Mohammad caricatures

[Aristotle]

No, the deaths can be blamed on the rioters. They created the situation, they reap the primary blame. Is there secondary or tertiary blame? Sure. But the people reacting to and trying to deal with the situation do not bear primary blame.

I think 50+ years of failed attempts at coddling and walking on eggshells has pretty much proven that weakness does not work when dealing with the radical muslim segment of the world. Being sensitive to their feelings does nothing but encourage them and convince them we are weak and beatable.

It is past the time that we accept that their feelings are irrelevant.

If they can't handle someone putting forth a negative opinion of their "religion", too damn bad. The rest of the world and the rest of the world's religions deal with it on an almost daily basis.

They should focus all that energy on cleaning up their own countries that just happen to be 100% dictatorial tyrranies propped up by human rights abuses and brutal subjugation.

[Kraxe]

Originally posted by Aristotle
I have seen people burn the American Flag when I lived in DC. I found it exceptionally offensive. I also feel it is totally within their free speech rights. I do not think they should be killed for it.


That is the difference.

That's because you're not an extremist Ari. I'm sure there are plenty of American's who do see more than red and want to 'kill' when they see people burning the US flag.

That's the problem, the media are focusing on extremists for the most part. Certainly it doesn't help when such people are in influential positions, but given that there are over a billion Sunni muslims in the world, there's relatively few people protesting, and it is obvious that extremists are the driving force behind the protests around the world.

[Solubynn]

How do riots and death threats equate to suicide bombing? Those two phenomena happen quite frequently and sometimes, for much much less serious issues.

(Had to edit this because I just saw the previous three posts) Kraxe summed up a lot of what I wanted to say about extremism. And to support his argument, you don't see me running for riots, and you don't see me threatening people. Trust me, I'm not the only one.

[Darion]

How do riots and death threats equate to suicide bombing?

Here's a quickie paragraph for you.

MAIDUGURI, Nigeria (AP) - Nigerian Muslims protesting caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad attacked Christians and burned churches on Saturday, killing at least 15 people in the deadliest confrontation yet in the whirlwind of Muslim anger over the drawings.

And here's the answer to your question: probably because they both kill people that had nothing whatsoever to do with the situation. How do riots and murders -not- equate to suicide bombing?

[Solubynn]

Originally posted by Darion
Here's a quickie paragraph for you.

MAIDUGURI, Nigeria (AP) - Nigerian Muslims protesting caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad attacked Christians and burned churches on Saturday, killing at least 15 people in the deadliest confrontation yet in the whirlwind of Muslim anger over the drawings.

You obviously know nothing about what's going on in Nigeria between Muslims and Christians. It's pretty messed up there. The tension between both ethnies has been going on for years, and that's due in big part to the extremism on both sides. So when a Muslim extremist leader calls for a violent riot, they sure as hell will destroy christian property just for the heck of it. And don't tell me the Muslims are the only ones to blame for this. As I said, the hatred between Muslims and Christians is to be blamed on both sides.

Originally posted by Darion
And here's the answer to your question: probably because they both kill people that had nothing whatsoever to do with the situation. How do riots and murders -not- equate to suicide bombing?

That's funny. That sounds a lot like war. So, by your logic, riots=suicide bombing=death threats=war? Or how about we add another equal and put "torturing civilians in Abu Ghraib's prison" next to it? Funny how by your argument, those things suddenly become equal.

But since you asked a question and tried to answer one I had asked, I'll answer yours. Death threats and riots are anger driven, making them partly natural, while suicide bombings of civilians are acts of terrorism. That's how they're not equal.

[Khirmint]

Originally posted by Solubynn
So when a Muslim extremist leader calls for a violent riot, they sure as hell will destroy christian property just for the heck of it.

Originally posted by Solubynn
while suicide bombings of civilians are acts of terrorism

I'm assuming the short version of "calling for a violent riot" equates to “Gather up clubs and weapons, get yourself really really really riled up and then go to a church and be violent”. How is that any different from getting someone to strap up on a bomb and go to a church and blow themselves up?

The end result is that someone put a plan into motion to destroy property and kill innocents.

Demonstrations that turn into riot's on their own would be dfferent. Doesn't sound like thats what happened though.

[Solubynn]

Originally posted by Khirmint
Demonstrations that turn into riot's on their own would be dfferent. Doesn't sound like thats what happened though.

This is what I mean by a riot, a demonstration that led to violence. I don't care about people who just pick up sticks to beat innocents and burn local churches, that's just an act of ciminality (and I know for a fact that wasn't the issue discussed here), but rather about demonstrations that turn into riots. This is what happened in Nigeria. People were out on a demonstration but got teargased by the police, and then hell broke loose.

[Darion]

That's funny. That sounds a lot like war. So, by your logic, riots=suicide bombing=death threats=war? Or how about we add another equal and put "torturing civilians in Abu Ghraib's prison" next to it? Funny how by your argument, those things suddenly become equal.

There are inmates in prisons in the United States who have it far worse than the "civilians" (HAH) in the aggie who never got a chance to carry a bomb on a bus, so save the bleeding heart bullshit for someone that hasn't been there. My argument was that riots kill people who had nothing to do with the causation of the original situation, case in point: Muslims demonstrate in anger against a European cartoon and burn some churches while they're at it ("How dare you portray us as terrorists!? Let's set that church on fire and kill some people!"). You're gonna take that and say "Well, you don't know what's been going on down there"? That is quite a stretch.

How about the simple fact that the European cartoon they were protesting had nothing to do with the churches they burned -in Nigeria-? It sounds to me like you are essentially saying "Duh, that's what Nigerian Muslims do when they get together, they burn churches! Boys will be boys, after all"

People were out on a demonstration but got teargased by the police, and then hell broke loose.

Yes, I am sure that the roiling mass of humanity filled with righteous anger was protesting peacefully and hadn't so much as looked at the police crosseyed. It is a sad but true fact that (in the real world) people sometimes do shit like this on purpose, without the diabolical government/police force/totalitarian regime needling them until they had no choice but to burn churches and kill people.

[Aristotle]

Solubynn, I cannot believe you are sitting here defending a group of people who think it is ok to kill people simply because something they said or wrote or drew is deemed "offensive."

Have you gone crazy?

Whether it is "The Satanic Verses" or these latest comics, it is totally indefensible for these muslim psychopaths to think murder and killing is an appropriate response to SPEECH they do not like.

That's right. There is NO DEFENSE. Furthermore, there is NO BLAME to be placed on the people who created those comics or published them, just as there is no blame to be given to Salman Rushdie or the publishers of "The Satanic Verses." Period.

Finally, there is absolutely no comparison whatsoever to the reaction of other religions and cultures to things they find offensive. When some idiot made "Piss Christ", Christians were upset and spoke out about it. They did not riot in the streets, kill people, and call for the death of the "artist." When Americans eat hamburgers, the government of India does not recall their ambassadors and call for the annihilation of the "Great Satan" that kills cows. Other religions of the world deal responsibly and rationally with the fact that some people do things that offend their religious and cultural beliefs. It is only the radical muslims that are so unhinged that any perceived slight against them necessitates riots, death threats, and acts of terrorism.

Of course, the real reason for this is simple: every muslim nation in the Middle East and Africa is a tyrannical dictatorship. They use this as a way to distract their populace from the real enemy: their own religious and governmental leaders that have enslaved them. If the Imam's and King's of the Middle East can make the people focus their hatred on "The West", they can delay the realization that their own leaders are worthless subjugators.

[Solubynn]

Originally posted by Darion
There are inmates in prisons in the United States who have it far worse than the "civilians" (HAH) in the aggie who never got a chance to carry a bomb on a bus, so save the bleeding heart bullshit for someone that hasn't been there.

So basically, you don't have the right to protest or even mention what happened during the September 11 attack, or feel sorry for the innocents that were killed, because you weren't there, or even on one of those planes?

Originally posted by Darion
My argument was that riots kill people who had nothing to do with the causation of the original situation, case in point: Muslims demonstrate in anger against a European cartoon and burn some churches while they're at it ("How dare you portray us as terrorists!? Let's set that church on fire and kill some people!").

Muslims have been portrayed by the West as terrorists for a few decades now. This protest is about the Prophet being portrayed as one, not Muslims.

Originally posted by Darion
You're gonna take that and say "Well, you don't know what's been going on down there"? That is quite a stretch.

How about the simple fact that the European cartoon they were protesting had nothing to do with the churches they burned -in Nigeria-? It sounds to me like you are essentially saying "Duh, that's what Nigerian Muslims do when they get together, they burn churches! Boys will be boys, after all"

Yes, once again, had you done a little bit of research, you'd know what's going on in Nigeria, and you'd know that it is bound to blow to such proportions in this specific country. In Egypt, you'd never see something like that happening because Muslims and Christians live in harmony. They didn't decide to divide the country into two, a half for Muslims and another for Christians.

When England lost in France 98, hooligans went down in the streets to cause havoc and burn stores in Marseille. I doubt the local citizens of Marseille had anything to do with their loss and consequent disqualification from the World Cup. That's the foolishness of riots, it's a bunch of angry people who senselessly assault innocents, burn and create chaos for whatever reason they deem worthy.

Which brings me to answer Aristotle :

Originally posted by Aristotle
Solubynn, I cannot believe you are sitting here defending a group of people who think it is ok to kill people simply because something they said or wrote or drew is deemed "offensive."

Have you gone crazy?

Defending? You haven't even asked me for my position on riots, despite the fact that I've already said that I don't go to riots
or threaten people. Perhaps my previous paragraph will give you a little insight on what I think about riots.

Originally posted by Aristotle
Whether it is "The Satanic Verses" or these latest comics, it is totally indefensible for these muslim psychopaths to think murder and killing is an appropriate response to SPEECH they do not like.

That's right. There is NO DEFENSE...

Yes, I agree. Though if you had read carefully what I wrote, and saw how my participation to this thread evolved, you'll see that I wasn't defending them and that I am discussing something totally different.

Originally posted by Aristotle
Finally, there is absolutely no comparison whatsoever to the reaction of other religions and cultures to things they find offensive. When some idiot made "Piss Christ", Christians were upset and spoke out about it. They did not riot in the streets, kill people, and call for the death of the "artist." When Americans eat hamburgers, the government of India does not recall their ambassadors and call for the annihilation of the "Great Satan" that kills cows. Other religions of the world deal responsibly and rationally with the fact that some people do things that offend their religious and cultural beliefs. It is only the radical muslims that are so unhinged that any perceived slight against them necessitates riots, death threats, and acts of terrorism.

That is exactly why I started posting in this thread. People tend to mix things up when it comes to Islam. Recalling embassadors and prohibiting the consumption of Danish goods in the Middle East is one thing, while death threats and riots are another. I don't understand why you're mixing all four, it only shows that despite what Kraxe told you about extremists, you still tend to put Muslims (weither intentionally or not) all together in the same category. Now that we've discussed at length death threats and riots, let's discuss the political and economical reactions such as the other two. How exactly does that sound unreasonable to you? Allow me quote you in one of your posts :

Originally posted by Aristotle
I have read a lot of extremely offensive things about the US. A recent example is that utter horseshit movie coming out of Turkey starring Billy Zane and Gary Busey and probably some other Americans. I will not watch the movie, and I'll never watch Billy Zane or Gusey ever again. I do not think they should be killed, nor do I think riots are called for (nor did they happen).

Need I say more?

Originally posted by Aristotle
Of course, the real reason for this is simple: every muslim nation in the Middle East and Africa is a tyrannical dictatorship. They use this as a way to distract their populace from the real enemy: their own religious and governmental leaders that have enslaved them. If the Imam's and King's of the Middle East can make the people focus their hatred on "The West", they can delay the realization that their own leaders are worthless subjugators.

Yes Aristotle, you are right. But is that really the topic?

Originally posted by Aristotle
[B] ... Furthermore, there is NO BLAME to be placed on the people who created those comics or published them, just as there is no blame to be given to Salman Rushdie or the publishers of "The Satanic Verses." Period.

Brannick has aptly explained part of this is in his post:

Originally posted by Brannick
[B] But on the other hand - Islam is not only a religion, but also a way of life. Life and religion is very closely linked in Muslim society, so it's actually a very important issue for them. And if in their religion showing God is already itself a blasphemy (it's prohibited to picture God, Allah), you should be able to imagine what a humoristic image of God can do.

Like it or not, this is how it is. The reporter knew this. What he did was an outrage to all Muslims. Don't try to convince me he didn't know or that he is not to blame. I didn't tell you to suck it when Fareinheit 911 or when that movie in Turkey got out, and don't tell me you agree that the makers of this movie are not to be blamed for it.