View Full Version : [en] Drawings of a profet
Webmaster
16-02-2006, 10:42
why it's offending? coz they don't accept or just respect the western way of life!
we are forced to give up our, with blood, achieved human rights?
i say no! we should be proud of being modern europeans! we have united to prevent things like the nazis and wars in general in europe.
europeans defined the human rights, the right of the individual to express himself, invented the business basics, modern physics and chemistry, e.g. ... !
so, why we should stop using our humor? comics/essays against bush noone ever cared about offending the people in the US. after katrina the people stupidly said it hit the right ones.
why not facing this fanatic bunch of muslime radicals the same way. we pay much money to help the suffering people, to bring education, food and shelter to them. religion is a hot topic, indeed. but we don't want to stop them believing. we don't let them stop us being european.
nice article (german) about the european becoming islamic:
http://www.weltwoche.ch/artikel/?AssetID=13188&CategoryID=82
Webmaster, how would you feel if I told you that we have lots of jokes about holocaust? Hitler comes to a concentration camp and asks a few Jews how much they weight. First one says 10kg, second one says 12kg, third one says 20kg, and Hitler says to the third one "You're a chubby guy, aren't you?"
I don't think your freedom of speech allows this.
Webmaster
16-02-2006, 14:08
actually it's allowed ... the german law forbids nazi symbols, glorification of the nazis and disbeliefing the holocaust.
the joke is bad taste and offending jews but not against the law ... the british people make such jokes all the time about germany.
i cannot undo what germans have done in the past and coz of this we face fanatic muslimes right now
Ok, maybe the joke is allowed, but still it's not allowed to be a nazi. I'm not saying it should be allowed, I'm just saying that it's not freedom of speech.
Webmaster
16-02-2006, 14:58
freedom of speech has it's limits. i don't deny this!
freedom of speech should have some limits.
We got used to juke about some national stereotypes, but very seldomly we joke abuot serious and politicaly incorrect topics. And if we do, it is motly either among friends or in some special TV shows/magazines/radio shows (that are known to be satirical or humouristic. Themes like this don't emerge in other genres/formats. It is also one of the limits.
but if something like this emerges in some other format (joke like this in evening news, informative newspaper etc.) it also provokes very emotive reactions.
Could you imagine that in pre-election debate between 2 politic leaders in Czechia one would say that Germans left this country in a peaceful way and shuold have been punnished more for the fact they broke our state?
it would be international scandal (just like it was when Jörg Haider was elected in Austria)
I have just red very interesting article about this sayng where are the most violent protest: in countries that are either under western occupation (Afghanistan) or where are secular undemocratic regimes (Syria, Egypt) where local regimes stand mostly against islamic oposition so they want to show people they are not anti-religious + of course Iran which needs anything to strenghten home unity against the West which is trying to disble Iran to have something West already has.
Furthermore the most calm reactions are in countries where freedom of speach has biggest tradition (UK and USA) while the protests go from countries thathave no long experience with dealing with immigrants while the countries with long tradition of immigration and mixture of culture say this was over the limit of freedom of speach.
As far as I know the redactor of Jyllands-Posten wanted to start a discussion about limits of self-censure. This was probably the only success of this action. True is that you can start a debate about some limits only when someone croses them.
PS: I don't know if I am happy or disappointed that christian fundamentalists have already left our forum... it would add some more aspects to our discussion :lol: Definitely it keeps the discussion in limits of discussion so it doesn't turn into emotive argue
Samurai Squirrel
16-02-2006, 19:35
imo freedom of speach shouldn´t have limits. i also think it´s wrong to punish ppl for denying the holocaust.
btw i don´t know if it´s been mentioned yet, but there were cartoons shown in the arab world that had nothing to do with those printed in the newspaper. they where never published and nobody knows who actually did them. unfortunately, the fanatics are too busy rioting to care about the difference between "published in newspaper" and "popped out of nowhere".
and yes, i think the current arab culture is inferior to current western culture. i also think east-asian culture is most advanced at its core (but still stuck in old traditions sometimes).
If I would have been the drawers of the Jylland-Posten, I'd probably have published the drawings too, just because I would not have expected such an overreaction.
But now it is clear that there are imams and certain governments that use exactly these drawings of the prophet to fire up their populations in a general wave of hate versus first Denmark, Norway, Scandinavia, then also Israel (yeah, all the same) and finally the USA.
In history, when the Christians were using their inquisitors, nobody could've made a joke of the Christian god or Jesus. Now, that is possible, because of the evolvement of Christianity towards the open and free society of these days in Europe, including freedom of speech.
It is however clear that the Islam is not yet that far. Provoking and continuing -unnecessary, unless you can make a profit out of it, which some people still think they can- to offend the Moslem world is not wise in any way, for it will not lead to any understanding at all, which is the primairy purpose after all.
Sure, it is absolutely wrong that the Islam cannot take this yet, but we should give them time. Humour and satire are basic principles of a free state - hopefully the Islam will grow towards those principles.
Freedom of speech is a right and must be excercised - but to how far, that decision is up to individuals and the consequences are also to be beared by those individuals. I say, the drawings should be acceptable, but they aren't, so stop provoking and offending - that won't help anybody.
Not only the Islam is intolerating, by the way, Russia (read: Vladimir Poetin) has reduced freedom of press/speech and mocking politicians (read: Vladimir Poetin) is now illegal. That is another worrisome fact. In Russia counter-evolvement seems to be going on. Will Russia be a dictatorship? (Rhetorical question that is not to be answered in this thread or at all)
Angryminer
16-02-2006, 20:20
Will Russia be a dictatorship?Please don't go offtopic. If anyone wants to start a russian-politics-discussion please do so in a new thread.
Angryminer
freedom of speech has it's limits. i don't deny this!
But than it's not freedom of speech, it's limitation of speech!
And about the muslims...the west should stay out of middle east, unless if they want a third world war...
If the drawing were made in a peacefull time, it wouldn't be so much noise about it. Nobody would want to bring them and start the riots. It's just the both sides are asking for it...I see some troublesome times...:nono:
Angryminer
16-02-2006, 20:49
Everyone's freedom has limitations. Be it freedom of speech or any other freedom. That is because my unlimited freedom would limit your freedom. As a result we all have to limit or freedom a bit so the average of us gets away with the "most freedom" possible.
To put it in simplier terms: Would it be right if I lied all day about foreigners calling them stupid and lazy people? No, my freedom has to be limited here.
That's why humor has limitations and that's also why the riots must stop.
Angryminer
Webmaster
16-02-2006, 20:51
humor is humor ... so it's a matter of taste ... but a newspaper is not a nation ... so there is not need to apologize as nation or condem a nation.
i don't see the point to bow low for this radicals, sorry!
I never said bow to the radicals, what I meant to say was "don't poke the bear". Leave them, and they'll leave you. The drawings were just an excuse, like the nuclear program in Iraq.
Webmaster
16-02-2006, 23:25
sure! a smoking gun!
they don't want us to interfere with their way of life! so they should leave us alone ... if we want making fun of anything, it's our business ... that's it.
they make fun about jews, hitler and the holocaust. do we get on the streets burn their flags or attack people? no we don't.
i don't like the situation and i don't like the world as it is right now. bush + fundamentalistic christs vs. fundamentalistic muslimes. any we get caught in the struggle of this. and this only because of some degenerated austrian guy leading the germans to an utlimate failure ;(
imo freedom of speach shouldn´t have limits. i also think it´s wrong to punish ppl for denying the holocaust.
hehe.
Let's think abuot this situation:
You go with your grandma by bus somewhere and I enter the bus and start to shout on your grandma asking her to dig herself a grave and p*ss iff the chair and let me sit. And then I will say that I hope she will burn in hell with all her relatives who I wish to die the best possible way.
That would be total aplication of freedom of speech as you ask for it.
What would be your reaction? "Hey, granny, let this gentle young man sit on your chair"??? I suppose your reaction would be very emotive against me. Could you imagine world with NO LIMITS in any sphere of human life? I don't.
Webmaster: humour is a humour ... and newspaper is nesapaper. But tell me, do you see bad jokes about serious topics in serious buig newspaper? In my country this is not common and if it happens, it fires up emotions. The same it is in all our world. We don't burn embassies, right. But those who do it are radicals maybe even payed by somebody. They are not representants of islam. We also have protests where flags are burning (anti WTO and IMF demonstrations) but we understand it as riots of radical groups. Why do we understand these muslim protests as statement of 1 billion of muslims?
Webmaster
17-02-2006, 12:03
@bus
in europe as far as i know it's common sense to give children and older people your seat, or?
@newspaper
there is normally some "none bad taste" code in serious newspapers. they operate in their own set limits ... this danish newspaper is considered as such a newspaper ... i don't say it was right to post them ... i only say that i like the 1st tshirt as reaction of the events and that i don't change my humor coz of some fanatics!
@riots
maybe we are mislead by the pictures of many many people and transfer this "as statement of 1 billion of muslims" ... but they do the same ... the see drawings everywhere and belief that everyone draws there profet to offend them ... mass media suxxs!
Everyone's freedom has limitations. Be it freedom of speech or any other freedom. That is because my unlimited freedom would limit your freedom. As a result we all have to limit or freedom a bit so the average of us gets away with the "most freedom" possible.
To put it in simplier terms: Would it be right if I lied all day about foreigners calling them stupid and lazy people? No, my freedom has to be limited here.
That's why humor has limitations and that's also why the riots must stop.
Angryminer
No freedom has its limitations really. Your unlimited freedom could limit somebody else's freedom and vice versa, but that is exactly your freedom (and my freedom). Freedom cannot have limitations in the defining sense of the word, just because it is called freedom, don't you agree? Following from this all is that nobody can actually have complete freedom. That also deals with your wish, Samurai Squirrel. According to you Freedom of Speech should not have limits. But having the freedom of speech ad se limits you. Another example of languid confusion as was posed more about by Wittgenstein for example.
Whether it's ethically acceptable to limit other persons' freedoms by your exercise of freedom is the matter that we're discussing here. I deem it not wise unless you want, example given, war. For now, the Islam isn't ready for such humour.
Webmaster
17-02-2006, 15:02
the islam or it's followers?
// edit
http://www.spiegel.de/kultur/gesellschaft/0,1518,401501,00.html
Traveller
17-02-2006, 15:37
Here is one article of a Bulgarian paper, which I saw yesterday (I think there are some things worth thinking about):
The hysterics with the cartoons of the prophet Mohammed
1. Yana Byurer Tavanie
„Capital“ newspaper
Are you already reading? On blind?
Then you have trust in us.
Tell us – do we betray or justify your trust with our decision not to publish the cartoons with the image of Mohammed?
We hope that it's the latter.
The hysterics around the caricatures has put the medias in the world, including „Capital“, in an incredible ethical dilemma. The question was one -
What weighs more?
The right of the reader to see the pictures and create his informative opinion about them or the explosive supersensitivity on the subject? We also asked ourselves could there be freedom of expression at all costs or are there any limits? And isn't freedom with limits like wooden iron? And so on.
Every media made its own decision. Some, including Bulgarian publications, printed the cartoons – not so much because of their artistic value, but as waving a flag in defence of the free speech. Without being interested that the radical Islamists want exactly this. And without thinking (in particular our local medias) that they could eventually influence negatively on the progress of the trial in Libya.
Others, like „Capital“, decided in the end that the battle for the free speech could be led also with words. Pictures. Whatever. That every published caricature is not a bullet in the heart of the Islamists, but on the contrary – a new weapon for their cause. That if the reader wants, he could find the pictures in internet. However we should also admit that to the end we weren't unanimous what to do (in the text below you could see the clash of the arguments of two colleagues). Just as in the world, different opinions on the matter for the publishing of the caricatures could be heard in the office of „Capital“. And just as in the world, every side was fully convinced in its rightness.
That much for the hesitations. However, there are some things in this whole caricature saga, which are undoubted. First, that the situation is absurd. Surrealistic. More cynical even than the caricatures. Of course, nobody denies the right of the Muslims to feel offended from the picturing of the prophet Mohammed, furthermore – from the placing of an equal sign between him and the terrorism. But a certain overreaction could be seen. (By the way, if the Arab world is so pettish on the subject of religion, it's pretty strange that there weren't such mass protests against the terrorists-suiciders or the hostage takers, which wave the flag of Islam, but really slap it in the face.) The absurd in short – in the end of September 2005 a small Danish newspaper publishes twelve caricatures, which become the reason four months later 15 people to be killed, countries to close their embassies, world leaders to be visibly worried, while every day enraged mobs are burning flags and crave revenge, understand it – death. If this was a movie scenario, in the moment it would lie in some thrash-can, rejected because of hopeless unrealism. But it happens. Although under the clever staging of some Arab states and certain Islamic groups.
The second undoubted thing is that the time machine exists. How else could we explain ourselves the fact the XVIII century fell down upon the XXI and the latter still can't recover after the strike? The clash of civilizations is more visible than ever (regards, mister Huntington). It isn't a matter of elementary opposition on the axis Christians – Muslims, many of the professing Islam condemned the extreme behaviour of their protesting „brothers by religion“. It's a matter of a catastrophe between cultures. In the world there are still large masses of people, in whose value system notions like democracy, freedom of speech, independent medias don't exist. People of the past, which are capable of holding accounts of a government because of the act of a private newspaper. People of the endless monologue, which despise the position of the other side and instead of listening to it, they want to burn and crush it. And in the same time people, with which a dialogue should be searched. It isn't serious to think that we can ignore each other. Because the more we do it, the less we'll understand each other and the sharper and hurtful our clashes will be.
The third undoubted thing in the whole caricature story is that for another time the problems of the integration in Europe appeared. The unwillingness, both of the receiving society and of a certain minority, to step back from some values in the name of the common understanding became visible. If in the future will for such compromises isn't found, the last thing the western governments want would happen – more and more the problems of the integration will be represented as a confrontation, in which the West is opposing the Islam. Thus, serving their own political goals, the radical Islamists would continue speaking for the increasing hostility towards the Muslims.
If you read these words, you have read to the end a text, full with unknowns already since the title. Similar is the situation with the road, which two civilizations should walk towards one another, in order to live together. In the very beginning it's known only that there is no other way. It isn't clear however how much is this road steep, long or dangerous, neither would the end of the travel be disappointing, instead of satisfying. For the first steps are necessary will, courage, a bit of adventure spirit and, of course, trust in the cause.
Well, if all this is missing, some curiosity would also do the work.
---
2. Caricature saga
Or how 12 pictures, published in a small Danish newspaper, ignited the whole world
2005
- September 30 – The Danish newspaper „Jyllands Posten“ publishes series of caricatures. One of them pictures the prophet Mohammed as a terrorist, in whose turban there is a bomb. In another one Mohammed stops suicide-terrorists on the gates of heaven with the motive that the virgins are depleted. The newspaper does this with the purpose to offend the Muslims in the state and with the evil plan to cause mass chaos across the world after four months? Not exactly. Actually the pre-history is confusingly innocent – a friend of the culture editor of „Jyllands Posten“ complains to him that he can't find an artist to illustrate with the image of Mohammed his book about the life of the prophet. Then the journalist decides to test the level of auto-censorship in Denmark and asks 25 caricaturists to draw Mohammed. A big part of them refuse – the Islamic tradition explicitly forbids the picturing of Allah and his prophet. Some however agree and thus the publishing of the cartoons happens.
- October 20 – The ambassadors of 10 Muslim states complain to the Danish prime-minister.
2006
- January 10 – A Norwegian paper republishes the caricatures.
- January 26 – Saudi Arabia recalls its ambassador from Denmark, while Libya announces that it closes its embassy in Copenhagen.
- January 30 – Armed persons break in the delegation of the EU in Gaza and demand an apology.
- January 31 – The Danish newspaper apologizes. The Danish premier accepts the apology, but defends the freedom of the press.
- February 1 – Several other European newspapers republish the caricatures – defending the freedom of expression.
- February 2 – The chief editor of the French paper „France Soir“ is fired. In the next days other European papers will also publish the cartoons. In Palestine armed groups threaten to kidnap Europeans.
- February 3 – In a declaration the ambassadors of the Arabic and Islamic states in Sofia call upon the Bulgarian medias not to take part in the campaign with the caricatures of the prophet.
- February 4 – Syrians attack the Danish and the Norwegian embassy in Damascus. In front of the Danish mission in London posters are waived, threatening with a repeat of the terrorist attacks from July 7th. One of the protesters is masked as a suicide-terrorist. The chairman of the UN Koffi Anan appeals for calmness.
- February 5 – Lebanese demonstrators put to fire the Danish embassy in Beirut. A boycott of Danish products starts in Dubai, which would later spread in the whole Near East. On the doorsills of the shops are being put Danish flags as door mats.
- February 6 – The protests are taking lives. Several people are killed in Afghanistan, while the police attempts to take control over the demonstrators. A young boy dies in Somalia after the protesters attack policemen. At least 16 people, of which 11 policemen, are injured at the protests in India. Hundreds of demonstrators gather at Tehran in front of the closed Danish embassy, burning flags and wanting „Death for Denmark“. In Bulgaria the premier Sergey Stanishev calls to the medias to „treat with the necessary respect“.
- February 7 – Iran announces the breaking of all trade contacts with Denmark. More people die in Afghanistan after an attempt for attacking a controlled by Norway base. There are protests also on the Philippines, in Indonesia and the controlled by India part of Kashmir. On a special press-conference the Danish prime-minister calls the tension around the caricatures „a global crisis“ and declares that extremists are using the situation, in order to cause „a clash of the cultures“. In the meantime the Iranian paper „Hamshahiri“ “strikes back”, by announcing a competition for caricatures on the subject of the holocaust. Later „Jullands Posten“ would announce that it's inclined to publish them. After two Bulgarian papers (“Novinar” and “Monitor”) print the caricatures of Mohammed, our ambassador in Iran is called for a conversation in the Iranian internal ministry.
- February 8 – The French magazine „Charlie Hebdo“ publishes the cartoons. The French president Jacques Chiraq condemns such behaviour as „obvious provocation“. Until this moment almost all European leaders have appealed for calmness. In the meantime at least four more people are killed in the continuing protests in Afghanistan. Thus the death cases come to above a dozen. There are protests in Bangladesh, Palestine and Pakistan. Nigerian politics are burning the Danish flag. Hackers are attacking hundreds of Danish sites and posting pro-Islamic messages. In Bulgaria the direction of the Muslim faith comes out with a declaration, according to which there should be freedom of speech, but it should have clear parameters and limits.
- February 9 – According to a report of ITAR-TASS the Afghani movement „Taliban“ offers a reward of 100 kg. of gold for the head of a caricaturist, who has drawn a cartoon of Mohammed. The movement also offers 5 kg. of gold to everyone, who kills a military man of Denmark, Germany or Norway. In Lebanon hundreds of thousands are protesting against the caricatures. The Iranian vice-president qualifies the statement of the state secretary of the USA Condoleeza Rice, that Iran and Syria are responsible for the intensifying of the problem, as one hundred percent lie. There are protests also in the capital of Bangladesh and in Kapetown, South Africa. It becomes clear the government of Malaysia has closed a paper, which published the caricatures.
---
3. Puzzle
People with an attitude on the subject are thinking about the caricatures
The Arabist
Prof. Tsvetan Teofanov, deputy-dean of the Faculty for classical and new philologies in the Sofia University "Sv. Kliment Ohridski"
The Muslims have differences in many religious questions, mostly about the problem of authority and rule in their society, but they are completely united in their reverence to their prophet. All Muslims are outraged by the cartoons, which directly link Mohammed with the terrorism. Their reactions however are different. Most of them also condemn their fellow Muslims, which vandalize, burn embassies and foreign flags. Denmark, as a state, has no fault for this happening, neither do the other western countries. It's not impossible that some circles are adding fuel to the radical spirits in the Islamic world, by taking use of the concrete fact. Whatever conclusions we make, it's clear that the problem exceeds the borders of the spontaneous collision and accident, and testifies for much deeper processes. The status quo is disturbed. A new influential player has appeared on the global political scene and the great powers, whether they like it or not, should conform to him. Huge masses of people are following his orders. His phraseology directs us to the religion, but his aims are political. We can only guess what will happen in the future. But whatever happens, even if the freedom of speech reigns all over the world, the Muslims will not allow the memory of their prophet to be desecrated in such rude and insolent way. Such a desecration and sacrilege could not be excused with the freedom of speech.
The jurist
Krassimir Kunev, chairman of the Bulgarian Helsinki committee
The publishing of the caricatures of the prophet Mohammed places us in front of a complicated situation. From one side, the right for freedom of expression could be limited because of several reasons, f.e. when it instigates violence and chaos, as well as racial, ethnical or religious hatred and discrimination. From another side, one democratic society should be capable to give possibility for expression of speech, which is critical or even shocking.
The Islamophobia and the stereotyping of the Muslims found public expression in a number of spheres of the social life in Europe and Northern America after the 11th of September 2001. The publishing of the cartoons in Denmark, in which unfortunately such spirits were also displayed in the recent years, is at the least a sign of insensitiveness towards one of the dearest religious feelings of the Muslims. But the fault of those, who drew and initially published the caricatures, would hardly be more than this. And from this point of view, their excuse is enough for their insensitiveness to be repaid. It’s hard, however, to excuse the behaviour of those, which, standing in front of the mass protests of the Muslims from the whole world, published them again and even turned them into an object of trade.
But whatever the offences of the caricaturists and of their imitators are, those, which took the occasion from the publications and incited violence and destruction in the near eastern countries, went too far. They allowed and even pushed the offence to transform into fanaticism and political extremism, while their government did not find strength or maybe even will to stop them. No religious faith, no matter how sincere it is and how much offended it feels, should serve as an excuse for violence.
The journalists
Mohammed Halaf, Iraqi journalist
The cartoons themselves first came out around 4 months ago in Denmark. The present reaction is a little late and this awakes the doubt that some medias and governments are diverting the attention from certain problems. There are many Arabic and Islamic poets, which were ironic towards the religion (Omar Hayam for example), but their works are accepted as literature classics. The whole problem is political. A psychosis is created among the Arab masses, which have considerable social-economic and political problems – high unemployment, bad health service, unenviable role of the woman in the society, strong dictatorial regimes and others… The Islamic societies are living through an identity crisis. They belong to a different age. They’re far from the progress of the world. They want to prove themselves through violence. We have problem not only with the others, but also with ourselves. The ordinary people, the masses, however don’t understand this and become an instrument in the hands of the politics. This counts concretely for the regimes of Iran and Syria. “Al Jazeera” is also stirring up this problem and the other states in the region can’t stay indifferent, because their neutrality would lead them to be condemned in sympathies to Western Europe.
Yovo Nikolov, special correspondent of “Capital”
The enraged battle conflict around the publishing of cartoons of the prophet Mohammed in the European medias is entering more and more into the section “Are you respecting me?” [Tr. n.: typical drunk talk in Bulgaria]. And, just like in the drunken argues there is no winner in this subject, the same way the attempts to understand the motives of the radical Islamists, which burn the Danish embassies in the Arab states, would stay futile. When the more moderate ones explain that it isn’t a matter of war of civilizations, they’re wrong. It is indeed a clash of ideologies. It’s undoubted that the religious feelings should be respected. But it’s also undoubted that everybody has a right on opinion and everybody should have the freedom to criticize.
I have nothing against the Muslims and I respect their feelings, but if they please, may they not tell me how to behave in my own country, what to say, in what to believe. I believe that the European societies are tolerant enough towards the different religions. And I think that the canons of every religion are in force only for its own followers. The rest should respect their difference, but it’s stupid to want them to live by their customs.
The opposite would mean a dictation and a return back to the dark years of the early Middle Ages, when both the Christianity and the Islam were enforced with fire and sword. The denial of religious freedoms, from the freedom of speech and from the freedom of criticism will send us exactly in those ages. I believe that the humour and the self-irony are among the main features of the intellect. The Danish caricatures may not be genius, but they’re good. The Arab kamikazes are indeed going a little too far, and the virgins of Mohammed would sooner or later be depleted…
Borislav Kandov, reporter “Media and advertising” in “Capital”
The freedom of speech is the greatest achievement of the western civilization. A freedom fought about, burnt in the pyres of the Holy Inquisition, kicked in the camps of the communist block and still lying behind the bars in some totalitarian states. The right to say what you think, however, doesn’t mean at all that you can offend freely whoever you wish. And, as theory teaches – every right bears with it the respective obligations. Like for example the obligation to bear responsibility for your actions, when you practice your rights.
Yes, not only the Danish, but also all the journalists over the world have the right to say and write what they think. But after this they should be ready to bear the responsibility for the consequences, which their work caused. An action, which the authors of the scandal denied to take in the period of four months. The strongly conservative characteristics of the Danish culture and society were shown in the way, by which both the editors of “Jyllands Posten” and the representatives of the government reacted – who are you to tell us if we can mock with your religion? You can’t curse at someone and expect him to applaud you!
@bus - it was extreme example of absolute freedom of speech as Samurai Squirell wants it. Maybe I forgot to say that in that example I would only tell that without meaning it seriously. But would the reaction be adequate to "just words" that are adequate to unlimited freedom? I say it won't be. Absolute freedoms of speach=everyone can say everything=noone should respect anybody else=why should older people be respected?=absurdity and chaos
@newspaper. So Jyllands-Posten is a humouristic/satiric papers? AFAIK it isn't so there is something wrong even in our view of understanding.
Noone is asking anybody to change his humour (the problem is that many "freedom fighters" try to move this problem to this point what is absolutely irrelevant). They ask for respect. Have you ever seen any joke about holocaust or human rights in serious papers? I haven't.
@riots. It's too easy to throw the guilt to mass media only. It is on both sides, mostly on the side of those who intentionaly provoke (and after revealing of the many facts I am sure it was provocation - to open a discussion about limits of self-censure, and also they knew that edition of those caricatures may cause what it caused.
Another thing is as mentioned by Xuca. It happened in situation when moslems see in many and many cases how we (generaly-societies, not everyone) have no respect to them. When you feel disrespected by someone and then he makes fun of your most important symbol, you will start to do something to gain respect. And many people have respect connected with fear. I can understand it (though I don't feel it to be good)
vBulletin v3.5.4, Copyright ©2000-2007, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.