlash that every one fears. As we all know, Europe has a very dark reputation in matters regarding to ethnic minorities and although I don't think we're close to another Yugoslavia yet, no one is under any illusion that actual violence against Muslims will be a final straw on the camels back.

In the mean time the tide keeps coming in. Turkish demonstrations have begun to escalate and a Polish husband and wife were kidnapped in Gaza today...

Now I'm going to watch a BBC debate from the Middle East... the premise for the debate is 'The Middel East needs no lessons in journalism from Europe'.

Burning down embassies and threatening violence in response to a satirical cartoon is absurd. It should not matter whether the cartoon is offensive or not. Civilized people do not respond is this manner.

Do you think the drawings are offensive/hurtful?

Obviously they're offensive to some. If they weren't, we wouldn't be seeing such a strong reaction to their publication. That doesn't, however, mean that they shouldn't have been published. They were intented to make a point regarding the power that Islam has over the freedom of expression, and they've conveyed that point rather well. Why should artists and writers have to be afraid for their physical safety simply because they challenge the tenants of Islam?

This is religious censorship, and it creates silence that can only be imposed by fear. We've seen it over and over again throughout history. Hypatia, Galileo, Michaelangelo, Darwin, The Inquisition, The Salem Witch Trials, Salman Rushdie, Taslima Nasrin, Theo Van Gogh...

It's simply not acceptable. In a free society, conflicting views are going to be challenged. This is how societies advance, and I don't believe that an apology is necessary from those who have chosen to voice their opinions in a non-violent manner.

Do you feel a boycott is warranted in this case?

If individuals want to boycott Danish products, they can do so. It's an acceptable form of protest, and the Danes, in turn, can do the same.

Do you feel the Danish newspaper and/or the Danish government should apologize?

Why should the Danish government apologize for allowing freedom of the press? I think that the Danish government should be requesting an apology from the people who burned their assets to the ground.

Carlsen you don't have to reply or address anything if you don't want to...participation here is completely voluntary.

I was trying to make the point that I felt others hadn't so well before me with the holocaust denial laws, altho I am sure my point is not the one they were hoping to make, that Europe is not so often the biggest proponent of Freedom of Speech. Yeah I know the term Europe is over generalising, but this issue is now a European one as several papers in Europe have published the pictures as a show of solidarity, that both sides of the conflict recognize.

For instance France's president Chirac announces to the world that he defends freedom of speech and yet as the article I posted earlier shows..where was the defense for this freedom in France when someone wants to talk bad about homosexuals? Why is bad talk about Muslims ok but gays is not in France?

See the way I see it and I have shared some views with moif in PM on this is that each nation in Europe does have a distinct and separate identity, culture and in essence spirit and so we see each react differently to often the same stimuli.

I feel Fascism or as it is also called Nazism is no different than Islamism and I think as we saw how each nation reacted to Fascist or Nazi ideals rise in their own nation's in the 1930s and how each one reacted differently and had different outcomes, we see the same occurence now in 2006.

Denmark is historically known for being extremely liberal and open society but many here in the US seem to believe this liberalism extends to things like sex and drugs, they don't understand that the true form of it is most exemplified in how Denmark reacted to the Nazis in the 1930+ and how their reaction was not the same as many others in Europe either.

I think we see this stark contrast again..even when many claim to be in support of free speech and a liberal society only few actually practice it. That was why I was asking you if you felt like the last stand? If this is a culture war and freedom of speech is being fought in favor of "social harmony" haven't some in Europe already given up? Is Denmark in fact one of the few nations in Europe that can truly attest to supporting the principle of freedom of speech?

In reaction to your assumption, I must point out that the current immigration policy in the EU does not reflect my wishes nor my hopes. It can not be the purpose of immigration to uphold our standard of living or to compensate for demographic change. The Federal Republic of Germany had a huge increase of immigrants during the economic boom in the 60s, the "Wirtschaftswunder". For the lack of a worker force, immigrants were allowed into the country, whose descendents have created a lot of problems, from common language, common identity and raging unemployment to high crime rate & so on. Therefore I hope to warn all of those who think it is a good idea to open up the EU for immigrants to counter problems that could be solved otherwise, through a different approach on family policy for example.
With that clarified, I have now heard, that militant islamic extremists have infiltrated the mob and fuel and steer the riots to ever more extremist actions. For these people supply the people with one sided information and there are few sources that provide information from other perspectives, the riots keep on going. Few people have actually seen the caricatures.
In Afghanistan, a protestor was shot and 4 other men wounded in a riot against the Mohammed caricatures.
In Lebanon, as the example came up earlier, it is mostly Syrians and Palestinians that are rioting and not the Lebanese.
Whilst Pakistan summoned embassadors of some 9 European countries to discuss an apology for the caricatures, I hope the Scandinavian government does the same with the Syrian embassadors to discuss the attacks on their nations soil in the embassy burnings.
I am more sceptical about Moifs hopes, that this line of events that we have seen so far will die down in a few days. I don't think we have seen the end of it for quite a while.

Do you think the drawings are offensive/hurtful?

As a Christian, I find certain caricatures of Christ offensive, but I have tolerated them under the heading of free speech. As a Muslim, I might find the caricature of Mohammed offensive, but I would not think it warranted violence of any sort any more than the caricatures of Jesus Christ would.

I think the Muslims need to look at the intended message of the caricature, that being that violence is associated with their religion these days. Remember the saying, "What you do speaks so loudly that I cannot hear what you say." Seems the meaning has gotten lost in the midst of their so-called righteous indignation.

Do you feel a boycott is warranted in this case?

No way. If anything, I would want to buy Danish products. Nothing that the Danes have done warrants punishment.

Do you feel the Danish newspaper and/or the Danish government should apologize?

No, I don't think so. But it's up to them, if they feel that apologizing will avert more bloodshed. They have my respect whether they apologize or not.

I suppose what irks me the most about this whole "debate" is the underlying assertions that these publishers somehow represent a defense of the principle of freedom of speech. That they and there supporters stand bravely against the rising tide of the Islamic subjugation of Europe.

Frankly, I'm not sure I'm capable of swallowing quite that much baloney.


moif asserted that freedom of speech directly translates to license to be obnoxious and insulting.

I argue that whereas "freedom" is a question of what one can do, license has far more to do with what one should do.

The cartoonists had every right to publish this cartoon under the law.

...but that doesn't change their actions for what they were. Foolish, immature, entirely unnecessary and unconstructive.


Holding these person up as examples of Western values shows just how little some have progressed emotionally from the days of the "White Man's Burden".

These pictures didn't merely contradict Islamic legal principles, they were a direct and very personal insult on million of Muslims, the majority peaceful and at least as decent as there non-Muslims neighbors.

..and yet at every turn they peaceful protest (the majority) are ignored for those that play to political agenda's.


Cartoon anger is a misrepresentation
Of course that's just the BBC. Intimidated and perhaps even infiltrated by the Islamic threat.


Like the Pope... and Kofi Annan... and, and your own prime minister.


They're all cowards.. all simply afraid to counter the Islamic threat.

Time to face facts, perhaps not all criticism of these cartoons is motivated by fear of Islamic extremism

Maybe decency hasn't died a quiet death in all the halls of government.

They may or may not be foolish (personally I didn't find them to be that funny), but it's totally doesn't matter. Are you saying that every article or cartoon being printed in the newspapers across the world has to be "mature, necessary, and constructive"?

Do you think the drawings are offensive/hurtful?

People got offended, so yes, they are offensive. There's no question about that.


Do you feel a boycott is warranted in this case?

Some people may feel that the boycott is justified. That's their right. If someone got offended, it's totally within their rights not to buy Lego for their children or stop buying Danish dairy. It is also within my rights to counterbalance their efforts by buying more Danish products than I usually do (it is danish blue cheese week at E.H. household! )

Do you feel the Danish newspaper and/or the Danish government should apologize?

No, I don't think so. The government apology is out of the question, but I also don't feel that newspaper's apology was necessary. As it has been pointed out, Jews and Christians are being consistently ridiculed in the media in the arab world. It may have been "insensitive" to print those cartoons, but "sensitivity" and "freedom of speech" seem to be in direct conflict with each other.

I'm not sure that anybody is saying what the papers printed was a good or even smart thing to do. Some may feel that way, but really it's a side issue.



I agree that publishing the cartoon was all of those things, but it's no different than when cartoons are published that make fun of Christ or any other belief system, religious or not. There are a lot of people out there with a tasteless sense of humor, and people as a whole need to have thick skin unless they plan of locking themselves in a cave with no outside access.

The concerns that I have focus on the response by many Muslims. In the past couple days I have seen some response by governments to keep things peaceful, which is very good to see. The majority of demonstrations have been peaceful, but any violence is too much and counterproductive for all Muslims. There are have been attacks on Christian churches and other nationalities that had nothing to do with the cartoons. The violent crowds are lashing out at anything non-Muslim.

However, even peaceful demonstrations are calling for Danish and other governments to dictate to their press what they can and cannot print. This shows a complete ignorance of how our societies function.

I'm hoping that moif is right and that this will die down. I'm hopeful, but think this could still be a very dangerous situation if it continues.

Clearly you have the wrong impression of the newspaper and the reasons they had for publishing the cartoons. The background have been adequately explained already in this thread, so I am not going to do it again.


Lets assume you are right, which I don't agree that you are, so what?
Even if they are immature or even racist, does that mean politicians get a license to undermine freedom of speech, by stating that speech must be "inoffensive"? All I have been asking is, that western politicians and media don't take a stand against freedom of speech, even when they find it offensive, but many have, and they have certainly earned my contempt by doing so. Everytime they say speech must not be used to cause offense they are in essence advocating censorship and thus playing right into the hands of the radical muslims, that wants governments in western Europe to punish the media that published the cartoons. Don't you see anything wrong with that picture?


I don't so much hold the publishers of these cartoons up as an example of western values, as much as I hold up the apparent abundant number of anti-free speech people as the worst kind of hypocrites.


I see things I and fellowminded could take as a personal insult constantly, but of course we don't number in the billions. Having great numbers don't bar others from insulting you. Get over it.