News Caricatures AGAIN Was it really free speech?

[Cyrus]

Nearly two hundred words this time without an answer. I didn't ask if we have anything to learn from each other, nor for a history lesson I already knew. I asked if you are placing all of the blame for recent events on Western ignorance.

To be perfectly clear, I am putting blame on the blatant and disrespectful people who published that newspaper which served no purpose other than to ridicule and insult a religion and culture of another society. My point about the history lesson, it to show you that most people do not know or understand this.

Then make that point, instead of saying that I must be an idiot to think that someone might think that no line was being crossed.

I never said you were an idiot, that is not fair.

And this is all irrelevant anyways. Even if I thought that they intentionally crossed a line and purposely went a mile beyond, I would still defend their right to do so, and would still argue that the Middle Eastern reaction is entirely inappropriate.

Let me be exact and clear so you do not accuse me of using a thousand words this time. Yes, they had a right to do so. But then they must be held accountable for what they did and said. It is as simple as that. Anything otherwise is called a double standard . Your statement has the implication that the Islamic world should let the western world insult their religion in the name of satire and sit idly by with a smile on their face. This view is very one-sided and unfair. IMO, the reaction that involved violence WAS inappropriate; however, the nonviolent reaction was entirely within their rights. And I think had they not resorted to violence, and stuck to boycott and protest, they would have made it crystal clear that this kind of slander will NOT be tolerated towards the Middle East if a healthy and respectful relationship between the two civilizations is to exist.

 

[russ_watters]

Perhaps you do not see what I am saying, so I will clarify it for you.

In Islamic culture, this cartoon is a nuclear bomb set off by the west. Do you understand my point now? This kind of cartoon is as bad to Islamic society as is suicide bombers to the west. This is what the west needs to learn and to respect.

I don't think there is any misunderstanding there - but no matter how many times you say it, it doesn't get any less unacceptable. Islamic society may not respect human life, but Western society and the world community in general does. The nations of the Middle-East will continue to be the rogues of the world until they start respecting human life.

 

[Cyrus]

Islamic society may not respect human life, but Western society and the world community in general does.

That is not a fair assessment Russ, in fact it is very racist. Let’s look at 'civilized western society' in the last 100 years shall we? How many Jewish people were killed in WW2? How were the blacks treated in this country 40 years go? How were the Chinese treated in this country? The Japanese? How about the use of nuclear weapons on Japan? How about the US and Russia holding the world hostage with their nuclear weapons in the cold war? Are these all actions of a civilization respectful to human life? ALL CIVILIZATIONS have problems, and the ALL have their ups and their downs. You do not have to agree with different civilizations and societies, but if you DO NOT RESPECT them, you are asking for wars to be a fact of life. No one said Denmark does not have the right to freedom of press. What was said; however, is that if you DO CHOOSE to print material that is insulating to Islam, not criticizes Islam, is insulting to Islam, we are going to hold you accountable. You too Russ, are now holding a double standard.

 

[russ_watters]

If the Middle East had published a cartoon of Jesus in a repugnant manner, I promise you all the news media would plaster that around the entire world with outrage, and the military would flex it's fist in Iraq towards the Iraqi people. What’s with this double standard?

No. You are flat-out wrong. There is no such double standard. Islamic newspapers publish racist cartoons on a virtually daily basis and it doesn't even raise an eyebrow in the west. Besides - the ME has a media outlet that pretty much acts like a viocebox for Al Qaeda - does anyone in US ever even organize a protest over that? Heck, American newspapers publish religious caricatures and there aren't violent reactions here.

You are way, way off. There is a culture clash here, but one side is acceptable and the other is not. In modern society, freedom of expression and respect for human life are requirements and killing people over a perceived insult is childish and criminal.

 

[russ_watters]

That is not a fair assessment Russ, in fact it is very racist.

That was your claim, cyrus, not mine. You are the one who said that Muslims equate insults with murder.

No one said Denmark does not have the right to freedom of press. What was said; however, is that if you DO CHOOSE to print material that is insulating to Islam, not criticizes Islam, is insulting to Islam, we are going to hold you accountable.

If "we are going to hold you accountable" means you are going to kill people in response, that simply isn't acceptable.

You too Russ, are now holding a double standard.

There is a double standard, cyrus, but it is on the other side of the mirror.

 

[russ_watters]

Cyrus, http://www.adl.org/Anti_semitism/arab/qatar_cartoons.asp" is a sample of the kind of anti-semetic cartoons that appear in Mid-eastern papers. (google it - you'll find hundreds more) Do you recall a time when Israelis started burning-down embassies over these cartoons? Of course not. The west exercises and respects freedom of speech. The Mid-East exercises but does not respect it. The double standard is on the other side of the fence from where you think it is.

 

[Gokul43201]

What was said; however, is that if you DO CHOOSE to print material that is insulating to Islam, not criticizes Islam, is insulting to Islam, we are going to hold you accountable.

And who is this "you" ?

 

[Cyrus]

That was your claim, cyrus, not mine. You are the one who said that Muslims equate an insults with murder.

Have you paid any attention to a word I wrote Russ? I said insults to Prophet Muhammad. Perhaps you should go back and read my post #63 and dispense with the word twisting.

If "we are going to hold you accountable" means you are going to kill people in response, that simply isn't acceptable.

Again, please read what I post, and stop responding to what I did not post. I don't appreciate your incessant need to append your personal views to the end of something I say and changing its meaning. Read what I write, and not what I didn't write.

Besides - the ME has a media outlet that pretty much acts like a viocebox for Al Qaeda - does anyone in US ever even organize a protst over that?

Perhaps you have missed the last few state of the union addresses by the president. He said that this was not acceptable, and he went to war. This was not the only reason for going to war, but it was part of the reasons. So you might want to reconsider your position Russ.

Russ, are those cartoons of Jesus, or Moses? Did you read what I wrote?

 

[Hurkyl]

I never said you were an idiot, that is not fair.

To say that this newspaper had no clue that it was crossing the line by insulting the prophet of a major religion is simply asinine.

Definitions of asinine on the Web:
devoid of intelligence

I am putting blame on the blatant and disrespectful people who published that newspaper which served no purpose other than to ridicule and insult a religion and culture of another society.

I will assume this implies that you do not place any blame on anyone else then. Thank you -- I feel better knowing that I really am responding to what I think I'm responding to.

Yes, they had a right to do so. But then they must be held accountable for what they did and said.

(1) But why should anyone else be held accountable for what the newspaper did and said?

(2) Of course, we must also consider that freedom of expression deserves defending. I think we agree that it's a bad thing that artists and journalists are being held accountable with their very lives. What do you think is a good way of doing that, since you do not seem to think defying those who intimidate as acceptable.

Your statement has the implication that the Islamic world should let the western world insult their religion in the name of satire and sit idly by with a smile on their face. This view is very one-sided and unfair.

Fine. But that has no resemblance to what I am trying to say.

the nonviolent reaction was entirely within their rights.

It's entirely within their rights to boycott Iran in response to the Danish cartoons too! Just because they have the right to do it doesn't mean it was an appropriate response.

The Middle East should be held accountable for what it's done in response. Anything otherwise would be a double standard.

And I think had they not resorted to violence, and stuck to boycott and protest, they would have made it crystal clear that this kind of slander will NOT be tolerated towards the Middle East if a healthy and respectful relationship between the two civilizations is to exist.

I find it difficult to see how there could be a healthy and respectful relationship if the Middle East demands suppression of free speech in the Western world.

 

[russ_watters]

Just because the government of Denmark is not affiliated with the newspaper does not mean they should not apologize. They could simply say, "We the government of Denmark apologize for the actions of the newspaper." They are not saying it was their own governments fault, they are simply apologizing for the stupidity of the few that tarnished their good image.

Wow. You are an American, right? You live in Maryland. I am just floored by the depth of your misunderstanding of the concept of freedom. A democratic government apologizing for the free speech of its citizens makes as little sense as me apologizing for the weather.

 

[russ_watters]

Have you paid any attention to a word I wrote Russ? I said insults to Prophet Muhammad. Perhaps you should go back and read my post #63 and dispense with the word twisting.

Insults, yes - you aren't disagreeing with me.

In fact, let's go back a little...

In Islamic culture, this cartoon is a nuclear bomb set off by the west.

Don't you see the absurdity of that statement? Surely Islamic culture would react differently if an actual nuclear bomb were set off in, say, Iran.

Perhaps you have missed the last few state of the union addresses by the president. He said that this was not acceptable, and he went to war. This was not the only reason for going to war, but it was part of the reasons. So you might want to reconsider your position Russ.

What!? The US went to war with Al Jazeera? Cyrus, maybe you want to go over this conversation again tomorrow - I don't think you are following it.

Russ, are those cartoons of Jesus, or Moses?

If you look, you can find such cartoons, but regardless, why would that matter? People are free to be offended by whatever they want to be offended by, right?

 

[Cyrus]

Wow. You are an American, right? You live in Maryland. I am just floored by the depth of your misunderstanding of the concept of freedom. A democratic government apologizing for the free speech of its citizens makes as little sense as me apologizing for the weather.

I have no misunderstanding of the concept of freedom. As I have stated before, and you have failed to properly read, it was within their right to post the cartoon. Yes, the government of Denmark is not obliged to apologize. This is true, but I have never said they are obliged. For the matter of civilized diplomacy and peace, a simple apology for the insensitive actions of the newspaper, or a public apology of the newspaper itself in conjunction with a speech by the president of Denmark, would serve the greatest good to everyone.

 

[russ_watters]

The word "obliged" does not apply here, Cyrus. An apology by government for the exercised free speech of its citizens is meaningless. The government has no control or responsibility for the speech, so it is logically equivalent to apologizing for the weather.

Lets try the opposite approach: what, exactly, do you think such an apology says and could accomplish?

 

[Cyrus]

The purpose of the speech, which could include an apology, would serve to show the Middle East that the cartoon does not reflect the values of the Danish people, nor does it show the feelings that the Danish people have on Islam or the prophet Muhammad. Something along these lines would have been an effective tool to show disgust and distaste for such appalling actions by its populace.

If you look, you can find such cartoons, but regardless, why would that matter? People are free to be offended by whatever they want to be offended by, right?

Maybe there are, so you find me some. I don't have to look, you're the one making that claim.

Don't you see the absurdity of that statement? Surely Islamic culture would react differently if an actual nuclear bomb were set off in, say, Iran.

It’s called exaggeration Russ, thanks for pointing the obvious out. The importance is that you get the implied severity of such actions towards the Islamic community. Stop picking and choosing trivial words from my discussion and start looking at the larger picture I have presented to you.

 

[russ_watters]

The purpose of the speech, which could include an apology, would serve to show the Middle East that the cartoon does not reflect the values of the Danish people, nor does it show the feelings that the Danish people have on Islam or the prophet Muhammad. Something along these lines would have been an effective tool to show disgust and distaste for such appalling actions by its populace.

What gives the Danish government the right to say what the values/feelings of the Danish people are? That's kinda the entire point of the existence of freedom of speech. Wow, again.

I may just need to start repeating this over and over: You are saying that the Danish government should apologize for its people exercising the freedoms that the Danish government exists to protect. You don't see the absurdity - the paradox - in that?

It’s called exaggeration Russ, thanks for pointing the obvious out. The importance is that you get the implied severity of such actions towards the Islamic community. Stop picking and choosing trivial words from my discussion and start looking at the larger picture I have presented to you.

Hey, you said it. Stop with the hyperbole and start making reasonable arguments. I believe we just had a long discussion about the quality of the postings in this forum...

 

[russ_watters]

Maybe there are, so you find me some. I don't have to look, you're the one making that claim.

A two-for-one sale! Jesus and Bush in the same cartoon!

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blbushvsjesus.htm

Cyrus, it is in extremely poor taste to ask for proof of obvious facts. I cannot believe that you wouldn't know that such cartoons exist both in the US and the ME.

 

[Cyrus]

I will assume this implies that you do not place any blame on anyone else then. Thank you -- I feel better knowing that I really am responding to what I think I'm responding to.

Of course. The blame clearly falls square on the shoulders of the people who ran the cartoon. However, when you do choose to publish such a cartoon that insults another country, you do run the very real and very serious risk, of giving your own country a black eye. It’s not fair to the people of Denmark, but that’s the way the world works. Sometimes you have to do things you want to, to ensure peace and stability.

(2) Of course, we must also consider that freedom of expression deserves defending. I think we agree that it's a bad thing that artists and journalists are being held accountable with their very lives. What do you think is a good way of doing that, since you do not seem to think defying those who intimidate as acceptable.

I am not clear on your question, can you please elaborate?

It's entirely within their rights to boycott Iran in response to the Danish cartoons too! Just because they have the right to do it doesn't mean it was an appropriate response.

In their eyes, it is appropriate. It is nonviolent, and I think that was the high road for them to take, and for that I applaud them in that regard.

I find it difficult to see how there could be a healthy and respectful relationship if the Middle East demands suppression of free speech in the Western world.

Again, I have to tell you go to back and read what I wrote. You have missed what I have explicitly stated. It is not a demand on suppression of free speech. It is the simple request of restraint on insulting prophet Muhammad. This is the last time I am going to say this, so pay attention everyone. They have the right to publish anything they wish. But when they choose to publish against the prophet Muhammad, the Islamic society is not going to sit idly by. There will be demonstrations and there will be protests.

Russ, was that made by the Middle East?

I believe we just had a long discussion about the quality of the postings in this forum...

Why don’t you present your material in one nice post and stop flooding this thread with all your ranting Russ. This is getting to be annoying on your part, please stop. I was having a nice discussion with Hurkyl until you came in here.

 

[Moonbear]

Okay folks, this thread wasn't supposed to just continue the old, locked discussion, but to bring new evidence to light and discuss a different perspective. Since there are now several pages rehashing the same old discussion that was already locked, I'm simply locking this one too.