Westerners flee Gaza, West Bank

[barb162]

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1138878507685&call_pageid=968332188854&col=968350060724

Westerners flee Gaza, West Bank
Spiralling anger over Danish caricature
Feb. 2, 2006. 11:55 AM
IBRAHIM BARZAK
ASSOCIATED PRESS


GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - Armed militants angered by cartoon drawings of the Prophet Muhammad published in European media surrounded EU offices in Gaza on Thursday and threatened to kidnap foreigners as outrage over the caricatures spread across the Islamic world.
Foreign journalists, diplomats and aid workers began leaving Gaza as gunmen there threatened to kidnap citizens of France, Norway, Denmark and Germany unless those governments apologize for the drawings.

In Paris, the daily newspaper France Soir fired its managing editor after it republished the caricatures Wednesday, and Pakistani protesters chanting “Death to France!”

Gunmen in the West Bank city of Nablus entered four hotels to search for foreigners to abduct, and they warned hotel owners not to host citizens from several European countries. Gunmen said they were also searching apartments in Nablus for Europeans.

snip

[Dixie Flatline]

1. Their anger is both ironic and hypocritical

Ironic because they are protesting cartoons that lampoon Islam as a religion of violence by using guns and threatening to murder people.

Hypocritical because they seem to have no problem drawing vicious anti-Semitic cartoons like these:

http://pmw.org.il/cartoonphoto-De-humanization%20of%20Jews.html

[Colorado Blue]

2. I had heard about things like this. I hadn't actually seen them.

Whoa.

[Benbow]

3. No, their anger is neither ironic nor hypocritical

You are approaching this from the wrong direction. First point to make is that Islam prohibits the depiction of Mohammed (PBUH), even by Muslims, in order to prevent idolatry. These cartoons are, for Muslims, an attempt at desecration of something holy.

(The Jews have or used to have a similar rule, about Yawe.)

So publishing the cartons is crass and deliberately provocative behaviour.

[Dixie Flatline]

6. But, murder is also prohibited by Islam

Which makes the Islamic radicals who are threatening to kill people hypocritical and their anger ironic.

The problem with religious wackos of any stripe is that they tend to twist and distort the true meaning of the religion they claim to be adhering to.

[Harper_is_Bush]

124. Thanks for exposing what you're really about

how are the people demonstrating against these cartoons akin to radical Islamic terrorists?

You were responding to a poster who pointed out that the demonstrations and objections to these cartoons by people in the street is niether ironic or hypocritical.

Instead of focussing on that, you chose to turn the discussion to terrorists.

Why?

[barb162]

7. Anger is one thing; threatening to kill or kidnap people takes

things to an entirely different level. It's called crime.

[Benbow]

22. Except when the US military do it? n/t

[barb162]

34. The military kidnaps people over satirical cartoons?

That's news to me

[Benbow]

41. The military trashed Ali Fadhil's house, took him away,

traumatised his children. And then said it was a "mistake". Most people here believe that it was not a mistake but a "warning" because he had been working on a film for Channel 4 (read "cartoons"). Disgusting behaviour in a "superpower".

[barb162]

52. You know, I can't figure what this has to do with the topic

of the thread? There are plenty of mistakes in war and there are atrocities in war.

But can you explain why because of a few cartoons,some people think they have the right to commit crimes against totally innocent people?

[INDIA]

84. Here's the common argument I see...

"Wow, I can't believe that these muslims blow themselves up, behead and kill all those people"

"Oh yeah, well the US military does it all the time. We're just as bad!'



"I can't believe the violence and oppression in Islamic countries"

"Oh yeah?, well our right wing fundamentalists are oppressive too!"


I'm sorry but there is no real comparison here. Christians would have reacted in the same way to cartoons too...500 years ago. We're in modern times, and Islam is failing to catch up.

[barb162]

94. yeah, 400-500 years ago

people were literally killing each other over religious wars in Europe, Protestants v. Catholics. But we sit here in 2006 and there are death threats,kidnapping, burning flags, etc.

[manic expression]

120. Not really

what about the abortion bombers? Lord's Resistance Army? Robertson calling for the deaths of Supreme Court Justices and Hugo Chavez? MISSIONARIES who rape indigenous cultures? Fighting in Ireland? Don't even make me go further back in history (as in 1800's) to show what disgusting crap Christians are responsible for.

Don't even try to say Islam is worse than Christianity; the conditions and situations between Islamic and Christian countries are so different the conclusion that Islam is "worse" is just incorrect.

Also, 1000-500 years ago, the Islamic world was the center of learning and a place of tolerance. The Christian world was a bunch of petty fiefdoms sitting around, killing Jews, launching holy wars, wallowing in ignorance and waiting for the apocalypse.

One more question: are you serious?

[smirkymonkey]

87. Shall we go back to the Ottoman Empire?

[barb162]

92. No, I think we're supposed to go back to the Crusades, LOL

I just don't know where the thinking comes in that it's okay to physically harm totally innocent people because satire was printed.

[barb162]

9. So if the cartoons are satirical from the standpoint of the

cartoonist, does someone have the right to threaten and/or kidnap other people who come from that continent, namely Europe?

[nodehopper]

10. but Mohammed has had plenty depictions, in Eastern art

just one example

[Dixie Flatline]

13. Here is one from Iran from 1999

http://info2us.dk/muhammed/

[Benbow]

17. Again, this is respectful, even if th style is rather kitch n/t

[Dixie Flatline]

18. I actually like that one

But, I am still confused. Is it okay to draw Mohammed if it is respectful?

[Harper_is_Bush]

126. It is enough for you to know that these cartoons are considered

an extreme insult.

If you are confused, go do some research.

[Benbow]

16. Well, this one is respectful n/t

[Colorado Blue]

67. Islam has followers in many cultures. I think Persian culture

is quite different from the world of the Wahhabi or the Taliban, and the Turks had their own culture, etc.

BTW this is really beautiful. Thank you.

[truthInCO]

21. So publishing the cartons is crass and deliberately provocative behaviour

So is Howard Stern, a prominent jew.

Look at the cartoons above, then the ones posted in Danish papers, and try to figure out the intent. The first step in justifying a genocide is de-humanizing the victims.

We've seen this all before people.

Satirized pictures of Mo' will never justify, jihad, violence, kidnap, murder, and otherwise terrorizing mayhem.

Theres no moral equivalence (though I predict many responses saying otherwise) to justify what's going on around the world regarding these drawings.

[Benbow]

28. Thing is, guys, Bush has squandered whatever moral authority

the US ever had in the world. What "justifies" extraordinary rendition, then?

[Stella_Artois]

26. So we should change to accomodate them ?

Satire has been a part of Western European culture since the 5th century BC, the cartoons were published in Western Europe. Why should people not of that religion have to conform to its beliefs ? We don't have to conform to any religion, if we choose not to. If Muslims can't tolerate that, then they have a problem. Not us.

[Benbow]

29. No, just resist the low temptation to be racist n/t

[Stella_Artois]

The race card ?

Who is being racist ?

[Igel]

77. I missed the racism.

After all, I've seen similar depictions in the Arab/Pakistani press, drawn by people claiming to be Arab/Pakistani Muslims. Even the depictions of Europeans are drawn by stereotype: such is the very nature of caricature--obviously a racist creation, no?

Or is it that you have to know the ethnicity of the drawer, and that determines the intent? And does that mean that the way Europeans are represented (routinely) in the Arab press is racist?

[seriousstan]

31. So the artist was asking to be killed??? Fuck Mohammed! That's right

I said it. I don't care how insulted people are by my lack of respect for their "God", they have no excuse for advocating violence against me. If your religion demands my death or injury, then YOU CAN"T HAVE THAT RELIGION!!!! This is 2006 not 1306. I don't recall the Pope calling for the death of the "Piss Christ" art piece. I also don't recall a organized Jewish death warrant for cartoons of jews with exaggerated features.

[Benbow]

35. Jews kill Palestinians every day in the Occupied Territories, just for

being in the wrong place.

[barb162]

40. And Palestinians kill Jews every day for being in a market place

or bus. What does that have to do with death threats, boycotts, kidnappings, etc., of Europeans because satirical cartoons were published. What is the justification for this outrageous, intolerant behavior?

[Benbow]

43. The Palestinians do not practise State terrorism -

they do not have tanks and helicopter gunships with which to flatten people's houses. Whereas the Israelis do, and do just that.

[barb162]

64. Practice of suicide bombing, kassam rockets, etc. is okay?

And this has what to do with the OP?

[Jim Sagle]

95. They would if they had a state. That's why they don't have a state.

[manic expression]

122. BS

the reason they don't have a state is because Israel is occupying their land. Oh, and that whole killing Palestinians and taking their land thing...that might have something to do with it.

[fakeshemp]

116. How does the fact that it's not "state" terrorism make it any more

acceptable? The innocent victims end up just as dead.

[Englander]

114. Now, *that* is an absurd claim. n/t

[manic expression]

121. Why?

They are fighting the injustice of Israel. Israel has been murdering Palestinians, stealing their land and worse for 50 years. It is only natural for a people to fight against this in the only way they can (that includes killing people who are part of the country that oppresses them).

[Dixie Flatline]

46. What does this have to do with Jews or Israel?

This isn't about Bush, Israel, Jews, or America.

It's about free speech, religious fundamentalism, and Europe, especially Denmark.

[Benbow]

49. If you take it out of context, you will understand nothing n/t

[dxdem]

36. While I agree

that breaking with muslim thought and practice in this way is...insensitive(?), maybe, crass and deliberately provocative behaviour is exactly what so much of Op-Ed and Opinion and Political Cartooning is. I'm of the belief that nothing is off limits...

[Benbow]

38. You'll say nothing is off limits until you yourself are offended?

That will happen one day, believe me.

[dxdem]

48. Well...

ever since I broke from mainstream, organized religion, I tend not to get offended all that much. I may think you're an asshat, but I also won't give two proverbial s---'s in the end. I try to live pretty mellow. Better for the blood pressure...

[AngryAmish]

70. The answer to offense speech is more speech.

Denounce those who insult you.

Do you think it is kinda racist to kill someone who is the same color or nationality of someone who wrote the offending cartoons?

[barb162]

44. That's right. This is a free press issue

[Benbow]

47. No, it isn't. Some things are sacred, like respecting another's religious

beliefs. You would want the same for yourself.

[barb162]

58. You are wrong,I respect the right of anyone to satirize any religion

[Benbow]

60. It is totally ludicrous to call such impulses a "right" n/t

[dxdem]

73. Ludicrous?

As I said, insensitive, maybe. Probably, even, depending on the medium. Hard to frame this as a "Freedom of Speech" issue, given that's just our (U.S.) first amendment freedom of speech.

But ludicrous? Ludicrous is reading holy texts as non-fiction and completely literal. Ludicrous is NOT laughing at some of the more transparent lackings in organized religion. Ludicrous is NOT, however, exercising your freedom of speech.

ludicrous is getting all up and offended everytime somebody sneezes, looks at you, or finds discussion material in something you think is cool.

[dxdem]

75. No, THIS is Ludacris...

[Jim Sagle]

96. Obviously the concept of free speech eludes you.

[barb162]

109. are you writing that satirizing is an impulse, not a right

That the right to satirize something or someone is really the impulse to satirize soemthing or someone. Because if that is what you mean, you're wrong. Are you writing that political cartoonists just operate on impulse when they do their work

[Englander]

115. These cartoons are *not* satire. n/t

[Igel]

80. I've seen translations of some "Muslim"

sermons uttered over state-run radio from state-run mosques that are widely respected.

I found them blasphemous and reprehensible. Religious slime.

And, yet, they're allowed to say them without people rioting in the streets of Rome or Springfield, without death threats being issued against them.

There are calls for the state, however, to punish them: to fire them, since they're state employees. But they're not.

Respect for sensitivities is obviously a one-way affair for some people.

Those people have lost all claim to respect for their beliefs, and all moral authority.

[smirkymonkey]

89. No, they are not. Not for those of us who are not religious.

We don't see it as sacred. We see it as childish fantasy. You are still applying religious rules to a secular world. It doesn't work. If that is the way Muslims want to run thier own nations, fine. The rest of us are exempt.

[fakeshemp]

128. Crap

Religious beliefs should be no more protected from criticism or ridicule than politcal or any other ideological beliefs.

And as an atheist I consider nothing "sacred". What others consider sacred is their own business. There are things I believe in and care about, but I'm quite capable of accepting reasoned criticism and ignoring unreasoned abuse with regards to these, thank you very much.

[MetaTrope]

100. Haven't seen a pickaninnie cartoon in a while though

[tabasco]

72. Religious people should not expect the whole world to follow ...

their rules.

That is simply insanity. Middle Eastern mullahs should not have censor powers over a free Western press. If they don't like what is shown in a newspaper, they should urge people to boycott the newspaper. But to threaten violence is FAR BEYOND and much more wrong than the printing of a cartoon, no matter how offensive it might be.

Radical clerics, wherever they may be, should stick to their religious beliefs and leave everybody else alone.

[INDIA]

83. So what's your point? n/t

[smirkymonkey]

86. Ummm - The Danish Press is not subject to Islamic Law.

And the Arab press has demonized Jews and the Jewish religion regularly.

[genie_weenie]

119. Great points!

Of course don't forget the protesters burned the Danish flag which has a cross on it...

But, that gets lost in the shuffle of let me be a good dhimmi and apologize so you don't kill me...

[genie_weenie]

118. too bad

as an ATHEIST, it is my right to lampoon, ridicule and make fun of any religious person whenever, I feel like. Now, in normal civilized company I might refrain due to manners, but if I feel like drawing a nomadic desert merchant, who demanded JEWS and Christians acknowledge him as the next prophet and then condemned them to death when the Jews did not, had hallucinations in cave claiming an angel revealed the final perfect true word of God to him, married a 9 year old, raided defenseless carvans and invaded Mecca numerous times, then as a person living ina free nation I will do it whenever I damn well please and if that offends you too bad.

Of course, the Koran supposedly gives you the right to strike off my head because of my blaspheme and non-acceptance of a religion of lies.

[tatertop]

4. What do you feel is the source of the animosity in those cartoons?

I am refering to the anti Sharon, anti expansionism cartoons on
the website you provided.

[Dixie Flatline]

8. It's obvious

The anti-Sharon and anti-expansionist cartoons are in reaction to their negative feelings towards Sharon and Israeli policies.

The cartoons depicting Jews as rats, snakes, Satan or having the stereotypical hook-nose are just plain old anti-Semitism.

[Coastie for Truth]

30. Read Genesis XXXVIII, 10

and take your concerns in hand.

[Benbow]

24. You have to see this in context: the Muslim world's perception that

President Bush is on a crusade against Islam. Except, of course, it is not a "perception", it is the truth. Muslims degraded at Abu Ghraib. Reports of the Holy Koran being flushed down the loo at Guantanamo. 32,000 Iraqis (mostly Muslim) killed since the invasion of Iraq by the US-led coalition, on the basis of a lie.

These cartoons are seen as an aspect of Bush's crusade.

[Stella_Artois]

33. Again, not our problem.

Thats their misconception. Denmark is not in America, Bush does not control the Danish media.

[Benbow]

37. The famous American isolationism n/t

[barb162]

55. will you care to explain why some people go apeshit over cartoons?

[Benbow]

59. Explain why people enjoy ridicule - there's your answer n/t

[barb162]

65. that's a non- answer if I ever saw one.

[PassingFair]

91. Here's some ridicule for you...

Some puglicans might have a problem with this.

You know what? TOUGH.

I reserve the right to mock anyone or anything, especially
anyone or anything that presumes to dictate what I may or
may not do or say.

Sacred, schmracred.

I don't have to "respect" anyone's religion, any more than
I have to respect a schizophrenic's belief in pink lights of
knowledge from outer space.

[barb162]

102. Bwahahahhaha!

I love that "nukular" thing.

[Dixie Flatline]

39. I think it's a real stretch blaming Bush and/or America

for this.

[Benbow]

45. Well, that's how it is described here by various commentators n/t

[Dixie Flatline]

50. Well, they are wrong

Bush is responsible for a lot of the shit going down in the Middle East today, but this has nothing to do with him.

Sheesh. He isn't God. He doesn't control the Danish media and French newspapers.

[Benbow]

54. They are right - way back, post 9/11 Bush announced a "crusade" n/t

[Dixie Flatline]

69. I don't see how Bush

is responsible for this.

It makes absolutely no sense blaming this on Bush, America, Jews, Israel, or Iraq.

[Benbow]

110. I assume that you don't know how loaded the word "crusade" is?

Bush could not have chosen a more undiplomatic, insulting or threatening word.

[Igel]

82. "Polysemy". Not just a theory.

Let it be your new word for the day. Just as "jihad" has a few meanings, by context, so does "crusade."

Or do you believe that "jihad" can only have one meaning. In which case, I pick "holy war for imposing Islamic proscriptions on a non-Muslim people."

Your homework assignment for tomorrow will be to understand verbal context, and how Gricean maxims should be applied in English.

[Harper_is_Bush]

127. There's a little saying about camels and broken backs.

Heard of it?

What do you think of the Iraq war, btw?

Do you believe it has inflamed Arab sentiment against the West? Do you believe it has caused an increase in the ranks of terrorism?

[barb162]

103. What commentators? There wasn't one word in the OP article

about the US.

[smirkymonkey]

85. Thank you!

Irony and Hypocrisy. Exactly.

[Harper_is_Bush]

123. Who is "they"?

I'm seeing a disturbing trend by some to take these unfortunate circumstances as an indication that all of Islam or all Muslims can now be fairly generalized.

[Colorado Blue]

5. Here's an explanatory link:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,,1700205,00.html

Apparently, depicting Mohammed isn't prohibited in the Quran:

"...But what we cannot have, according to tradition, is a graven image. There is no explicit ban in the Qur'an, but to picture him would be to annexe God's creative power and to attempt to depict the sublime. No human being, one correspondent told the writer Malise Ruthven, can ever depict the beauty and grandeur of his countenance.
That is not to say that there are no Islamic images of Muhammad, or traditions in which his picture is allowed. Examples exist from earlier centuries - most notably the 14th century manuscript of Rashid al-Din's Universal History in Edinburgh University Library - but they usually show the prophet's face veiled or featureless.

In his Short Introduction to Islam, Ruthven writes: "The image of the prophet, literary rather than visual, radiates throughout the Muslim world. Perhaps the very restriction on pictorial representation aids cultural diffusion, allowing peoples of different races and ethnicities to internalise its essential features."

[barb162]

12. Well, this makes the behavior of the gunmen even more outrageous

[Benbow]

20. More outrageous than invading Iraq for no WMDs? n/t

[truthInCO]

27. Focus

Take 20 seconds away from your hatred of the war and amerikkka and hone in on the issue of murder threats versus cartoonists, newspapers and entire populations of free people who believe in free speech.

[Benbow]

32. Everything that the US does now is set in the context of Iraq

and America's unconditional support for Israel. Israel has nuclear weapons capacity but the US says that Iran cannot have it? How hypocritical is that?

Don't you hate war? I certainly do, and the invasion of Iraq was an illegal war.

[truthInCO]

79. I absolutely hate the war

but the unreasonableness of extremist muslims has existed since LONG before the war. You are correct the war has inflamed it like nothing else.

The intolerance of criticism, parody, comedy, and generally free speech, is what's irrational and dangerous here. It's mind-boggling frankly, to shout that "Islam is the religion of peace, and we will murder, kidnap and destroy anyone who defames it!"

Off-topic, but Israel has yet to use it's nuclear weapons on Iran. You might expect they should have long before now, but their democratic society prevents that.

Iran would not show similar restraint. That is the difference.

[Jim Sagle]

98. Not hypocritical at all.

Israel needs its nukes to survive - period.

[barb162]

101. A Danish paper did some cartoons and that's what this thread

is about, along with the aftermath to those cartoons. Danes are getting threats. EU's office was closed by gunmen. ETC. This thread is not about the Iraq war. Probably every DUer is against the Iraq war, although I can't speak for every one of them.

[Colorado Blue]

62. I agree. I think this flap reflects some cultural rifts.

There are great differences between western society, which thrives on the controlled and creative conflict of many voices, and traditional societies, which may be more homogenous in nature.

Also, western democracy deliberately gives great power and latitude to the press and to individual freedom, and deliberately limits church and king.

That isn't the case in parts of the world where theocracies or virtual theocracies, still exist.

I don't think the cartoons were being deliberately racist. There are limits to free speech and if in fact they crossed that line, most countries have laws to remedy such situations. But no religion should be considered above the laws of a democratic society, within that society, as long as the line between satire and outright hate speech hasn't been crossed.

In fact, even when it has been crossed, the general response is, usually, oh well. For example there have been cartoons in British papers, showing Jewish politicians as pigs. That's hateful, really; and many voiced their objections, yet it didn't result in threats of violence.

Why? Because the paper has the right to publish tasteless cartoon and the public has the right to complain. We understand that within our culture, but probably people outside of it haven't learned it yet.

Someday we will all probably understand each other better.

[barb162]

61. Why do you keep trying to switch the topic to the Iraq war

There are plenty of Iraq war threads.

[nodehopper]

90. do you know the name for the logical fallacy you just engaged in?

[Benbow]

19. Thank you for taking the trouble to post that n/t

[Earth_First]

11. Has anyone drawn the CIA propaganda link in all of this yet?

This smells like spook all over it, and it's getting the exact attention and reaction that confirms my theory behind this.

[barb162]

14. You're losing me

[Dixie Flatline]

15. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar

[pennylane100]

25. It seems like the CIA doesn't need to stir things up here.

These fundamentalist wackos are doing it all by themselves.

[Coastie for Truth]

23. What about a picture of Muezza?

<>

She knows for sure that I am neither Mohammed nor Joseph Smith nor Jesus nor Moses. But she really thinks she is either Muessa or Baste.

[fedsron2us]

78. What price she is thinking

What fools these mortals be

[barb162]

104. blasphemy!

She's such a cutie; did she get catspit all over that printer?

:hi:

[mike_c]

42. half the anti-arab, anti-muslem bigots on DU showed up for this thread....

See if you can figure out who they are.

[Benbow]

51. Christians?

To be more exact, fundamentalist Christians?

I am a liberal Anglican (Christian) but Islam is just fine with me.

[Colorado Blue]

66. Oh for pete's sake. I've read every post on this thread and

I don't that at all.

I do see attempts to derail the topic, which is a conflict between freedom of speech in one society, and religious sensibilities in another.

It's an interesting topic and should be discussed free of pejoratives and name-calling.

[mike_c]

71. this is one of those instances when folks get to try the shoe on...

...and wear it if it fits.

[barb162]

105. ????

[fedsron2us]

88. Your wasting your time mate

The threads on this topic are designed to let every sanctimonious self satisfied prig on DU patronise you until Doomeday.

[barb162]

99. You are so right. Defending freedom of expression and

freedom of the press now gets people called bigots?

[manic expression]

125. If you express

insensitive views, be ready for the reaction that is obviously going to follow.

It's not that they don't have the right to publish the pictures. The problem is that the representations were clearly inflammatory and arguably derogatory. You have the right to say something ridiculous, but with those actions come reactions. It's called responsibility.

[truthInCO]

81. Half the Dhimmi apologists didn't show up. n/t

[barb162]

106. Care to name names? Care to give your thoughts on the article?

[fakeshemp]

112. I see a lot of people defending free-speech and condemning armed militants

and kidnappers. If that constitutes bigotry, and the apologists for fundamentalism are to be considered enlightened, then the world truly has been turned upside down...

[DemonGoddess]

53. Caricatures and satire are just that

If I was up in arms every time I saw an anti-Catholic cartoon for example, then I'd be hypocritical in what I beleive. You know what I mean? It's okay to satirize this that and the other one, but not what I am. FAUGH. I take all satire for what it is. sheesh

[barb162]

56. I agree and

GO CUBS!

[Benbow]

57. But perhaps that just means that you are decadent and

corrupted and depraved? Note, I am not saying that - I am a Western Christian - but that's how many Muslims view the West. And I don't believe that they are all wrong.

[fedsron2us]

76. Perhaps it is up to God to judge

whether we are decadent, corrupted and depraved not his self appointed representatives on earth be they Christian, Muslim, Jewish or Hindu. As usual when it comes to interpreting the divine will there is always no shortage of people who want to kick the Almighty of his throne and do his job for him.

[PassingFair]

93. They are welcome to their opinions.

They are NOT welcome to kill me for mine.

[megatherium]

113. decadent and depraved = ?

Is this a reference to the relative acceptance of homosexuals in the west? I know these code words: I am gay.

[lovuian]

63. They are acting ridiculous!!!

:crazy:

[phrenzy]

68. Fuck Muhammad, Fuck Jesus, and...

If you have want to try to kidnap, behead or otherwise physically harm me for saying that then FUCK YOU TOO.

[barb162]

97. LOL

[HannibalBarca]

74. Sigh...

There are days when I find myself wondering what to make of this world.

[barb162]

107. German kidnapped in W. Bank goes free

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L02355520.htm
02 Feb 2006 19:48:55 GMT

Source: Reuters
NABLUS, West Bank, Feb 2 (Reuters) - A German was briefly held by Palestinian gunmen in the occupied West Bank on Thursday after militants threatened Europeans over newspaper caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad

snip
Earlier, al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, an armed faction in President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah movement, threatened in a news conference to kidnap citizens of France, Denmark and Norway if they did not leave Nablus within 72 hours.

Palestinian security officials said gunmen from another armed group in Fatah seized Kasten in protest at the cartoons, which were published in a Danish newspaper in September and republished in Norway last month.

Newspapers in France, Germany and Spain have also reprinted the caricatures. Islamic tradition prohibits realistic depictions of prophets, and considers caricatures of them blasphemous.

[brentspeak]

108. People getting blown up with suicide bombs doesn't raise their eyebrows

But cartoons inspire radical Muslims to kill more people with suicide bombs.

Freaks and sickos.

[sleipnir]

111. Ignorance causes this. A lack of real education in the Islamic World.

I'm not going to go off on a rant, but most of the Middle East is la-la land when it comes to complex literary concepts like Satire, Humor, and Symbolism. I find it's due to a lack of real education, but then again, we have similar problems here in the US. So, perhaps it's a more general problem than we want to admit to at the present.

[smirkymonkey]

117. That's it.

Religion keeps them ignorant and easy to manipulate, and their leaders want to keep it that way. We also seem to be heading in the same direction with the attack against science, logic and reason by the Christofascists in the US. Reactionaries, all.

Nations run on superstition, who are hostile to progress and reason, have no chance of giving their citizens a better life. Many of these Islamic nations are going to be hopelessly mired in poverty and misery once the oil runs out or once other sources of energy are found. They have nothing else.